In recent years, we have seen poorly written tax legislation by the Ministry of Finance, and the reason is that the Ministry has distanced itself from taxpayers and experts. A recent example (among many others): if the tax laws were well written, there would be no more problems with applying VAT to coffee or tea.

140,000 experts wrote a letter showing the Ministry of Finance and ANAF the dysfunctions that lead to fiscal problems.

For example, this is why there are problems.

The tax officials simply refuse to answer the questions of tax consultants, referring to the fact that “they do not give answers to hypothetical situations.”

“In addition to the fact that such an approach is not supported by any legislative provision, even contradicts the leading role of the fiscal authority, these requests are intended to draw attention to some ambiguities in the fiscal legislation and the active involvement of the fiscal authorities would have no other result than better compliance with the tax legislation with on the part of taxpayers”, show 140,000 experts gathered in the Union of Liberal Professions of Romania (UPLR).

Two malfunctions that arose as a result of the order of the Ministry of Finance

In 2021, a Ministry order (1233/2021) appeared, approving the current procedure for taxpayer guidance and assistance provided by ANAF, which, however, adds to the known historical shortcomings of the entire taxpayer assistance system managed by ANAF. under the coordination of the Ministry of Finance.

According to the UPLR document, this has caused several dysfunctions, but two of the biggest ones are:

1. Termination of cooperation between the department of tax, procedural and accounting legislation of the Ministry of Finance with professional bodies regulated by the profile, regarding the correct understanding and application of legal provisions in the field of taxation and accounting.

These professional bodies were created by legislative initiative of the Ministry of Finance, and which, according to the laws on their organization and activities, are still in some form of coordination or supervision in relation to the Ministry.

This gap occurred due to the fact that, according to the procedure approved by the order of the Ministry of Finance, the relevant professional organizations are considered only ordinary taxpayers. General problems of interpretation and application of legislation, with which subordinate professional bodies turn to the ministry, are sent by it to territorial AFPs for resolution without their analysis by the legislation department of the ministry and the formation of a special conclusion on them.

From the answers to these requests provided by the territorial UFP both to the regulated professional bodies and to the accounting companies that keep the accounting records of the taxpayers and tax consulting companies, it appears that the fiscal authority that helps the taxpayers cannot formulate an answer. on the legal issue of the submitted analysis, since this is a general interpretation and application of the law, without identifying the taxpayer in a specific factual situation, and the fiscal authority cannot satisfy such requests, referring specifically to the provisions of the aforementioned order of the Ministry of Finance above.

2. Severing the relationship between the legislation department in the Ministry of Finance both with taxpayers and with all the ANAF territorial structures in the country, as a result of the procedural rule established by the same order, in the sense that requests by the territorial fiscal units and even the DGRFP or taxpayers, regarding clarification of the method of interpretation and application of legislation, which are sent to the Ministry of Finance, in accordance with the provisions of Art. 5 para. (3)‚”………. are considered to be addressed in error and are transferred by them within 5 working days for resolution to the competent fiscal authority provided for in Art. 4 …………” in the case of submissions by taxpayers and, accordingly, in accordance with the provisions of Art. 20 par. (6), in the case of appeals from ANAF territorial bodies, they are also considered to be incorrectly addressed and, as a result, are forwarded to the central ANAF for resolution, without analyzing and providing the Ministry’s opinion on them.

11 unresolved issues of assistance to taxpayers

UPLR has also prepared a list of outstanding issues regarding taxpayer assistance:

1 Providing clear and unambiguous answers to taxpayers’ or tax advisors’ questions based on analysis and transparently presented arguments.

2 Adherence to statutory deadlines for responding to requests for assistance and guidance, or at least reasonable deadlines.

3 Clarification of the difference between the provision of general information (based on the procedure established by the order of the Ministry of Finance No. 1,233/2021) and the regulation of future fiscal situations (based on Article 52 of the Tax Procedure Code and Procedure no.

3736/2015 regarding the issuance of a prospective individual fiscal decision).

4 Removal of restrictions on the right of taxpayers to consultation and real assistance from specialized bodies and removal of restrictions on access to assistance after the initiation of a tax audit of any kind.

5 Clarification or removal of the restriction on providing information on requests in which “ways to optimize the fiscal burden” are proposed or submitted (Article 3, paragraph (3) letter b) of the Procedure related to Order No. 1233/2021).

6 Clarification of the legal regime of the conclusions of fiscal authorities, provided at the request of taxpayers, in comparison with those provided by the Ministry of Finance to fiscal authorities at the request of the latter.

7 Implementation and updating of a database with addresses issued by authorities with authority for guidance and assistance, organized by types of taxes/fees, types of cases, industries, etc., of course with anonymization of data of taxpayers and sums.

8 Providing a non-discriminatory basis for providing guidance and assistance, given that currently in practice there are numerous situations where some taxpayers do not receive an answer to their requests, or it is practically unconvincing, or it is simply expressed mechanically by reference to the law, therefore it is completely useless.

9 Refusal of tax advisors’ requests for clarification – tax authorities simply refuse to answer, citing the fact that they do not respond to hypothetical situations. In addition to the fact that such an approach is not supported by any legal norm, it even contradicts the role

According to the instructions of the tax authority, these requests are intended to draw attention to certain ambiguities in the tax law, and the active involvement of the tax authorities will have no other result than better compliance with the tax law by taxpayers.

10 Implementation of a realistic and effective monitoring tool at the tax administration management level, which includes an evaluation system, primarily based on qualitative criteria, of all functional structures to guide and assist taxpayers.

11 Organization of a special section dedicated to the degree of satisfaction of taxpayers – beneficiaries of public services provided by relevant public servants, with this tax administration procedure.

See the whole the UPLR address for the Ministry of Finance and ANAF, which also comes with the solutions.

Photo source: Dreamstime.com