In brief

  • The sanitary-veterinary authority has updated, with effect for the years 2021 to 2024, the 49 tariffs for sanitary-veterinary actions in Annex no. 3 to Government Decision no. 1.156/2013. The update did not come from the authority’s own initiative, but from the enforcement of a court ruling.
  • The increase is uniform: the tariff for the last period covered is roughly 59% higher than the one for 2021, across all 49 entries. Inspecting a non-professional holding goes from 26.85 lei to 42.69 lei, and taking samples for encephalopathies in large animals from 134.25 lei to 213.45 lei.
  • For livestock farmers and for slaughterhouses nothing changes. Article 2 says that the order applies exclusively to the actions carried out by the claimant in the case, S.C. Laz Vet S.R.L.
Act: ANSVSA Order no. 835/2026
Published: Official Gazette of Romania (Monitorul Oficial) no. 718 of 28 August 2026
In force from: 28 August 2026

An order published in the Official Gazette of Romania, with a title nine lines long and a table of 49 tariffs, produces effects for a single company in the country. Order no. 835/2026 of the president of the National Sanitary Veterinary and Food Safety Authority updates the tariffs for public sanitary-veterinary actions for the period 2021 to 2024, in enforcement of a judgment of the Iași Court of Appeal that became final before the High Court. These are the tariffs for the field work under the animal disease surveillance programme, the same activity against the background of which the State separately grants sectoral aid, such as the support for pig farmers calculated per housing place.

Public sanitary-veterinary actions are the checks, sample collections, vaccinations and disinfection work that the State orders and pays for in order to keep animal diseases under surveillance. The first entry in the table shows who orders them: the county sanitary-veterinary and food safety directorates and that of the Municipality of Bucharest. The work is often carried out by a private veterinary practice, and the tariff it receives is the one in Annex no. 3 to Government Decision no. 1.156/2013, published in January 2014.

The order reproduces the updated table in full: 11 categories of action, 49 tariff rows and six columns, one for each period in which the values changed between 2021 and 20 November 2024.

What it changes in practice

The first effect is the size of the update. Measured against the 2021 column, the tariff for the last period covered is 59% higher, and the percentage is the same across all 49 rows. Checked row by row, the ratio between the last and the first column varies between 1.556 and 1.600, the deviations coming from the rounding of small amounts. In other words, the update was not done action by action, but through a single index applied to the whole table.

The second effect is how that increase is spread over the periods. Between 2021 and 2022 the tariffs rise by 11.1%, between 2022 and the first nine months of 2023 by 17.1%, then by 9.4% for the last quarter of 2023, by 0.3% for the first half of 2024 and by 11.4% for the period from July to 20 November 2024. The biggest jump is the one in 2023, and the smallest, 13 bani on a tariff of 38.20 lei, is the one at the start of 2024.

The third effect concerns the actual amounts. Inspecting animals and non-professional holdings goes from 26.85 to 42.69 lei per holding. Clinical examination of a bovine, from 2.69 to 4.27 lei per head. Blood sampling in large animals, from 9.40 to 14.93 lei. Taking samples for transmissible spongiform encephalopathies in large animals, from 134.25 to 213.45 lei. Inspecting a lot of more than 100 sheep or goats, from 268.49 to 426.89 lei.

The fourth effect is who pays. Ten of the 11 categories are public actions, that is, borne by the programme approved by government decision. The only exception is category 11, the inspection of live animals for health certification, marked with an asterisk and accompanied by the note „Tariful este suportat de către deținătorul animalelor”, the tariff is borne by the keeper of the animals. There the tariffs run from 13.42 lei for a small lot of pigs up to 426.89 lei for a large lot of sheep or goats.

The fifth effect, the one that changes the meaning of all the others, is Article 2. The order applies exclusively to the public sanitary-veterinary actions carried out during 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024 by the claimant in case no. 465/45/2025, named in the text: S.C. Laz Vet S.R.L. No other veterinary practice, no county directorate and no livestock farmer comes under this order.

The series went further: September 2026 brought three orders raising the tariffs by as much as 75.6%, again only for the practices that won in court.

The sixth effect is one of timing. The tariffs concern periods that closed between one and five years ago, so the order does not set what is paid from now on, it recalculates what was worked in the meantime. The text contains no provision on how the recalculation is done, who carries it out, within what deadline the differences are paid and from what date any interest runs.

The seventh effect is one of precedent. The updated tariffs are those in an annex to a government decision, and the update is made by order of the president of an authority, on the basis of Article 15^2 of Government Ordinance no. 42/2004 and of Government Decision no. 1.415/2009. The order does not explain why the update was not made at the times when the indicators relied on, annual inflation and the minimum wage indexations, were already known. The series continued: the third order in the same series, published on 10 September 2026, with fees 75.6% higher than in 2014, still applies to a single company.

What has changed compared with the previous situation

The most important thing that has changed is who decided. The update does not come from an analysis by the authority, but from Civil Judgment no. 226 of 27 October 2025 of the Iași Court of Appeal, Administrative and Tax Litigation Division, which became final through Civil Decision no. 2.706 of 3 June 2026 of the High Court of Cassation and Justice. The criteria for the update were not chosen by the issuer: the average annual inflation rate for 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024 and the percentage by which the national minimum wage was indexed on 1 January 2021, 1 January 2022, 1 January 2023, 1 October 2023 and 1 July 2024. They appear identically in the title of the order, in the preamble and in Article 1.

The calendar has changed as well. From the first-instance judgment to the final decision 219 days went by, and from the final decision to the publication of the order a further 86. The internal approval reports bear the dates 29 July and 7 August 2026, the order is signed on 21 August and published on 28 August 2026.

The structure of the tariffs has not changed. The 11 categories, the sub-entries and the units of measurement remain those of Annex no. 3, and the columns merely add new values for periods that are past. The order does not introduce, remove or rename a single action.

Finally, nothing has changed for the future. The last column stops at 20 November 2024, and the order does not say what tariffs apply after that date, nor why the interval closes there.

Advantages and disadvantages

What it improves

  • A final judgment is enforced through a published act rather than an internal letter, so the outcome of the case can be verified by anyone.
  • The updated table is reproduced in full, with all 49 entries and all six periods, not only the entries in dispute.
  • The criteria for the update are written out explicitly and can be checked: the average annual inflation of four years and five minimum wage indexation dates.
  • The update is arithmetically consistent across all rows, with a final ratio steady at around 1.59, so no entry is treated preferentially.
  • The note showing that the inspection for health certification is borne by the keeper of the animals is kept, so it is clear where the State pays and where the owner does.
  • The act states precisely the case, the courts and the numbers of the rulings, so another provider can check whether it is in a similar position.

What remains a problem

  • An act in the form of a general rule, published in Part I, produces effects for a single company, named in the text.
  • Providers who carried out the same actions, in the same years, at the same tariffs cannot tell from the order whether the updated tariffs apply to them as well.
  • The interval covered stops on 20 November 2024, even though Article 2 speaks of actions carried out during the whole of 2024.
  • The order lays down no procedure for recalculating and paying the differences, although it deals exclusively with sums owed for work already done.
  • The words „exclusiv TVA”, excluding VAT, appear on the first four columns but are missing from the columns for 2024, even though all of them are calculated with the same index.
  • The act does not explain why the update was not made by the dates on which the indicators relied on had already been published, which would have avoided the case altogether.

Practical advice

  1. If you run an authorised private veterinary practice and carried out public sanitary-veterinary actions between 2021 and 2024, bear in mind that the order does not apply to you directly. Article 2 limits it to the claimant in the case named there.
  2. Compare the tariffs you were paid with the columns in the table. The difference between the 2021 tariff and the updated one for July to 20 November 2024 is roughly 59% on any entry, so the calculation can be made quickly on your own settlement statements.
  3. If you are considering an action of your own, first ask the court for the exact particulars of the rulings cited: Civil Judgment no. 226 of 27 October 2025 of the Iași Court of Appeal and Civil Decision no. 2.706 of 3 June 2026 of the High Court, both in case no. 465/45/2025.
  4. Livestock farmers need do nothing. The only category paid by the owner, the inspection for health certification, is likewise updated only for the actions of the provider in the case.
  5. If you have actions carried out between 21 November and 31 December 2024 to settle, the table has no column for that period. Ask the sanitary-veterinary directorate in writing for the applicable tariff, so that you have the answer on record.
  6. For any calculation, use the figures excluding VAT. The first four columns say so explicitly, and the last two follow from the same index, so they are built on the same basis.

Frequently asked questions

Will veterinary services become more expensive for farmers?
No. Ten of the 11 categories of action are paid out of the public programme, and the eleventh, borne by the keeper of the animals, is updated only for the actions carried out by the company named in Article 2. For everyone else, nothing changes.
Why did it take a court ruling?
The order does not explain. It only shows that the update is made „conform”, in accordance with, a judgment of the Iași Court of Appeal, final before the High Court, and that it applies exclusively to the claimant in that case. The court’s reasoning is not reproduced in the act.
By how much did the tariffs rise?
By roughly 59% between the 2021 column and the column for the period July to 20 November 2024. Stage by stage: 11.1%, then 17.1%, then 9.4%, then 0.3% and, finally, 11.4%. The percentages are the same across all 49 entries.
Why does the table stop on 20 November 2024?
The act does not say. The last column is headed „perioada iulie – 20.11.2024”, the period from July to 20 November 2024, while Article 2 speaks of actions carried out during the years 2021 to 2024. For the interval from 21 November to 31 December 2024 there is no column at all.
What does it mean for an order to update an annex to a government decision?
The tariffs sit in an annex to Government Decision no. 1.156/2013, published in Official Gazette of Romania no. 8 of 7 January 2014. The order rewrites their values relying on Article 15^2 of Government Ordinance no. 42/2004 and on Government Decision no. 1.415/2009, the act organising the sanitary-veterinary authority.
Can another veterinary practice rely on this order?
Not directly, because Article 2 limits it to a single provider. The order does remain useful as a benchmark, though: it shows the update criteria the court accepted and the values that follow from applying them.

Errors and inconsistencies in the published text

  • The title and Article 1 against Article 2. The title and Article 1 provide that the tariffs in Annex no. 3 to Government Decision no. 1.156/2013 „se actualizează”, are updated, with no restriction as to who they apply to, which is the wording of a general rule. Article 2, however, says that „prezentul ordin se aplică exclusiv”, this order applies exclusively, to the actions carried out by one named provider. A veterinarian who carried out the same actions, in the same years and under the same contractual arrangement, cannot establish from the act whether Annex no. 3 is amended for everyone, with Article 2 merely delimiting the situation that prompted the update, or whether the annex remains unchanged for everybody else. The consequence is financial and concerns an entire profession.
  • Article 2 against the last column of the table. Article 2 declares the order applicable to actions carried out „în cursul anilor 2021, 2022, 2023 și 2024”, during the years 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024, that is, including in the final weeks of 2024. The table, however, stops at the column „perioada iulie – 20.11.2024”. For actions carried out between 21 November and 31 December 2024 the order declares an entitlement but sets no tariff, and the text says neither why the interval closes on 20 November nor what value applies after that date.

Editorial analysis

The act does properly what it had to do: a final judgment required certain tariffs to be recalculated, and the authority recalculated them and published the result in full, not only the entries at issue. Publishing the whole table is the right choice, because it turns an individual dispute into information anyone can verify. The problem is not what the order does, but what it fails to say about its effects on everyone else.

What does not show when the act is read from beginning to end appears when the table is recalculated. The ratio between the last and the first column is constant across all 49 rows, at around 1.59, and the deviations, between 1.556 and 1.600, occur exclusively on the small amounts, where rounding to the nearest two bani shifts the percentage. The update is therefore a single compound index applied mechanically, not a reassessment of the cost of each action. That explains why the act needs no economic reasoning, but it also shows that any other provider would arrive at exactly the same figures if it asked a court for the same recalculation. The difference between being and not being the claimant in case no. 465/45/2025 is not one of substance, but one of access to justice.

The second observation comes from comparing the steps. The 0.3% increase for the first half of 2024, that is 13 bani on a tariff of 38.20 lei, stands against 17.1% for the first nine months of 2023 and 11.4% for the second half of 2024. The criterion combines annual inflation with the minimum wage indexations, and it is the indexations that produce the jumps: five dates are listed in the act, and none of them falls on 1 January 2024. The period with an almost nil increase is exactly the interval between two indexations.

The third concerns the calendar. From the first-instance judgment to the final decision 219 days went by, and from the ruling becoming final to the publication of the order a further 86, of which the last seven between signature and appearance in the Gazette. The provider did the work in 2021 and sees its tariff corrected in 2026. The order, which deals exclusively with sums owed for work already done, contains no provision on the recalculation, on the deadline for paying the differences or on the interest due, that is, precisely the part that turns a table into a payment.

What should be changed

  • Express extension of the updated tariffs to all providers in the same position. The index is identical for all of them, and keeping the limitation to a single claimant guarantees a string of cases with the same subject matter and the same predictable outcome.
  • Completion of the table with the period from 21 November to 31 December 2024. Article 2 declares the order applicable to the whole of 2024, and the missing column leaves an entitlement with no figure to calculate it on.
  • A provision on recalculation and payment. An act that corrects tariffs for years already closed ought to say who recalculates, within what deadline the differences are paid and from what date interest runs.
  • The words „exclusiv TVA”, excluding VAT, on all six columns. Their absence from the columns for 2024, when the first four carry them, is an invitation to differing interpretations over a fifth of the amount.
  • A mechanism for periodic updating, applied of the authority’s own motion. The criteria used here, annual inflation and the minimum wage indexation, are public and known on fixed dates; applying them on time would have made a case that lasted almost two years unnecessary.

Original text of the legal act

The text below is reproduced in Romanian, the official form of publication.

The full text, as published in the Official Gazette of Romania

Official Gazette of Romania no. 718 of 28 August 2026 32 pages PDF, 475 KB the act starts on page 2

Open the official PDFDownload the PDF

The viewer is not shown on small screens. Use the buttons above to open or download the file.

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For specific situations, consult a licensed attorney or tax advisor.