In brief

  • From 3 September 2026, VAT registered companies that do not file the 300 VAT return, the Romanian decont 300, will have the tax assessed ex officio on the basis of the real data ANAF already holds about them, from the pre-filled RO e-TVA return, from RO e-Factura and from electronic cash registers.
  • The calculation is simple and harsh: from output VAT the authority deducts only half of the input VAT. If the result is negative or below 20 lei, no decision is issued. Otherwise, the amount becomes a payment obligation.
  • The company has 15 days from receipt of the notification to file the return and 60 days from receipt of the decision to have it cancelled, again by filing the return. After those 60 days, a return that is filed is no longer processed, and the amount calculated by ANAF stands.
Act: Order of the President of the National Agency for Fiscal Administration no. 1.022 of 20 August 2026
Published: Official Gazette of Romania (Monitorul Oficial) no. 745 of 3 September 2026
In force from: 3 September 2026, the date of publication; it applies from the obligation to file the return for July 2024 onwards

A company that does not file its VAT return no longer receives an estimate built on old averages, but an amount calculated from its own invoices, from which half the input VAT has been rubbed out with a pencil. Order of the President of ANAF no. 1.022/2026, published in Official Gazette of Romania no. 745 of 3 September 2026, approves the procedure by which the tax authority assesses ex officio the VAT owed by taxable persons who have not filed the 300 return, plus four new forms and their printing specifications, gathered in six annexes. This is the third procedure of its kind published by ANAF in three days: on 1 September came the order moving the hearing in documentary verification onto videoconference and the one doing the same for debt mediation. The present order, published two days later, still requires the taxpayer to turn up in person at the counter.

The persons targeted are taxable persons registered for VAT purposes under Article 316 of the Tax Code, that is, companies that have a VAT number and the obligation to file form 300 by the 25th of the month following the tax period, under Article 323(1) of the Tax Code. The tax period can be the month, the quarter, the half year or the year, and the procedure applies to each of them separately. „Taxable person” means, in ordinary language, the taxpayer who collects VAT from customers and pays it over to the State, after deducting the tax paid to suppliers.

The substantive novelty lies in the method of calculation. Until now, when a company did not file the return, ANAF did not know how much was owed and estimated: it took the average of the output VAT from the returns of the last 12 months, compared it with the average resulting from the 394 informative returns and kept the higher figure. Input VAT did not enter the calculation at all. Today, through the pre-filled RO e-TVA return, through the electronic invoicing system and through connected cash registers, the tax authority has the real figures for the month for which the return is missing. Point 19 of Annex no. 1 says what it does with them: it takes the total output VAT, it takes the total input VAT, it reduces the input VAT by 50% and calculates the difference. The remainder becomes a payment obligation.

The arithmetical effect of that half is large. A company with 200,000 lei of output VAT and 180,000 lei of input VAT would have had 20,000 lei to pay if it had filed the return. Assessed ex officio, it pays 200,000 minus 90,000, that is, 110,000 lei, 5.5 times more. In an even clearer case, a company with 100,000 lei of output VAT and 150,000 lei of input VAT was entitled to recover 50,000 lei from the State; assessed ex officio, it receives a payment decision for 25,000 lei. The general rule that comes out of the formula: an assessment decision is issued whenever the input VAT is lower than twice the output VAT, even where the company was in fact in a refund position.

The calendar matters as much as the formula. Within at most two working days of the filing deadline expiring, the specialist department draws up the list of those who have not filed, called list (L0) in the procedure, and sends each of them a notification. The notification, the form in Annex no. 2, says two things: that failing to file the return within 15 days entitles ANAF to assess the tax ex officio, and that the company is summoned to the offices of the tax unit, within 5 days of receipt, to exercise its right to be heard. Seven days after communication, the tax authority cleans from the list those who have meanwhile filed the return, have proved that they had no obligation, have appeared for the hearing or have refused the hearing in writing. Those who remain receive an invitation to a second hearing date, again of 5 days, through the form in Annex no. 3. Once the 15 days expire, the ex officio assessment decision is issued, form 192 in Annex no. 4.

The procedure does not apply to periods that have already been the subject of a tax inspection or of a documentary verification, nor to those for which an inspection has begun, nor to taxable persons declared tax inactive, for as long as they are in that situation. Nor can the authority go back in time indefinitely: an ex officio assessment can be made only within the limitation period, that is, five years, under Article 110 of the Tax Procedure Code.

The amount in decision 192 is payable depending on the date the decision reaches the company: if it is communicated between the 1st and the 15th of the month, the payment deadline is the 5th of the following month; if it is communicated between the 16th and the 31st, the deadline is the 20th of the following month. The decision can be appealed within 45 days of communication, before the issuing tax authority. And if the company files the return within 60 days of communication, the decision is cancelled through form 193 in Annex no. 5. Once that deadline passes, point 32 of the procedure closes the door: the return is not processed, and the amounts assessed ex officio stand.

On the RO e-Factura Register as well, another ANAF order from the same period lets taxpayers who joined voluntarily leave the register through form 081, under ANAF Order no. 1.021/2026.

What it changes in practice

The first consequence is that failing to file the return becomes, for the first time, an operation with a predictable cost that can be calculated in advance. Any accountant can now estimate, using two figures already held by the company, how much ANAF will ask for: output VAT minus half of the input VAT. Before, the result depended on a 12 month average the taxpayer could not reconstruct on his own.

The second consequence is that companies with a small mark-up are hit disproportionately. A trader who buys for 950,000 lei and sells for 1,000,000 lei has a small real amount of tax to pay, because the input VAT is almost equal to the output VAT. Halving the input VAT turns an obligation of a few thousand lei into one of tens or hundreds of thousands. Distribution, wholesale trade and construction are exactly the sectors in which the ratio between output and input VAT is close to one.

The third consequence touches companies in a refund position. A business that invests in a given month, buys equipment or materials and sells little, normally has VAT to recover. With the formula in the procedure, that same month produces a payment decision, as long as the input VAT does not exceed twice the output VAT. In practice, a refund entitlement turns into a debt, and recovering it depends on filing the return within those 60 days.

The fourth consequence is immediately financial. The ex officio assessment decision is at the same time an instrument of claim and a payment notice, and the payment deadline runs from the month of communication. Anyone who does not pay on time owes interest and penalties, even if he later files the return and obtains cancellation of the decision. Cancellation wipes out the amount, but not necessarily the charges already accrued.

The fifth consequence concerns a two year backlog. The order applies from the obligation to file the return for July 2024, the first period covered by the pre-filled RO e-TVA return. There are 26 monthly tax periods between July 2024 and August 2026 for which the procedure can now be started, and a company that has missed several returns may receive several notifications at once, each with its own 15 day deadline. The series continued in September 2026, when the agency added position 117 to tax return 100 and gave the tax certificate an electronic version.

What has changed compared with the previous situation

Until 3 September 2026, the ex officio assessment of VAT was carried out under point 3 of Chapter II of the Procedure approved by Order of the President of ANAF no. 962/2016, published in Official Gazette of Romania no. 233 of 30 March 2016. That procedure recognised not a single leu of input VAT. The amount owed was taken to be the higher of two averages: the output VAT from the returns filed over the last 12 months and the output VAT resulting from the 394 informative returns filed by the company’s trading partners. If nothing was found over 12 months, the analysis was extended to 24 months and, as a last resort, the average of the intra-Community acquisitions from the 390 VIES return was taken and multiplied by the standard rate.

The first change is therefore in the taxpayer’s favour: from zero to 50% of the input VAT recognised. The second change goes the other way: the base is no longer a historical average but the real figure for the missing month. For a growing company, the combination can be more expensive than the old rule. A company that averaged 50,000 lei of output VAT a month over the past year, but had 200,000 lei in the undeclared month, with 180,000 lei of input VAT, would have paid 50,000 lei ex officio under the old procedure and pays 110,000 lei under the new one. Recognising half the input VAT does not offset the move from an average to reality.

The third change is the appearance of the hearing. The old procedure contained no step for listening to the taxpayer: a notice was sent, a period was allowed to elapse, the decision was issued. The new procedure introduces two consecutive hearing dates, the first in the notification, the second in a separate invitation, precisely in order to satisfy the requirement in Article 9 of the Tax Procedure Code.

The fourth change concerns the clock and is less visible. The old procedure imposed a deadline on the tax authority itself: the notice had to be communicated within 15 days of the expiry of the legal filing deadline. The new procedure sets two working days for drawing up the list, but no longer provides any deadline for communicating the notification to the company. All that remains is the general rule in Article 47(10) of the Tax Procedure Code, under which the tax authority has 10 working days to initiate the communication steps. At the same time, the taxpayer’s window for reacting has shrunk from 20 days to 15.

The fifth change is that the old procedure does not disappear. Article 6(2) of the order keeps it in force for all tax periods before July 2024. From 3 September 2026 there are therefore two parallel procedures for the ex officio assessment of VAT, separated by the date of the tax period, not by the date of the failure.

Advantages and disadvantages

What it improves

  • It finally recognises that input VAT exists. The old procedure ignored it completely. Even at half, a recognised amount of input VAT brings the result closer to the economic reality of the company.
  • The calculation can be verified by the taxpayer. The data come from the pre-filled RO e-TVA return, which the company receives anyway, so the amount can be reworked with a pencil before the decision arrives.
  • It introduces the hearing, which was missing altogether. Two consecutive dates, one in the notification and one in the invitation, plus the option of waiving the hearing in writing for anyone who wants to shorten the procedure.
  • The 20 lei threshold removes pointless decisions. Point 22 refers to Article 96(2) of the Tax Procedure Code and stops a decision being issued for derisory amounts that would cost more to administer than they are worth.
  • Cancelling the decision has its own form. Form 193 in Annex no. 5 gives the taxpayer a written document confirming that the assessment decision has gone, instead of a mere entry in the tax authority’s internal records.

What remains a problem

  • The half that is cut is not an estimate, it is an unnamed penalty. The Tax Procedure Code requires an ex officio assessment to be made by estimation, and the estimate, under Article 106, must come close to the factual situation. When the tax authority has the exact figure and chooses to use half of it, the result deliberately moves away from reality.
  • Companies with a small mark-up pay several times what they owe. The closer the input VAT is to the output VAT, the wider the gap between the real amount and the ex officio one. Low margin sectors are the most exposed.
  • Someone who was entitled to a VAT refund gets a payment decision. The formula does not distinguish between a month of profit and a month of investment. A company with a refund entitlement ends up owing money merely because it did not file a form.
  • The hearing is required at the counter, within 5 days. ANAF already has a videoconference platform approved by Order no. 705/2026 and used in two other procedures published two days earlier. Here, the taxpayer is summoned in person to the offices of the tax unit.
  • The tax authority’s own communication deadline has disappeared. The old procedure required the tax authority to communicate the notice within 15 days. The new procedure sets no deadline at all, so the interval between the missed filing and the notification is left to the administration.
  • Applying the order backwards over 26 months comes with no transitional rule. The order says it applies from July 2024, but says nothing about decisions already issued for those periods under the old procedure, the one that recognised not a single leu of input VAT.

Practical advice

  1. Check now whether you have any 300 returns unfiled since July 2024. There are 26 monthly tax periods covered by the new procedure. A return filed today, on your own initiative, costs at most an administrative fine; the same return filed after the assessment decision costs the difference between the real tax and the tax calculated with half the input VAT.
  2. If you receive the notification, calculate the amount yourself before you answer. Take the output VAT and the input VAT from the pre-filled RO e-TVA return for the period and work out the difference between the output VAT and half of the input VAT. That tells you exactly what amount is coming your way and what those 15 days are worth.
  3. Filing the return stops the procedure at any moment, up to the decision. Point 13 of the procedure says explicitly that the tax authority interrupts the ex officio assessment if the return is filed in the meantime. Do not wait for the hearing, do not wait for the invitation: file the form.
  4. If you had no filing obligation, send supporting documents, not verbal explanations. Point 14(b) removes from the list only persons who have submitted documents attesting that the obligation did not exist. Appearing for the hearing, on its own, does not take you off the list on the basis of which the decision is issued.
  5. Mark in your calendar the 60th day from communication of the decision. It is the only deadline after which no remedy is left: a return filed on day 61 is not processed, and the amount assessed ex officio stands. The 45 day appeal is a separate and slower route that does not replace filing the return.
  6. Do not confuse cancelling the decision with wiping out the charges. The payment deadline runs from communication of the decision, and interest and penalties arise at maturity. If you file the return on day 55, the decision is cancelled, but a due date may already have passed.
  7. Check whether you are enrolled in the Private Virtual Space and whether you actually read it. Point 7 of the procedure says that documents are communicated through that service for those enrolled. The 5 day hearing deadline and the 15 day return deadline run from communication, not from the moment you open the message.

Frequently asked questions

Who exactly does this procedure target?
Taxable persons registered for VAT purposes under Article 316 of the Tax Code, that is, companies with a VAT number that had the obligation to file the 300 return for a tax period and did not do so. It does not apply to persons declared tax inactive, nor to periods that have already been the subject of a tax inspection or a documentary verification.
How is the VAT assessed ex officio calculated?
From the total output VAT the authority deducts half of the total input VAT. Both figures are taken from the pre-filled RO e-TVA return for the period or from the RO e-Factura system and the RO e-Case electronic cash register system. The result, if it is at least 20 lei, becomes a payment obligation.
Why only half of the input VAT?
In the approval report accompanying the draft, ANAF explained that it does not know the destination of the goods purchased, so it cannot establish to what extent the tax is actually deductible, and it chose a conventional rate of 50%. The order itself contains no explanation of that percentage.
What happens if the result of the calculation is negative?
No assessment decision is issued. The same happens if the difference is positive but below 20 lei, under point 22 of the procedure and Article 96(2) of the Tax Procedure Code. Note, however, that the result is negative only if the input VAT exceeds twice the output VAT.
How many days do I have to file the return after I receive the notification?
15 days from communication of the notification. It is the minimum period that Article 107(1) of the Tax Procedure Code requires before an ex officio assessment, and the procedure takes it over as such in point 17. Separately, the notification summons you to a hearing within 5 days of receipt.
What does the hearing mean and do I have to attend?
It is the right to state your point of view before the tax authority decides, provided for in Article 9 of the Tax Procedure Code. The procedure sets two consecutive dates: one in the notification, one in the invitation in Annex no. 3. You can also waive it in writing, in which case the hearing is deemed to have taken place.
Can I cancel the decision if I file the return later?
Yes, but only within 60 days of communication of the decision. If the return is filed within that window, the decision is cancelled and you receive form 193. After those 60 days, point 32 says the return is not processed and the amounts assessed ex officio stand.
When does the amount in the decision have to be paid?
It depends on the date of communication. If the decision is communicated between the 1st and the 15th of the month, payment is due by the 5th of the following month; if it is communicated between the 16th and the 31st, by the 20th of the following month. Interest and penalties are charged for late payment.
How do I appeal against the ex officio assessment decision?
The appeal is filed within 45 days of communication, on pain of forfeiture, under Article 270(1) of the Tax Procedure Code, before the issuing tax authority, under Article 269(4). The appeal does not suspend the payment obligation and does not replace filing the return within the 60 days.
What happens to tax periods before July 2024?
For them, the old procedure remains applicable, the one in point 3 of Chapter II of the Procedure approved by Order of the President of ANAF no. 962/2016. That one recognises no input VAT at all and calculates the amount as an average of the output VAT over the last 12 months.
Why does the order apply to periods from 2024?
Because July 2024 is the first period covered by the pre-filled RO e-TVA return, introduced by Government Emergency Ordinance no. 70/2024. Without that data, the formula in the procedure would have nothing to work from.

Errors and inconsistencies in the published text

  • Annex no. 1, points 14 and 15. Point 14(e) provides that taxable persons falling within points 4 and 5, namely those under tax inspection or documentary verification and those declared tax inactive, are removed from list (L0), and point 13 says, to the same effect, that for them the ex officio assessment procedure is interrupted. Point 15, however, says that the resulting list (L1) includes taxable persons who „have not filed the return for the period analysed, have not exercised their right to be heard in the hearing procedure or fall within the provisions of points 4 and 5”. The same category is taken out by two provisions and put back in by a third, and the consequence is not merely formal: under point 16, those on list (L1) receive the invitation to the second hearing date, so a taxpayer declared inactive would be summoned into a procedure that Article 107(4) of Law no. 207/2015 expressly prohibits in his case.
  • Annex no. 1, points 16 and 17. Point 16 requires the tax authority to set, by a separate invitation, a second hearing date, and the invitation in Annex no. 3 describes it as „the second consecutive date set in accordance with Article 9(3)(b) of the Tax Procedure Code”, a text under which the hearing is deemed to have taken place only after two consecutive dates on which the taxpayer does not appear. Point 17, however, triggers the ex officio assessment when the 15 days from communication of the notification expire, with no reference to the second date, and builds list (L2) from list (L0), not from list (L1), removing only three categories, among which the hearing does not figure. The result is two incompatible readings of the same act: either the decision can be issued from day 16 regardless of whether the second date has expired, or the tax authority has to wait for it. The act nowhere connects the two points, and the deadlines show how likely the overlap is: the invitation is issued within at most 7 days of communication of the notification, Article 47(10) of the Tax Procedure Code gives the tax authority 10 working days merely to initiate the communication of a document, and communication by public notice is deemed to have taken place only 15 days after posting, under Article 47(7).

Editorial analysis

The order solves a real and long standing problem. The 2016 procedure estimated the VAT owed from a 12 month average, without recognising a single leu of input VAT, for the simple reason that the tax authority had no way of knowing how much the company had bought. Since July 2024, through the pre-filled RO e-TVA return, through electronic invoicing and through connected cash registers, ANAF has the figures. It was natural for the procedure to be rewritten on real data, and the introduction of two hearing dates, entirely absent from the old procedure, is a gain worth stating.

The problem starts at point 19(c). The argument ANAF gave in the approval report is that it does not know the destination of the goods purchased, so it cannot know to what extent the tax is actually deductible, and for that reason it keeps a conventional rate of 50%. The argument explains the uncertainty but does not justify the percentage. The Tax Procedure Code requires, in Article 107(3) read with Article 106, that an ex officio assessment be made by estimating the taxable base, and that the estimate identify the elements closest to the factual situation. A round half is not the result of an estimate but a convention chosen for convenience, and the preamble of the order does not even invoke Article 106 or Article 107(3), only paragraphs (1) and (5). The difference is not theoretical: for a company with 200,000 lei of output VAT and 180,000 lei of input VAT, the real tax is 20,000 lei and the ex officio one 110,000, 5.5 times higher.

The second observation comes from combining the formula with the threshold in point 22 and does not show up when you read the act from beginning to end. A decision is issued whenever the difference is at least 20 lei, that is, whenever the input VAT is lower than twice the output VAT. It follows that a company in a refund position, with 100,000 lei of output VAT and 150,000 lei of input VAT, which would have been entitled to recover 50,000 lei, receives instead a payment decision for 25,000. The distance between the two results is 75,000 lei, and the procedure provides no filter to stop that case, even though the information that would identify it, the real input VAT, is already in the calculation.

The third observation concerns the clock, and this is where the sharing out of deadlines shows most clearly. The taxpayer has 5 days to appear in person at the counter and 15 days to file the return, both running from communication. The tax authority has 2 working days for an automatic listing operation, but no longer has any deadline for communicating the notification, the only one that matters to the company; the 2016 procedure imposed 15 days on it, and the new order dropped that, leaving the general rule in Article 47(10) of the Tax Procedure Code, which gives it 10 working days merely to initiate communication. The comparison is therefore between 5 days in which the taxpayer has to travel and 14 calendar days in which the administration has only to put a document in the post. At the same time, the taxpayer’s window for reacting has tightened from 20 days, as the 2016 procedure provided, to 15.

The last observation is about the distance between three orders of the same institution, published two days apart. On 1 September 2026, ANAF published two procedures moving the hearing in documentary verification and in debt mediation onto the videoconference platform approved by Order no. 705/2026. On 3 September, in the present procedure, the taxpayer is summoned „to the offices of the tax unit”, twice, in two different forms. The infrastructure exists, it belongs to the same institution and had already been used, but it did not make it into Annexes no. 2 and no. 3.

What should be changed

  • Replacing the fixed 50% rate with one calculated on the company’s own history. The practical effect: the average ratio between the input VAT and the output VAT declared in the last 12 returns of the same taxpayer is a figure ANAF already holds and which is, by definition, closer to the factual situation than a round half. It would narrow the gap between the ex officio amount and the real one without easing the pressure on those who do not file.
  • A filter for companies in a refund position. The practical effect: if the real input VAT exceeds the output VAT, so that the return would have shown VAT to recover, no assessment decision should be issued, but a second notification instead. The State loses nothing, because it would not have collected anything even if the return had been filed, and the company does not end up paying for a month in which it was entitled to a refund.
  • Aligning point 17 with point 16 and with Article 9(3)(b) of the Tax Procedure Code. The practical effect: a single sentence saying that list (L2) is drawn up after the second hearing date expires, where such a date has been set, would close the risk of decisions issued on day 16 being annulled on appeal for breach of the right to be heard. As it is written now, the appeal comes with a ready-made argument.
  • Reintroducing a firm deadline for communicating the notification. The practical effect: the 2016 procedure required the tax authority to communicate the notice within 15 days of the filing deadline expiring. Without it, any amount of time may pass between the missed filing and the notification, and the taxpayer learns of the procedure 15 days before the decision, however long the file has been sitting still.
  • The hearing by videoconference, on the platform already approved. The practical effect: one line in Annexes no. 2 and no. 3, allowing the taxpayer to opt for the online route, would align the procedure with Order no. 705/2026 and with the two orders published on 1 September 2026. For a company based hundreds of kilometres from the tax unit, 5 days for a physical journey means, in practice, giving up the hearing.
  • A transitional rule for the July 2024 to August 2026 periods already assessed ex officio. The practical effect: for those 26 tax periods, decisions issued under the 2016 procedure recognise not a single leu of input VAT, while the order now says that those periods fall under the new procedure. A provision allowing recalculation on request would close an inequality created by the very text that extends the application backwards.
  • Showing the three figures in form 192. The practical effect: the decision in Annex no. 4 contains a single box, „VAT payable assessed ex officio”. If it showed separately the output VAT, the input VAT and the 50% reduction, the taxpayer could check the calculation himself, and Article 97 of the Tax Procedure Code, which requires the decision to state the taxable base, would be complied with openly rather than through the free text box marked „Grounds of fact”.

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. 745 of 3 September 2026 16 pages PDF, 103 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.