In brief
- A national military college pupil whose parental rights are exercised by the director of the general directorate for social assistance and child protection no longer falls under the clause requiring maintenance costs to be repaid. Order no. M.201/2026 inserts into the model educational contract a new point, 21, in Chapter III, stating that the repayment obligation „does not apply” to those secondary beneficiaries. The obligation is not shifted onto anyone else: in the contract it rested solely on the secondary beneficiary, that is, on the adult who signs alongside the child, and the pupil’s own list of obligations has never included repayment.
- The order’s second point rewrites the termination clause, so that it no longer requires payment before leaving. Chapter IV letter c) provided that, where pupil status ends for reasons attributable to the pupil, the contract terminates „after the maintenance costs have been repaid”. From 19 October 2026, the same letter ends with „with the exception of those provided for in Chap. III point 21”. Without this second change, the exemption in the first point would have stayed blocked by the condition in the termination clause.
- It applies from the 2026-2027 school year, only to ninth grade pupils, so pupils in the tenth, eleventh and twelfth grades stay on the old contract. The educational contract is signed on entry into the ninth grade and runs for the whole period of schooling, so the last contract without the new exception stays in force until the summer of 2029. On top of that, the act was published 48 days after the start of the 2026-2027 school year and 18 days after the expiry of the period within which the ninth grade contracts were already due to be signed.
Published: Official Gazette of Romania (Monitorul Oficial), Part I, no. 871 of 19 October 2026, page 14
Who it affects: the pupils of the national military colleges and their parents or legal representatives; directly, the children for whom a court has ordered placement and whose parental rights are exercised by the director of the general directorate for social assistance and child protection, together with the directorates that represent them; the commanders of the national military colleges, who sign the contracts on behalf of the Ministry of National Defence
In force from: 19 October 2026, the date of publication, because Article III of the order merely states that the act is to be published and sets no other date
Applies from: the 2026-2027 school year, for ninth grade pupils, under Article II of the order
A child of 14 or 15 who enters a national military college signs an educational contract in the first weeks of school. The child does not sign alone: the parent or legal representative signs alongside, and the college commander signs on behalf of the state. The contract is concluded in three original counterparts, one for each party, after the college has verified the identity of the pupil and of the accompanying adult.
In that contract, the adult who signs is called the „secondary beneficiary” and the child the „primary beneficiary”. The difference between them is not a matter of form. The obligation to give the money back, if the pupil leaves the college, is written into the secondary beneficiary’s list, not the pupil’s. Chapter III point 2 subpoint 2) of the model contract requires the parent or legal representative to repay the sums representing the maintenance costs for the period during which the child was a pupil, in nine situations: voluntary withdrawal for personal reasons, being declared „unsuitable for the military profile”, failure to attend the selection tests, failure to take part in the assignment procedure, refusal of the assignment, failure to enrol at the military institution to which the pupil was admitted, refusal of an assignment to a school for military technicians or non-commissioned officers, failure to enrol at that school, and failure to pass the baccalaureate examination even in the second session.
For a child raised in the child protection system, the adult who signs is not a parent. Where placement has been ordered by a court, parental rights and obligations are exercised, under Article 66 paragraph (3) of Law no. 272/2004 on the protection and promotion of children’s rights, by the director of the general directorate for social assistance and child protection. That director signs the educational contract as legal representative and, until 19 October 2026, took on the repayment obligation along with the signature.
Order of the Deputy Prime Minister, Minister of National Defence, no. M.201/2026, published in the Official Gazette of Romania, Part I, no. 871 of 19 October 2026, page 14, takes this case out of the repayment clause. It has two points and one application provision, and everything it does fits into a few lines: it adds an exception and carries it through into the clause on termination of the contract.
What it changes in practice
The exemption does not move the debt, it extinguishes it. The new point 21 states that the provisions of point 2 subpoint 2) „do not apply to secondary beneficiaries for whom parental rights and obligations are exercised by the director within the county/sector general directorates for social assistance and child protection, on the basis of civil judgments delivered by the courts”. The primary beneficiary’s list of obligations, that is, the pupil’s, is at point 3 of the same chapter and contains no repayment obligation, neither in the old version nor in the new one. So if the obligation does not apply to the secondary beneficiary, no one is left who owes it.
What „maintenance costs” means in money. Chapter V point 1 of the contract defines them: the costs of food, clothing and equipment, accommodation and the reimbursement of outward and return travel during holidays, from the moment the contract is signed until the date of enrolment at a higher military education institution or a post-secondary military education establishment. This is not a tuition fee, but the cost of the child’s living in the boarding school, as the contract defines it. The amount is updated by the consumer price index communicated by the National Institute of Statistics, and the college commander is required to calculate it and bring it to the beneficiaries’ notice every year, within the first 10 working days from the start of the new school year, for the year just ended. The annex to the contract has four rows, one for each year of study, so the maximum exposure covers four years of boarding.
Not every child in placement falls within the exemption. The text requires parental rights to be exercised by the director of the directorate, on the basis of a civil judgment. Under Article 66 paragraph (1) of Law no. 272/2004, where placement is ordered by the child protection commission with the parents’ consent, parental rights remain with the parents, and where placement is ordered by a court in the cases provided for in Article 60 letters b) and e) they likewise remain with the parents, unless the court orders otherwise. It follows that two children with the same school path and different repayment regimes may live in the same family-type homes, depending on how each one’s placement was ordered.
The wording in the contract is broader than the legal basis invoked in the preamble. The preamble of the order refers to Article 66 paragraph (3), that is, to placement ordered by a court for a child with no known parents or whose parents have been deprived of parental rights, for an abused or neglected child, for a child found or abandoned in healthcare facilities and for an unaccompanied child who is a foreign national or stateless. The new text, however, does not repeat the list; it requires only that the director exercise parental rights „on the basis of civil judgments”. On that wording, the exemption also catches the case under paragraph (2), where the court decides, in the best interests of the child, to give the exercise of those rights to the director even though placement was sought without a parent’s consent.
What is left untouched. The adult who signs is still required to pay the value of college equipment lost, damaged or destroyed by the child, to ensure that the obligations assumed under the contract are met, to request the child’s transfer to a school in the Ministry of Education network in the situations provided for in point 2 subpoint 4), and to inform the duty officer about events occurring during the holidays. The penalties in Chapter V, including being declared „unsuitable for the military profile” and the transfer obligation that follows, do not change. Nor are the two exemptions that already existed touched: a pupil declared „medically unfit” in the final year of upper secondary school completes the course of study without repayment, and a twelfth grade pupil declared unsuitable on grounds of grade averages may be exempted if the pupil accepts a 4-year contract as a professional soldier or non-commissioned grade.
The schools for military technicians and non-commissioned officers are not affected. The order amends only Annex no. 1, the contract for the national military colleges. Annex no. 2, the contract for the post-secondary military schools, has a single „beneficiary”, the pupil, who signs alone, without a legal representative, and it stays in its previous form.
What has changed compared with the previous situation
Chapter III had no point 21. In the version in force up to and including 18 October 2026, Chapter III of Annex no. 1 had three points: the obligations of the Ministry of National Defence, the obligations of the secondary beneficiary and the obligations of the primary beneficiary. Point 2 subpoint 2), the one requiring repayment, had no exception after it. Whoever signed in the parent’s place, including the director of a general directorate for social assistance and child protection, took on the same obligation as a parent.
Chapter IV letter c) stopped at repayment. The previous version read: the educational contract terminates „on the cessation of pupil or student status for reasons attributable to that person, after the maintenance costs have been repaid”. The new version adds, at the end, „with the exception of those provided for in Chap. III point 21”. The ground for termination does not change; a condition that preceded it is removed. For the other two letters, termination on the award of the first rank and commission and termination of pupil status for reasons not attributable to the pupil, nothing changes.
The same annex had already been amended once, in 2024, by the same technique. Order of the Minister of National Defence no. M.221/2024, published in the Official Gazette of Romania, Part I, no. 964 of 25 September 2024, rewrote letter f) of point 2 subpoint 2) and letter i) of point 3, and its application provision was worded identically: the provisions apply from the 2024-2025 school year, for ninth grade pupils. The difference lies in the calendar. The 2024 order appeared 6 days before the contract signing period expired, the 2026 order 18 days after.
The exemption is the first to look at who signs rather than at what happens to the pupil. The two exemptions already in the contract, at Chapter V points 3 and 6, are earned through the pupil’s own situation: a state of health established in the final year, or acceptance of a professional soldier’s contract. Point 21 is the first criterion that concerns the legal identity of the adult who signs alongside the child.
Advantages and disadvantages
What it improves
- It removes an obligation that the person it rested on had no way of meeting. The director of a general directorate for social assistance and child protection signs the contract as the child’s legal representative, not in a personal capacity and not out of personal funds, yet the old text placed that director in the same position as a parent answering with their own assets. The exemption brings the contract into line with the institutional reality.
- It lifts a pressure that fell precisely on the children with no family support. A teenager raised in the protection system who turns out to be unsuited to the military profile faced, until 19 October 2026, a debt of up to four years of boarding, enforceable against the directorate that represents them. A pupil with parents ran the same risk, but also had an adult who could decide on their behalf; the other did not.
- The change is carried through to the end. The ministry did not stop at the exception in Chapter III but also touched the termination clause in Chapter IV, where repayment was a condition for leaving the contract. An exemption left only in the list of obligations would in practice have been cancelled out by letter c).
- The chosen wording is broader than the legal basis in the preamble. „On the basis of civil judgments delivered by the courts” also covers the situation where the exercise of parental rights passes to the director through a judgment given under Article 66 paragraph (2) of Law no. 272/2004, not only the cases under paragraph (3).
What remains a problem
- It does not say at what moment the situation is assessed. Placement may end during the four years of upper secondary school, through family reintegration, the establishment of guardianship or adoption, and at that point the secondary beneficiary is no longer the director of the directorate. The text does not say whether the exemption is assessed on signature of the contract, for each year of study or on the cessation of pupil status, even though the costs annex has annual rows signed separately.
- It leaves out children placed with their parents’ consent. For them, parental rights remain with the parents, so the secondary beneficiary is the parent and the repayment obligation stays intact. The difference between two children with identical paths comes down to how the placement was ordered, not to their situation at the college.
- It comes after the period within which the contracts concerned had to be signed. The order applies to ninth grade pupils in the 2026-2027 school year, and their contracts are concluded, under Article 1 of Order no. M.233/2023, within 30 days from the start of the school year. No provision makes any arrangement for an addendum or for re-signing the contracts already concluded on the old model.
- The three cohorts above stay on the old version. Pupils in the tenth, eleventh and twelfth grades in the 2026-2027 school year hold contracts signed earlier, and the last of those stays in force until the summer of 2029. A pupil in placement who is in the eleventh grade gains nothing from the order published on 19 October 2026.
- It settles nothing for the pupils of the military schools for military technicians and non-commissioned officers. There the contract has a single beneficiary, the pupil, and a young person who leaves the protection system at 18 and enters a post-secondary military school answers alone for the maintenance costs, with no equivalent exemption.
Practical advice
- If you are the parent or legal representative of a ninth grade pupil, ask the college for your counterpart of the contract and read Chapter III point 2 subpoint 2) and Chapter IV letter c). If the counterpart signed in the autumn of 2026 does not contain point 21, ask the commander in writing for an addendum, not for a verbal assurance.
- Representatives of the general directorates for social assistance and child protection who have signed educational contracts for children in placement should request, for every contract in force, confirmation that it falls under the new version of the annex, stating whether the exemption also applies to contracts signed before 19 October 2026.
- Keep at hand the civil judgment by which the court ordered the placement and established who exercises parental rights. The exemption operates „on the basis of civil judgments”, so the proof of the exemption is that document, not the placement order or a certificate from the directorate.
- Ask the college for the annual maintenance costs sheet. The commander is required to communicate the amounts within the first 10 working days from the start of the new school year, for the year just ended, and the annex is signed by the secondary beneficiary and by the primary beneficiary. An annex left unsigned by anyone for two years is a sign that the amount was never calculated.
- If the child’s placement ends during upper secondary school, notify the college in writing and ask for a record of when and why the secondary beneficiary changed. If a repayment claim arrives later, that date is the only thing that will separate the exempt years from the rest.
- Maintenance costs are not the same thing as damage to property. The new exemption covers only food, clothing and equipment, accommodation and travel; the value of equipment lost or destroyed through fault remains payable, under point 2 subpoint 3).
- If the pupil has a health problem or a difficult family situation, ask for Chapter III point 1 letter g) to be applied before matters reach the point of withdrawal. The ministry undertook in the contract to support pupils in special family or medical situations in keeping their pupil status until the end of the cycle, with the approval of the higher echelon.
Frequently asked questions
Who signs the contract if the pupil is a minor?
What, in concrete terms, are the maintenance costs?
Can the pupil be required to pay?
Does the exemption apply to any child in placement?
From when does it apply?
Are the contracts already signed in the autumn of 2026 amended?
What happens if the placement ends during upper secondary school?
In what situations was repayment required?
Do the pupils of the military schools for military technicians and non-commissioned officers benefit?
Does the exemption also cover destroyed equipment?
Errors and inconsistencies in the published text
- Article II: the date of application falls before the date of publication. The order, published on 19 October 2026, applies „începând cu anul școlar 2026-2027, pentru elevii clasei a IX-a”, that is, from that school year onwards, for pupils in the entry grade. The 2026-2027 school year began on 1 September 2026, under Article 1 paragraph (1) of Order of the Minister of Education and Research no. 3.194/2026, published in the Official Gazette of Romania, Part I, no. 126 of 16 February 2026, whose Article 7 paragraph (2) expressly covers pre-university military education establishments as well, in the absence of a change approved under that paragraph. Article 1 of Order no. M.233/2023, untouched by the new order, requires educational contracts to be concluded within 30 days from the start of the school year, that is, by 1 October 2026. On the date of publication the deadline had passed by 18 days, and the contracts of the designated addressees had been concluded on the old version of the annex. The order provides neither for an addendum, nor for re-signing, nor for application to contracts under way, so two opposite solutions can be argued from the text for the same child: the exemption benefits the child in the 2026-2027 school year, because Article II says so, or it does not, because the model contract the child signed did not contain it. The difference is the sum of the maintenance costs over up to four years of boarding.
- Chapter III point 21 read together with Chapter IV letter c): the moment at which the exemption is assessed is not established. The new point defines those exempted by a state of affairs expressed in the present tense, „beneficiarii secundari pentru care drepturile și obligațiile părintești sunt exercitate de directorul”, the secondary beneficiaries for whom parental rights and obligations are exercised by the director, while letter c) refers to „cei prevăzuți la cap. III pct. 21”, those provided for in that point, at the very moment pupil status ceases. That state of affairs can change over the four years of schooling, and Chapter V point 1 shows that the drafter reckons the costs year by year: the annex „Cheltuieli de întreținere”, maintenance costs, has four rows, one per year of study, signed annually by the secondary beneficiary as well. For a child reintegrated into the family in the eleventh grade, the text equally supports the conclusion that the exemption lapsed together with the years spent in placement and the conclusion that those years stay exempt; and for a child who enters placement in the eleventh grade it supports the conclusion that the exemption also covers the years signed for by the parent. Neither point 21 nor letter c) fixes the moment of assessment or apportions the debt over periods.
Editorial analysis
The order settles a real problem, one with a certain administrative cruelty about it, and settles it correctly in technical terms. A contract in which the obligation to repay up to four years of food, equipment, accommodation and travel falls on the director of a general directorate for social assistance and child protection, for a child the institution itself is raising, had no real addressee: the director was not signing with their own money, and the directorate holds no budget for repayments on behalf of children who turned out not to fit the military profile. The order’s two points work together, and that is not a given: an exemption left only in the list of obligations in Chapter III would have been blocked by the condition „after the maintenance costs have been repaid” in the contract termination clause. The ministry took the amendment all the way, which is rare in acts two lines long.
The observation that does not show when you read the act from start to finish is that the exemption does not move the debt, it extinguishes it. The repayment obligation is written in a single place, in Chapter III point 2 subpoint 2), in the secondary beneficiary’s list. The primary beneficiary’s list, point 3 of the same chapter, has thirteen letters about marks, conduct, the baccalaureate, enrolment and property borrowed from the library, but not one about repayment. So the moment point 21 says „does not apply”, no one is left in the contract who owes the amount. The text says this nowhere, and a hurried reading might assume that the pupil, once of age, takes over the representative’s obligation. The pupil does not.
The second observation is one of calendar, and the comparison with the previous act shows it. Annex no. 1 had been amended once before, by Order no. M.221/2024, published on 25 September 2024, with an application provision worded word for word the same: the 2024-2025 school year, ninth grade pupils. Both school years began on 1 September, so the 30-day deadline for concluding the contracts fell, in each of them, on 1 October. The 2024 order caught the window 6 days before it closed. The 2026 order missed it by 18 days, and 48 days passed between the start of the school year and publication. For an act that adds no procedure and calls for no preparation, the delay cannot be explained by complexity; what it does show is that the only cohort it addresses has already signed on the old version.
The third observation comes from dividing up the cohorts. In the 2026-2027 school year there are four cohorts in the national military colleges, but the order touches one. Pupils in the tenth, eleventh and twelfth grades hold contracts signed in 2025, 2024 and 2023, on an annex that knew no exception, and the contract runs for the whole period of schooling and, for those who go further, until enrolment in higher military education. It follows that the last contract without the exemption stays in force until the summer of 2029. If any child in court-ordered placement among those three cohorts withdraws or is declared unsuitable for the military profile in 2027 or in 2028, the directorate representing that child will receive a repayment claim based on a text that the Ministry of National Defence had already judged unfit on 13 October 2026, the date the order was signed.
What should be changed
- Add a transitional provision for the contracts already concluded. A sentence saying that the exemption also applies to educational contracts under way, through an addendum concluded within 30 days of publication, would close the one question that money hangs on: whether the ninth grade pupils of the 2026-2027 school year, the very people the order addresses, actually benefit from it. Without it, the exemption reaches its addressees only in the autumn of 2027.
- Extend the application to all cohorts currently in school. The formula „for ninth grade pupils” makes sense for amendments that change the rules of the course, because those cannot be applied halfway through upper secondary school. Here a financial obligation is being lifted, so nothing breaks if pupils in the tenth, eleventh and twelfth grades benefit too; on the contrary, otherwise the difference in treatment between two children in placement comes down to the year they entered the college.
- State at what moment the exercise of parental rights is assessed and apportion the debt by year of study. The costs annex already has four annual rows, signed separately, so the text can tie the exemption to the years in which the director of the directorate was the secondary beneficiary. That way, a child’s reintegration into the family does not bring back a debt for the years spent in placement, and entry into placement does not wipe out the years covered by the parent.
- Cover children in placement where parental rights remain with the parents as well. For placement ordered by the child protection commission with the parents’ consent, parental rights stay with the parents, so the repayment obligation remains intact on a parent who, by definition, was unable to have the child in their care. A condition written by reference to the special protection measure, rather than to who exercises parental rights, would treat identical factual situations alike.
- Put an equivalent clause in Annex no. 2. At the military schools for military technicians and non-commissioned officers the contract has a single beneficiary, so the maintenance costs are claimed directly from the young person. For those who leave the protection system at 18 and enter post-secondary military education, an exemption conditioned on having been under a special protection measure would do the same thing that point 21 now does at the colleges.
- Publish the amounts, not just the rule. Maintenance costs are calculated by each commander and updated by the consumer price index, yet no public reference value exists. An order requiring the annual publication of an average amount per pupil per school year would show both parents and directorates what the clause they are signing weighs, before they find out from the first repayment claim.
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. 871 of 19 October 2026, page 14 16 pages PDF, 156 KB the act starts on page 14
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.