The immediate impact on voluntary compliance is an increased pressure to justify the source of income, alongside a reduction in the time required to issue tax assessment decisions for identified discrepancies.
A draft order currently under internal review at the National Agency for Fiscal Administration introduces a major operational change: the inclusion of the General Directorate for Fiscal Anti-Fraud among the structures authorized to carry out personal tax situation verifications.
Reconfiguring the tax control workflow
Under the current model, the anti-fraud unit has a detection role, without assessment authority. The new framework removes this fragmented circuit and allows:
- identification of income discrepancies;
- quantification of tax liabilities;
- direct issuance of tax assessment decisions.
From a procedural perspective, this integration reduces the risk of statute of limitations and optimizes the use of institutional resources.
Risk threshold and trigger for verification
Case selection is based on risk analysis, with two cumulative conditions:
- a minimum 10% difference between estimated and declared income;
- an absolute value of at least RON 50,000.
These criteria shift controls toward taxpayers with significant fiscal exposure, particularly high net worth individuals.
Legal framework and tax treatment
The verification is carried out in accordance with the Fiscal Procedure Code (Articles 138–147), while unjustified income is subject to increased taxation under the Fiscal Code, with a rate of 70%.
This level of taxation acts as a coercive instrument rather than a standard taxation mechanism.
Procedural stages and right of defense
The control process remains formalized:
- compliance notification (30-day deadline for clarifications);
- verification notice;
- detailed analysis of assets and financial flows.
Compliance with these steps is essential for the validity of the fiscal administrative act.
Practical implications for taxpayers
For individuals concerned, the risk is no longer limited to identifying discrepancies, but also the acceleration of the assessment process. Consolidating competencies within the anti-fraud structure reduces the interval between detection and enforcement, which requires:
- thorough documentation of income sources;
- alignment of banking flows with tax declarations;
- preparation of supporting documentation prior to any audit.
The draft is not yet in force; its applicability depends on approval and publication in the Official Gazette.