In April 2026, ANAF published two official warnings within a two-week period: people introducing themselves as “ANAF Antifraud inspectors” are calling taxpayers and trying to obtain personal and banking details. The legal answer is simpler than it looks: a phone call is not a tax administrative act. It creates no obligations, no time limit runs from it, but how you respond can still matter.
A tax administrative act is issued only in writing, on paper or in electronic form, with the mandatory elements laid down by law (Article 46 of the Tax Procedure Code): the issuing body, subject matter, grounds, legal basis, signature, and information on the available remedies. It is communicated under Article 47: through the Spațiul Privat Virtual (SPV), the tax authority's secure online portal, by post with acknowledgement of receipt, or by hand against signature.
Time limits for responding, paying or appealing run from the communication of a written document, in the forms laid down by law.
A “telephone payment demand”, a “fine communicated by phone”, or “a debt that must be paid today” has no legal existence.
But it can steer the tax authority, it can be recorded in internal notes, and it can generate later written requests, drafted precisely on the basis of what you said.
The conversation produces no legal effects, but it can produce practical ones. And those are hard to undo afterwards.
The phenomenon is serious enough that ANAF has addressed it through repeated official statements.
Fraudulent calls from people presenting themselves as Antifraud inspectors and asking for personal and financial or banking details.
DGAF statement no. A_RPC 387: the identity of real inspectors is being stolen, using “details and names published on the anaf.ro portal, although the phone numbers do not belong to the institution”. The key message, quoted exactly: “ANAF Antifraud inspectors do NOT ask for personal or financial and banking details by phone”.
ANAF warned about text messages announcing “account blocking” and containing links to click, as well as about fake e-mails sent in the institution's name, reminding taxpayers that it communicates through the SPV or by post.
For the first time, telephone scams top the list of frauds: of all the incidents reported to the National Cyber Security Directorate in the first half of 2026, 42% were telephone fraud (vishing), 14% phishing and 13% SMS fraud (smishing). The scammers pose as a bank, the police or other institutions.
Near-certain signs of fraud: you are asked for your PIN, passwords, codes received by SMS, full card details; you are asked to transfer money to a “safe account” or to pay a “fine” immediately; the caller creates pressure, “criminal file”, “arrest”, “accounts blocked within hours”; you receive a link to click during the call. The irony of the situation: the scammers exploit exactly the real news about the expansion of Antifraud's powers, including OPANAF nr. 768/2026, under which antifraud inspectors can carry out the review of an individual's tax position, with the prospect of the 70% tax on unjustified amounts. Fear of a real inspection is what sells the lie.
Not your CNP, not your address, not your IBAN, not information about your income or accounts. A genuine official already has your identification details from the tax records; they do not need you to “confirm” them by phone, and they certainly have no need for banking or card details.
The full name, the unit they belong to (the county tax administration, the regional directorate, DGAF), the registration number of the matter, and the written document on which the call is based. A legitimate caller can give these without hesitation; a scammer becomes evasive or aggressive.
Do not prolong the conversation. Check your SPV account (that is where genuine requests and acts appear), call the ANAF call centre on 031.403.91.60, or contact the registry of the tax office where you are registered and ask whether there is a matter open in your name.
The formula that properly ends any telephone conversation: “Please send me the request in writing, through the SPV or by post, and I will respond within the statutory time limit.” This is a right, not a discourtesy, and for a proper official it is the normal procedure.
ANAF expressly asks for such calls to be reported through the single contact form at www.anaf.ro/asistpublic, giving the phone number, the date and time of the call and any details noticed; this information is used in criminal complaints for impersonating an official. If you have suffered any loss, file a complaint with the police.
You can say, without any risk: that you have noted the call; that you are requesting written communication; your contact details for correspondence (your tax domicile address is on file anyway). That is all.
Income, accounts, cash deposits, transfers, loans, assets, relatives: all of it is documented in writing, not recounted over the phone.
Figures “established” by the caller are not to be discussed by phone, in either direction.
And do not “acknowledge” any differences: a voluntary acknowledgement has real legal effects, including on the limitation period.
It is the most common mistake made by people acting in good faith, and the most costly one.
The last point is worth stressing. An explanation given by phone, from memory, with no documents in front of you, is almost always incomplete or imprecise. If the documents later show something different, not because you lied but because memory compresses years of transactions, you will have created, on your own, the appearance of a contradiction, possibly recorded in a note you can neither control nor challenge. Tax matters are clarified with documents, in written procedures, with time limits and remedies, not in phone conversations.
To recognise the fake, you need to know what the genuine article looks like.
For companies and similar entities, enrolment in the SPV has been compulsory since 1 March 2022; tax administrative acts issued electronically are communicated through the SPV. For individuals, the SPV is optional but increasingly used, and if you have an account, acts are communicated to you there. That is why the SPV account must be checked constantly: an act communicated electronically is deemed communicated within 15 days of transmission, even if you have not opened it.
Genuine documents have a registration number, an identifiable issuing body, a legal basis and a signature (including an electronic seal for those issued through the SPV). A compliance notice, a notice of review or of inspection, a payment demand (somație), or a tax assessment decision always come in writing, never “by phone”.
The final test, available to anyone: if the call is genuine, you lose absolutely nothing by asking for written communication. A genuine official will send the request through the SPV or by post. The scammer, by contrast, needs your decision on the spot; putting it in writing takes them out of the game.
WARNING: ANAF officially confirmed, in April 2026, that its inspectors do not ask for personal or financial and banking details by phone. Any call in which you are asked for a PIN, passwords, SMS codes, card details, a “safety” transfer, or immediate payment of a “debt” is an attempted fraud, regardless of how real the name used sounds or how official the caller sounds. Hang up, check the SPV and call 031.403.91.60, and report it through www.anaf.ro/asistpublic. Genuine institutions communicate in writing and have no need for your card.
Consult a lawyer with a tax law practice before communicating anything, if you find yourself in one of the situations below.
The call or message refers to the review of your personal tax position, to unjustified income, to a compliance notice, or to an antifraud inspection.
Cash deposits, transfers, crypto-assets, or foreign accounts.
A notice, an inspection notification, a request for information, and someone calls you to “sort it out amicably” before the deadline.
You spoke on the phone and do not know what happens next. Write down immediately what you said, and the date and time.
The point of early involvement is not confrontation with the tax authority, but the quality of the first written response: complete, consistent with the documents, and sent in time. In most cases, files are won or made more complicated at the first response, not the last.
No. Tax administrative acts are issued in writing and communicated through the SPV, by post with acknowledgement of receipt, or by hand against signature (Articles 46 to 47 of the Tax Procedure Code). A phone call does not establish obligations and does not trigger time limits. If you are told otherwise, that is a sign of fraud.
It happens, as a rule for one-off administrative matters: an appointment, a clarification about a document already filed, an addition. But this is legally irrelevant: nothing requested of you by phone becomes binding unless it is sent in writing. The correct response is the same in every case: ask for the request to be sent through the SPV, and reply in writing, within the time limit.
If you have disclosed card details or codes: call your bank immediately, block the card, change your passwords and turn on transaction monitoring. Report it to the police and to ANAF (the form at www.anaf.ro/asistpublic). If you discussed your tax position with a caller who might have been genuine, write down immediately what you said and the date and time, and consult a lawyer before responding to any later written request.
The SPV is a secure, authenticated channel; documents communicated through it come from the tax authority and have a registration number and an identifiable issuing body. Be careful, though, of e-mails that merely imitate SPV notifications: do not click links in messages; go directly to the anaf.ro portal and log in to your account. Anything not in the SPV or in official postal correspondence is not official communication.
Widespread enough to take first place. Of all the incidents reported to the National Cyber Security Directorate in the first half of 2026, 42% were telephone fraud (vishing), 14% phishing and 13% SMS fraud, with telephone fraud overtaking the other methods for the first time. The scammers pose as a bank, the police or other institutions, and ANAF is one of the identities used frequently.
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.