All material subject to strictly enforced copyright laws. © 2022 ITR is part of the Euromoney Institutional Investor PLC group.

Romania: Romanian individual tax residency position

intl-updates-small.jpg

The enactment of the Romanian Fiscal Code in January 2016 brought significant changes to an individual's tax residency position. For the first ever time, the Romanian legal framework provides for a 'split year' residency.

sofianu.jpg
tigai.jpg

Claudia Sofianu

Inga Tigai

More specifically, individuals can acquire/cease their Romanian tax residency at a certain moment during the fiscal year, when the relevant conditions are met. In the past (up to December 2015), a full year residency was in place and individuals could not split their position during the fiscal year.

In terms of tax liabilities, the new provisions target an individual's worldwide income at a more accelerated pace than before. Previously, income was not subject to Romanian taxation in the year the individual shifted their tax residency to Romania. So, it seems that the change intends to narrow the benefits granted to taxpayers when considering their tax residency.

Although the changes in the legislation are significant, the practice and procedures in respect of assessing an individual's tax residency position are mostly the same as before and could still lead to some odd situations.

As in the past, the Romanian tax residency position is assessed based on a tax residency questionnaire (TRQ) submitted on the individual's arrival to/departure from Romania.

Unclear areas

The new rules in the Fiscal Code are the result of having the tax residency position determined based on domestic conditions (the "inglorious" 183-days rule and the individual's vital interests) rather than the applicable treaty for the avoidance of double taxation, if applicable. Thus, by not employing a tie-breaker rule, Romanian authorities may potentially keep the individuals as tax residents in Romania even years after they shift their tax residency position abroad.

In particular, this might be the case for Romanian citizens travelling abroad for more than 183 days, who are required to clarify their tax residency position upon leaving the Romanian territory. In such cases, the burden proof of deregistration stays with the individual who should produce a tax residency certificate from the other state. Still, more inconveniences could be encountered if the authorities decide that deregistration is applicable only upon receiving the tax residency certificate from the other state and not from the actual moment when the event triggering the tax residency shift occurred. The bottom line is that when handling the matter with the authorities, the individuals should consider proper supporting documentation for the TRQ and making the applications in advance, as it is common that the tax residency notifications are issued with significant delays.

Another important procedural aspect concerns the shift of an individual's centre of vital interest to Romania. They can have their tax residency position assessed by Romanian authorities only after the 183-days term is completed. However, if the authorities consider the social and economic ties as being the connecting factor to Romania (as the case may be), the individual could fail to observe their tax liabilities for the first year of residence. Therefore, the delays in the assessment of the individual's tax residency position could then trigger penalties for late tax reporting and payment.

To conclude, since tax residency is assessed by the tax office where the individual resides, most recent cases show that the authorities' approach on tax residency is not consistent and issues are only resolved on a case-by-case basis. Considering that the practice on a split tax residency is still in its infancy, those affected by the new rules should undertake the assessment of their tax residency even before the due date to ensure they have more opportunities to clarify, by means of the TRQ, their position before any tax liabilities arise.

Claudia Sofianu (claudia.sofianu@ro.ey.com) and Inga Tigai (inga.tigai@ro.ey.com)

EY, People Advisory Services

Website: www.ey.com

More from across our site

The fast-food company’s tax settlement with French authorities strengthens the need for businesses to review their TP arrangements and documentation.
The full ALP model will be adopted through a new TP regime, which is set to boost the country’s investments and tax certainty.
Tax professionals have called on the UK government to reconsider its online sales tax as it would affect the economy at the worst time.
Tax professionals have called on companies to act urgently to meet e-invoicing compliance targets as the EU plans to ramp up digitisation.
In the wake of India’s ambitious 25-year plan for economic growth, ITR has partnered with leading tax commentators to discuss what the future will look like for India and for the rest of the world.
But experts cast doubt on HMRC's data and believe COVID-19 would have increased the revenue shortfall.
EY’s plan to separate its auditing and consulting businesses might lessen scrutiny from global regulators, but the brand identity could suffer, say sources.
Multinationals are asking world leaders to put a scale on carbon pricing to tackle climate change at the 48th G7 summit in Germany, from June 26 to 28.
The state secretary told the French press that the country continues to oppose pillar two’s global minimum tax rate following an Ecofin meeting last week.
This week the Biden administration has run into opposition over a proposal for a federal gas tax holiday, while the European Parliament has approved a plan for an EU carbon border mechanism.
We use cookies to provide a personalized site experience.
By continuing to use & browse the site you agree to our Privacy Policy.
I agree