Controls from ANAF: what happened to a taxpayer who asked for the VAT refund he was due / Advice from a lawyer who defeated the state in court

A taxpayer who requested the refund of VAT related to coffee, charged by ANAF in error, was subsequently faced with new fiscal controls, initiated without a legal basis. The lawyer Bogdan Blaj, who definitively defeated the state in a case regarding VAT on coffee, draws attention to the fact that such controls have become more frequent, in a context where the tax authorities mainly aim to increase budget revenues. What should companies do to defend themselves against possible state abuses?

A series of legislative changes applied starting in 2023 have generated confusion in the HoReCa field: what level of VAT should be applied to coffee and tea: 9% or 19%? ANAF claimed that it was 19%, but the companies contested this interpretation. Later, the courts found that ANAF was not right, and the taxing decisions were definitively annulled.

Based on such a decision, a taxpayer requested ANAF to reimburse the difference in VAT. The request for reimbursement was submitted to a separate tax inspection, as the procedure provides, and the control was completed favorably, the tax authorities approving the reimbursement of the requested amounts, Bogdan Blaj, the lawyer who won before ANAF at the Cluj Court of Appeal the case related to the amount of VAT applied to coffee, told HotNews.

ANAF decided to check the taxpayer again

“However, shortly after the end of the inspection and the recognition of the right to reimbursement, it was ordered to resume the checks by issuing a recheck decision, although there were no new data to justify such an approach.

The decision was contested, and the approach resulted in a result rarely seen in tax practice: the central tax body accepted the appeal and annulled the reverification decision, finding that it had been issued in violation of the legal conditions”, says the lawyer.

This case shows that a tax inspection completed in favor of the taxpayer cannot be resumed at the pleasure of the authorities, he added. The reopening of such verification is only possible in situations clearly and strictly provided by law.

ANAF cannot resume control without new elements

It's a rare solution, because it shows that the problem could have been solved directly by the tax authorities, without going to court and wasting years with lawsuits, as is usually the case.

“The discussion started from the application of the VAT rate for coffee-based drinks and from the taxpayer's possibility to request a refund of the VAT difference, after the cancellation of the tax decisions by which the 19% rate had been applied. The refund was requested for periods subsequent to those covered by the canceled tax decision, by submitting the VAT return with a negative amount, and this right was confirmed following a tax inspection that was completed favorably,” says Blaj.

So, in this case, the problem was not the taxpayer's right to reimbursement, which had already been confirmed, but the tax authorities' attempt to resume control without the existence of new elements. The law allows reverification only under limited conditions, and the simple change of approach of the fiscal body cannot justify the reopening of an already concluded inspection, the lawyer continued.

ANAF says that it goes to the control based on risk analyses

The example is not singular. Fiscal audits are more and more frequent, because the authorities aim to bring additional revenues to the state budget and often fiscal inspectors do not strictly follow legal procedures, the lawyer also says.

On the other hand, the ANAF representatives conveyed, at the request of HotNews, that the selection of persons to be subjected to fiscal control actions is strictly regulated, without allowing arbitrary selection for control.

“Verification of the personal fiscal situation/documentary verification are control procedures carried out on the basis of risk analyses, through which it is determined whether a natural person presents a risk of non-compliance with the declaration of taxable income”, reads the ANAF response.

From the statistics submitted, it appears that the number of checks in 2025 is comparable to that of the previous year, but the number of checked taxpayers has increased.

Thus, in 2025, 7,965 fiscal controls were carried out, compared to 8,047 in 2024.

Anti-fraud control actions carried out by anti-fraud inspectors in 2025 targeted 29,417 taxpayers, compared to 27,082 in 2024.

In the year 2025, out of the 893 control actions completed, 301 were completed with tax decisions by which additional fiscal obligations were established in the amount of approximately 607.1 million lei. Comparatively, in 2024, of the 1,295 control actions completed in 2024, 501 were completed with tax decisions by which additional tax obligations of 252.2 million lei were established.

Regarding tax inspections regarding declared income, in 2025, 5,765 tax inspections were carried out and 5,102 tax decisions were issued, for 107.8 million lei. A year before, in 2024, ANAF carried out 5,479 tax inspections and issued 4,940 tax decisions, for 96.8 million lei.

Advice for taxpayers controlled by ANAF

Economic agents facing such situations must be extremely vigilant and correctly apply the legal mechanisms to protect their rights, especially in the face of attempts to re-verify or impose additional tax obligations. The lawyer offers some advice for those who find themselves in this situation:

1. Cooperate with the authorities

This is a mandatory step, which involves providing the necessary information and documents to clarify the fiscal situation.

Also, the collaboration with the tax authorities during an ANAF control reduces the risks that the tax authorities will later invoke the existence of additional unknown data to justify a re-verification of the same period. Thus, transparency in collaboration can significantly limit the chances of being subjected to additional measures.

At the same time, if the tax authorities still decide to initiate a new audit without having new data, as happened in the case above, taxpayers who have complied with the obligation to cooperate have a real chance to prove that there are no grounds for re-verification.

2. Meet appeal deadlines

Companies must be extremely careful to comply with the legal deadlines for contesting fiscal administrative documents issued by ANAF, in order to protect their rights and avoid the execution of illegal measures.

In general, the term for contesting a tax administrative act issued following a tax control is 45 days from the date of communication of the act. However, there are also exceptional situations, which must be taken into account by each taxpayer.

For example, in the case of precautionary measures, which are applied during the conduct of a tax audit, such as the blocking of amounts until the completion of the verification, the appeal term is shorter, being 30 days from the communication of the decision to institute this measure. These measures are intended to ensure the recovery of the sums owed by the taxpayer, but, as in the case of other fiscal acts, they can be challenged if they are considered to have been imposed abusively or without respecting the legal procedure.

The appeal procedure usually follows two stages:

The administrative-fiscal stagein which the taxpayer submits the appeal to the issuing tax authority.

Judicial stagein which, after the end of the administrative stage, the appeal can be submitted directly to the competent court. There are also exceptional situations where the administrative stage is not mandatory, such as in the case of insurance measures, which can be contested directly in court.

3. Communication of fiscal documents: pay attention to the forms of communication

It is essential that companies check the deadline for the communication of fiscal documents, because the deadline for contesting runs from the date of their communication. When it is not possible to communicate at the headquarters or domicile, the documents are communicated through advertising. In the latter case, the act is considered to have been communicated, and the appeal period begins 15 days after the date of the announcement on the ANAF website.

However, this procedure only provides effective communication in theory, because in practice, many taxpayers do not constantly check the ANAF website to see if announcements targeting them have been published. Therefore, if you know that a tax audit is being conducted against you, it is ideal to periodically check the ANAF website to make sure that no tax administrative act has been published that affects you.

4. Suspension of the effects of the act

The appeal does not suspend enforcement, which means that the act can be enforced even if its validity is challenged. However, the taxpayer can request the suspension of the execution of the act in court, if it is clearly illegal. To obtain the suspension, it is necessary for the person to pay a bond, calculated in relation to the value of the amount imposed.

5. Foreclosures: what companies need to know

Tax administrative acts establishing tax claims are enforceable, which means that if the amount owed is not paid within the legal term, they can be enforced by the tax authorities without the need for another act. Thus, if the established fiscal obligations are not paid, the authorities can immediately start the enforcement procedure.

The contestation of documents issued in the forced execution procedure is subject to a short period of 15 days from the date of communication of the document. It is essential that companies are aware of this deadline, in order to be able to file the appeal in time and avoid the execution of illegal or excessive measures. If a company does not have the financial resources to pay off the debt, but wants to avoid foreclosure, it can apply for deferred payment.