The inspection has ended, and the result is a tax assessment decision for a sum you cannot pay. This is the moment when the most expensive mistakes are made: either panic (paying everything, with no defence) or paralysis (doing nothing until the payment demand arrives). A roadmap for the first 45 days, under the rules in force in July 2026.
The post-inspection file usually contains three categories of acts, with different legal regimes. Confusing them costs you time limits.
It describes the findings and gives reasons for the amounts. It is not the report itself that is challenged, but the decision issued on the basis of it; the RIF is, however, the raw material of the defence: that is where you find the methodology, the estimates and the inspection body's errors.
The title of claim (titlu de creanță): the act that establishes the principal obligations and which, if not challenged, becomes final. It is challenged within 45 days of communication.
Interest, late-payment penalties, the penalty for failure to declare. They often arrive separately, sometimes weeks apart, and each is challenged on its own, within its own time limit.
Check straight away: the actual date of communication (in the SPV, Spațiul Privat Virtual, the tax authority's secure online portal, the act is deemed communicated on the date it is accessed, but no later than 15 days after it is made available, even if you have not opened it); the periods reviewed and whether the limitation period has expired; the breakdown of the amounts by type of claim; whether a decision on the penalty for failure to declare already exists or is still to come. If the decision was issued after a review of your personal tax position, also check it against the data in the wealth and income declaration.
The due date is calculated from the date of communication (Article 156 of the Tax Procedure Code ('the Tax Procedure Code')): if the act is communicated between the 1st and the 15th of the month, payment falls due on the 5th of the following month; if communicated between the 16th and the 31st, on the 20th of the following month. Once the due date passes, the decision becomes an enforceable title (titlu executoriu).
A few weeks from communication (Article 156 the Tax Procedure Code). After that, ANAF, Romania's national tax administration, can move to enforced collection.
Articles 268-270 the Tax Procedure Code, on pain of forfeiture. A mandatory prior procedure: without an administrative appeal, there is no route to court. It is filed with the issuing authority, free of charge; for drafting technique, see the dedicated analysis on challenging the tax assessment decision.
If you also want to defend yourself orally before the resolution body, the request must be made within 30 days at most of the administrative appeal being registered, also on pain of forfeiture (Article 276(5)). In practice: ask for it within the administrative appeal itself.
They run day by day, whether or not you have filed an administrative appeal. They are the only clock that does not stop on its own.
Once the administrative appeal is resolved, the judicial time limits open up: 6 months for the action for annulment from communication of the resolution decision, or the possibility of going straight to court if the administrative appeal is not resolved within 6 months (Article 281). Jurisdiction at first instance: up to 3,000,000 lei, the tribunal; above that threshold, the court of appeal (Article 10 of Legea nr. 554/2004). And in court you are not limited to the grounds raised in the administrative appeal (ÎCCJ, Decizia RIL nr. 20/2023).
WARNING. Filing the administrative appeal does NOT suspend enforcement of the act (Article 278(1) the Tax Procedure Code). Whoever files the appeal and then waits passively can have their accounts garnished many months before any ruling is made. The administrative appeal is mandatory, but it is not a protection; protection is obtained separately: through payment, through judicial suspension, or through a payment schedule.
The rates for late-payment charges are still in force in July 2026, unchanged since 2016, which makes the calculation predictable and, on large amounts, brutal.
For obligations that are declared but unpaid: interest of 0.02%/day plus a late-payment penalty of 0.01%/day, around 10.95% a year. For obligations that are undeclared or incorrectly declared, established by the inspection through a tax assessment decision: interest of 0.02%/day plus a penalty for failure to declare of 0.08%/day (Article 181; the late-payment penalty no longer applies to these amounts, Article 176(3)), combined, around 36.5% a year.
The penalty for failure to declare does, however, have an essential release valve: it is reduced by 75%, from 0.08% to 0.02%/day, if the principal obligations are extinguished by payment or set-off by the Article 156 due date, or are placed on a payment schedule (Article 181(2)). Conversely, it is increased by 100% if the amounts result from acts of tax evasion established by the judicial bodies, one more reason to assess from the outset whether the file also has a criminal dimension.
In concrete terms, on a principal debt of 1,000,000 lei that was undeclared, exposure grows by roughly 1,000 lei a day (200 lei interest + 800 lei penalty for failure to declare). Paying on time or getting a payment schedule cuts the penalty to a quarter. This calculation, run on your own figures, is the first thing that needs to be on the table before the strategic decision.
Path 1, payment “under reservation” plus an administrative appeal. Payment does not amount to acknowledging the debt and does not close off your administrative appeal. Whoever has the cash (or can raise financing) pays in full by the Article 156 due date and challenges the decision in parallel. Gains: the late-payment charges stop; the 75% reduction of the penalty for failure to declare is locked in; there are no payment demands, garnishments or seizures; the tax clearance certificate remains usable. And if the act is annulled with final effect, the amounts are refunded on request with interest of 0.02%/day (around 7.3% a year), calculated from the date of payment to the date of refund (Article 182). The price: capital tied up for the length of litigation that is measured in years.
Path 2, non-payment plus suspension of enforcement. If payment would strangle the business or the family, the tool is suspension of enforcement of the tax administrative act by the administrative court: under Article 14 of Legea nr. 554/2004, immediately after filing the administrative appeal, until the first-instance court rules, and then under Article 15, together with the main action, until final resolution. Cumulative conditions: a well-founded case (a serious doubt as to the legality of the act) and imminent harm. Added to these is the bond, in tiers (Article 278(2)): 10% on amounts up to 10,000 lei; 1,000 lei plus 5% on the excess over 10,000 lei; 5,500 lei plus 1% on the excess over 100,000 lei; 14,500 lei plus 0.1% on the amount exceeding 1,000,000 lei. On 5,000,000 lei under challenge, the bond is 18,500 lei.
The effects of suspension are strong: all the effects of the act are frozen, the obligations do not appear on the tax clearance certificate, enforcement cannot begin, and during suspension no penalties accrue, only interest (for the late-payment charges relating to the suspension period, the ÎCCJ has ruled in favour of annulling them). The traps: suspension under Article 14 terminates automatically if the action for annulment is not brought within 60 days of the resolution decision being communicated (Article 278(5)), a much shorter time limit than the general 6 months; and if you lose with final effect, the debt is waiting for you at the end, with the interest accumulated.
Path 3, a payment schedule, in the 2026 form. For anyone who cannot pay in full, but can keep up instalments, a payment schedule prevents enforced collection and “tames” the late-payment charges. The regime has, however, been tightened by Legea nr. 239/2025 (in force since 18 December 2025) and supplemented by OUG nr. 89/2025.
Up to 5 years, with proof of temporary difficulty and security covering the amounts scheduled, the interest, and a margin of up to 16% (Article 193). With no security, or security below 50%, the payment schedule is granted for 6 months at most.
The new feature for 2026: a corporate debtor produces a contract executed in notarial form with the beneficial owner (as defined by Article 4 of Legea nr. 129/2019), in the situations expressly set out, among others, when it does not hold sufficient assets for security, or when it was set up less than 12 months before the request.
Twelve months at most, with no standard security, but, after Legea nr. 239/2025, capped at 100,000 lei for individuals and 400,000 lei for companies, and conditional on the company having existed for at least 12 months. For large amounts it has, as a rule, become unavailable.
Late-payment penalties are deferred and cancelled once the payment schedule is completed correctly (Article 208); the penalty for failure to declare keeps its 75% reduction (Article 181(2)); interest for the duration of the schedule is 0.02%/day, reduced to 0.015%/day when the security is provided in full by a letter of guarantee, a guarantee insurance policy, or a deposit of funds (Article 197).
Suretyship, in practice. The time limits for producing the contract are short and differ from case to case: 5 days at most from communication of the tax clearance certificate when the debtor holds no assets, or insufficient assets, 30 days at most from the agreement in principle in the other main scenarios, 10 days for a request to amend the schedule, and, respectively, up to the date the request to keep the schedule valid is filed. For individual debtors, Article 193(7) requires a notarial contract executed with a person capable of binding themselves, under Article 2285 of the Civil Code. Practical application has, however, remained inconsistent: in February 2026, CCF, the Chamber of Tax Advisers, publicly flagged to the Ministry of Finance and to ANAF blockages and diverging interpretations from one tax office to another, and asked for a circular to ensure uniform application. The operational takeaway: ask the competent tax authority in writing, before filing the request, what form and content will be accepted; a single day lost at the notary's office can wipe out a 5-day time limit.
The moment that changes everything: enforced collection stops or is suspended only from communication of the decision granting the payment schedule (Article 203), not from the filing of the request, and the request is resolved within 60 days at most. Filed late, the request will not protect you from a garnishment in the meantime. And remember: a payment schedule does not mean giving up the administrative appeal. You pay in instalments and keep fighting on the merits; if the act falls, the amounts paid are refunded with interest.
WARNING. Judicial suspension and a payment schedule cannot be combined for the same amounts; the Code expressly excludes from a payment schedule any tax obligations whose enforcement is suspended under Article 14 or 15 of Legea nr. 554/2004 (Article 184). Choosing between the “shield” (suspension) and “instalments” (a payment schedule) is a single strategic decision, made on the figures: the chances on the merits, the available cash, the security available, the bond. Changing strategy along the way is possible, but it costs time, exactly the resource in short supply.
The timeline of collection, if you do nothing: at the due date the decision becomes an enforceable title; the payment demand (somație) follows, accompanied by the enforceable title, and from its communication you have 15 days to pay, obtain protection (a payment schedule decision, suspension) or notify your intention to seek mediation with the tax authority (Articles 230, 230¹); mediation requires a meeting within 10 days at most and postpones the continuation of enforcement until the procedure ends. After the 15 days: garnishment (poprire), sent electronically, simultaneously, to every bank where you hold accounts, including over future receipts, garnishment of third parties who owe you money, and then seizure of movable and immovable assets.
Two aggravating factors common in large cases: if precautionary measures (precautionary seizures, precautionary garnishments) were ordered during the inspection, they turn into enforcement measures once the title exists; and irregularities in the enforcement stage are challenged separately, through an appeal against enforcement (contestație la executare) to the local court, within 15 days, a route that remedies procedural defects, not the merits of the assessment. If the garnishment reaches accounts with heavy turnover or recent transfers, expect the bank flows themselves to come under scrutiny.
With millions at stake, an extrajudicial tax expert report, prepared by a tax adviser, recalculates the taxable base, takes apart the methodology behind the RIF's estimates, and translates the defence into technical accounting language. The same report works three times over: as evidence in the administrative appeal, as support for the “serious doubt” needed for the suspension request, and as a reference point for the future court-appointed expert report in the litigation. Set against the late-payment charges running daily, its cost is marginal, provided it is commissioned in the first days, not in year two of the proceedings. Ideally, its foundations are laid back at the stage of the written position on the draft report.
The exact date of communication (including in the SPV), the Article 156 due date, and the 45-day time limit; take stock of the acts received and of those still to come (late-payment charges).
A lawyer and a tax adviser/expert, with the complete file: RIF, decision, schedules, the written position filed at the closing discussion. If pieces are missing, ask for access to the inspection file.
Total exposure (principal, interest, penalty for failure to declare), available cash, possible security, chances on the merits, the bond. Payment under reservation, suspension, or a payment schedule, with simulations for each option.
By the 5th or the 20th of the month following communication: if your strategy includes payment or a payment schedule, act now; paying in full on time, or getting a payment schedule, keeps the reduction of the penalty for failure to declare.
Reasoned in fact and in law, with all the evidence and, ideally, with the party-appointed expert report attached. File it with the issuing authority; ask for the oral hearing (at the latest within 30 days of registration, but ask for it from day one).
Under Article 14 of Legea nr. 554/2004, with proof that the bond has been deposited and evidence of the imminent harm. Do not wait for the administrative appeal to be resolved.
You have 15 days to pay, seek mediation, or make use of protection already obtained; check the legality of every enforcement act and, if there are irregularities, file an appeal against enforcement.
An action before the competent court within 6 months, or within 60 days if you have suspension under Article 14, otherwise it terminates automatically; together with the action, the suspension request under Article 15, with the bond already deposited remaining valid.
A contextual observation: many files of this kind begin long before the inspection, with an ignored compliance notice. If ANAF later returns to the same period, check whether the strict conditions for a re-audit are met; a second round is never a formality.
No. Payment does not amount to acquiescence and does not extinguish the right to challenge the decision within the 45-day time limit. It is a risk-management decision: it stops the late-payment charges and enforcement, keeps the reduction of the penalty for failure to declare, and, if you win, the amounts are refunded with interest of 0.02%/day from the date of payment (Article 182 the Tax Procedure Code).
Not for the same obligations: amounts whose enforcement is judicially suspended are excluded from a payment schedule. In practice you choose the main tool according to the probability of success and your resources: strong arguments of unlawfulness plus an available bond, suspension; uncertain merits, but the ability to pay in instalments, a payment schedule. If the suspension request is refused, a payment schedule remains available afterwards.
The calendar in summary: communication → due date (the 5th or the 20th of the following month) → payment demand → 15 days → garnishment. In the fast scenario, accounts can be frozen at around 6-8 weeks from communication of the decision. With precautionary measures already put in place during the inspection, the margin is even smaller. That is why the strategic decision is made in the first few days, not “after we see what ANAF says on the administrative appeal”.
If you did not pay on time and did not get a payment schedule, the penalty stays at 0.08%/day for the whole period, plus the interest, a devastating cost on large amounts. If you paid by the Article 156 due date, or obtained a payment schedule, the 75% reduction remains locked in even if you lose on the merits. This is exactly why step four in the roadmap comes before filing the administrative appeal.
Informative material, updated on 17 July 2026. It does not constitute legal or tax advice; individual situations must be assessed on their own facts.
If you have an inspection under way or have just received a notification, the related analyses are grouped under tax inspection and the review of individuals. For how such matters are handled, see tax assistance.
Time limits run from the date of communication. A first conversation clarifies what is being alleged, what you need to substantiate and how the defence is built, before an estimate becomes a tax assessment decision.