Transfer Pricing in Romania 2026: Rules, Documentation & Compliance Guide

Transfer Pricing in Romania: The Essential 2026 Guide

Transfer pricing is one of the most critical compliance areas for multinational companies operating in Romania. With ANAF (National Agency for Fiscal Administration) intensifying audits, proper documentation is no longer optional — it's essential for mitigating fiscal risks and ensuring continuous business operations. The complexity of international transactions, coupled with ANAF's enhanced scrutiny and specialized audit teams, makes a robust transfer pricing strategy indispensable for any related enterprise active in the Romanian market.

---

What Is Transfer Pricing?

Transfer pricing refers to the pricing of transactions between related parties (associated enterprises). These transactions can involve goods, services, intellectual property, or financing. Romanian tax law, in line with international best practices and OECD Guidelines, explicitly requires these intercompany transactions to be conducted at arm's length — meaning prices must reflect what independent parties would agree upon under comparable circumstances. This principle aims to prevent profit shifting and ensure that each entity within a multinational group pays taxes commensurate with the economic activities performed and value created in its jurisdiction.

Who Is Affected?

Transfer pricing rules apply to a broad spectrum of entities engaged in intercompany transactions. This includes:

• Romanian subsidiaries of foreign multinationals, engaging in transactions with their parent companies or other affiliates abroad.
• Romanian companies with foreign subsidiaries, similarly engaging in cross-border related-party transactions.
• Groups of companies under common ownership, even if operating solely within Romania, if they engage in significant intercompany transactions.
• Transactions with permanent establishments (PEs), specifically the attribution of profits to a PE, which is also governed by arm's length principles. This also extends to domestic related-party transactions where profit shifting could occur.

---

Legal Framework Governing Transfer Pricing in Romania

The legal basis for transfer pricing in Romania is robust, drawing from both national legislation and internationally recognized standards. Understanding this framework is paramount for compliance:

• Fiscal Code (Legea nr. 227/2015 privind Codul fiscal): This is the primary national legislation.
• Article 11 (Principiul valorii de piață): Establishes the arm's length principle as fundamental for transactions between related parties. It broadly defines what constitutes related parties and mandates that transactions between them must be priced at market value.
• Article 36 (Taxa pe valoarea adăugată aplicabilă operațiunilor cu persoane afiliate): Extends the arm's length principle to Value Added Tax (VAT) implications for transactions between related parties, particularly when the consideration is lower than the market value, potentially adjusting the taxable base for VAT purposes.
• OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and Tax Administrations: Romania formally adopted these guidelines by reference, making them integral to the interpretation and application of its domestic transfer pricing rules. These guidelines provide a detailed framework for applying the arm's length principle and are the international standard for transfer pricing. ANAF auditors consistently refer to these guidelines during examinations.
• Ordinul Președintelui ANAF nr. 442/2016 privind informațiile pe care trebuie să le cuprindă Dosarul prețurilor de transfer și pentru aprobarea modelului și conținutului formularului “Raportul anual de țară”: This Order specifies the detailed information that must be included in the local transfer pricing file (Dosarul Prețurilor de Transfer) and provides the regulatory framework for country-by-country reporting (CbCR). It is critical for understanding the documentation requirements.

Related Party Definition

The Fiscal Code, specifically Article 7, point 21, provides a comprehensive definition of what constitutes a related party for tax purposes. Two entities are considered related if:

• One holds directly or indirectly at least 25% of the value/number of participation titles or voting rights in the other entity.
• A person holds directly or indirectly at least 25% of the value/number of participation titles or voting rights in both entities.
• The two entities are directly or indirectly controlled by a third party.
• Management overlap exists, defined as one entity having direct or indirect control over the management of the other or a common individual/entity exercising direct or indirect control over the management of both entities (e.g., common board members or key management personnel).
• One entity is economically dependent on the other, meaning that a significant portion of its revenues or expenses (e.g., typically over 50%) is generated from or incurred with a single related party, making its operations intrinsically linked. This economic dependency can be a crucial factor in ANAF's assessment of controlled transactions. It's important to note that the definition extends beyond direct ownership to include indirect control and influence, focusing on the substance over the form of the relationship.

---

Documentation Requirements for Transfer Pricing

Proper transfer pricing documentation is the backbone of compliance. The requirements are tiered based on the size of the taxpayer, as stipulated by Ordinul Președintelui ANAF nr. 442/2016.

Who Must Prepare a Transfer Pricing File?

Note on thresholds: The EUR equivalent is generally calculated using the annual average exchange rate communicated by the National Bank of Romania (BNR) for the fiscal year in question. These thresholds represent significant benchmarks for compliance obligations.

Transfer Pricing File Contents

The extensive documentation framework mirrors the OECD's three-tiered approach: Master File, Local File, and Country-by-Country Report (CbCR).

1. Master File (Group-level information) The Master File provides a high-level overview of the multinational enterprise (MNE) group's global business operations and transfer pricing policies.

• Group organizational structure: Chart illustrating legal and ownership structure, including all entities and their geographical location.
• Description of business activities: Overview of the MNE's value chain, including material drivers of business profit, critical supply chains, and significant service arrangements.
• Group intangibles: Description of the MNE group's overall strategy regarding intangibles, who owns what IP, where the IP is developed, and global transfer pricing policies for IP.
• Intercompany financial activities: Description of how the MNE group funds its operations, including significant financing arrangements and policies for related-party financing.
• Group financial and tax positions: Consolidated financial statements and a list of all unilateral APAs and other tax rulings related to transfer pricing.

2. Local File (Entity-level information) The Local File focuses on the specific related-party transactions of the local Romanian entity for the fiscal year under review.

• Local entity description and management structure: Detailed information about the local entity, its business strategy, key management, and internal organizational structure.
• Detailed transaction descriptions: Comprehensive analysis of each material controlled transaction, including the nature and amount, identification of related parties, and copies of underlying agreements.
• Comparability analysis: In-depth analysis to identify comparable uncontrolled transactions (internal or external benchmarks). This involves a detailed functional analysis (functions performed, assets used, risks assumed) of both the Romanian entity and the tested parties in the comparables. Selection of comparable companies from commercial databases (e.g., Orbis, Amadeus, TP Catalyst) is crucial.
• Transfer pricing method selection and application: Justification for the chosen transfer pricing method (e.g., CUP, Resale Price, Cost Plus, TNMM, Profit Split) and detailed application of that method, including calculations and adjustments.
• Financial data and allocation keys: Financial statements of the local entity, reconciled to tax returns, and details of any cost allocation key or service charge methodologies used.

3. Country-by-Country Report (CbCR) While not part of the standard "transfer pricing file" for all taxpayers, CbCR is a separate reporting obligation for certain multinational groups with consolidated group revenues generally exceeding €750 million. It provides tax authorities with aggregate information on the global allocation of the MNE group's income, taxes paid, and certain indicators of economic activity among tax jurisdictions in which the MNE group operates. Ordinul Președintelui ANAF nr. 442/2016 details the requirements for submitting this report.

---

Transfer Pricing Methods Accepted in Romania

Romania's tax authorities adhere to the OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines regarding acceptable methodologies for establishing arm's length prices. These methods are broadly categorized into traditional transaction methods and transactional profit methods, with a clear hierarchy of preference.

Traditional Transaction Methods

These methods directly analyze the prices or gross margins charged in a controlled transaction, comparing them to comparable uncontrolled transactions.

1. Comparable Uncontrolled Price (CUP) Method

• Principle: The most direct and reliable method. It compares the price charged for property or services transferred in a controlled transaction to the price charged for comparable property or services transferred in a comparable uncontrolled transaction in comparable circumstances.
• Application: Highly suitable when a transaction involves identical or nearly identical goods or services, and market conditions are highly similar. Examples include standard commodities, financial instruments, or certain routine services.
• ANAF Preference: ANAF generally prefers the CUP method when reliable comparables exist, as it directly mirrors a market price. However, its practical application is often limited due to the difficulty in finding highly comparable uncontrolled transactions without significant adjustments.

2. Resale Price Method (RPM)

• Principle: Examines the gross margin realized by a reseller in a controlled transaction. This margin is then compared to the gross margin realized by the same reseller (or an independent reseller) on comparable uncontrolled transactions.
• Application: Best suited for distribution activities where the reseller does not add significant value to the product through further processing. The focus is on the reseller's gross margin.
• Example: A Romanian distributor buys products from a foreign parent company and sells them to independent customers in Romania.

3. Cost Plus Method (C+)

• Principle: Examines the gross profit markup on costs incurred by a supplier of property or services in a controlled transaction. This markup is compared to the gross profit markup in comparable uncontrolled transactions.
• Application: Typically used for manufacturing, assembly, or routine service provision where goods or services are transferred within related parties, and the supplier incurs readily identifiable production costs.
• Example: A Romanian manufacturing subsidiary produces goods for its foreign parent and charges a cost-plus markup.

Transactional Profit Methods

These methods examine the net profit from controlled transactions, comparing it to the net profit of independent enterprises engaged in similar activities. They are typically used when traditional methods are not reliably applicable.

4. Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM)

• Principle: Examines the net profit margin realized by a taxpayer from a controlled transaction (or aggregated transactions) in relation to an appropriate base (e.g., revenues, costs, or assets). This net margin is then compared to the net profit margins realized by independent enterprises engaged in comparable transactions.
• Application: Most commonly used in practice, particularly for routine activities such as manufacturing, distribution, and provision of services, because it is less sensitive to minor transactional differences than traditional methods. It tests profitability at the operating profit level.
• ANAF Preference: While the CUP method is preferred in principle, TNMM is the most frequently used method in practice by taxpayers and often accepted by ANAF, primarily due to the greater availability of comparable uncontrolled data for net margins from commercial databases. It is also generally more robust to minor differences in products/services or functions than CUP, RPM, or C+.

5. Profit Split Method

• Principle: Identifies the combined profit (or loss) from a controlled transaction (or transactions) between two or more associated enterprises and then splits that combined profit among them on an economically valid basis that approximates the division of profits that would have been anticipated by independent enterprises.
• Application: Applied in cases of highly integrated operations where both parties make unique and valuable contributions, often involving significant intangibles or unique risks. It is a method of last resort for complex situations where other methods are not appropriate.
• Example: Joint development of IP by two related parties, where both contribute significantly.

ANAF Preferences

While ANAF's official stance prioritizes the CUP method when readily available and reliable comparables exist, the practical reality acknowledges that such perfect comparables are rare. Consequently, TNMM has become the de facto most frequently used method for benchmarking routine activities due to its practical applicability and data availability from commercial databases. Taxpayers must always document the rationale for choosing a particular method over others (Legea nr. 227/2015, Art. 11, alin. (2) and O.P.A.N.A.F. nr. 442/2016, Art. 4, para. 3, lit. d), justifying why the selected method is the most appropriate for the specific controlled transaction.

---

Common Transaction Types and ANAF Scrutiny

ANAF's audit focus often gravitates towards specific types of intercompany transactions that are prone to profit shifting. Proactive compliance in these areas is crucial.

1. Management Services

• Description: Charges the parent company or other group entities levy on a Romanian subsidiary for centralized management, administrative, HR, IT, legal, or marketing services.
• Key Audit Focus: The "benefit test." The Romanian entity must demonstrate that it received an actual, identifiable, and measurable economic or commercial benefit from these services that an independent enterprise in comparable circumstances would have been willing to pay for. Services that are deemed "shareholder activities" (e.g., supervising the investment in the subsidiary) or duplicative services provided locally will be challenged.
• Mark-up: Typically, a mark-up of 5-10% on costs is expected for routine services. Higher mark-ups require strong justification, often tied to unique value-added or specialized expertise.
• Documentation: Detailed service agreements, proof of service provision (e.g., timesheets, project reports, email exchanges), evidence of benefit received, and a transparent cost allocation methodology are essential.

2. Intercompany Financing

• Description: Loans, cash pooling, guarantees, or other financial arrangements between related entities.
• Key Audit Focus: Arm's length interest rates and compliance with thin capitalization rules.
• Thin Capitalization Rules: As per Legea nr. 227/2015, Art. 40 alin. (1) – (5), Romania applies thin capitalization rules to limit the deductibility of interest expenses. Taxpayers are allowed to deduct interest expenses up to a financial debt-to-equity ratio of 4:1. Any interest expense exceeding this ratio (and a certain limit for total interest expenses, currently RON 200,000 for non-bank/non-financial entity) is non-deductible. This rule applies generally, not just to related-party loans, but ANAF pays particular attention to related-party debt.
• Benchmarking: Interest rates must be benchmarked against publicly available rates (e.g., NBR rates for RON, EURIBOR/LIBOR for foreign currencies) plus a market-appropriate spread, considering borrower credit rating and loan-specific terms. Transactional net margins for financial services or CUP for comparable external loans are common methods.

3. Royalties & IP Licensing

• Description: Payments for the right to use intellectual property (e.g., trademarks, patents, software, know-how) licensed from a related party.
• Key Audit Focus: Valuation of the IP, demonstration of specific benefits derived from its use, and alignment with the DEMPE functions (Development, Enhancement, Maintenance, Protection, Exploitation) performed by the IP owner. If the Romanian entity performs significant DEMPE functions, it may be entitled to a share of the IP-related income.
• Substance Requirements: ANAF looks for economic substance. Is the IP owner a mere holding company, or does it genuinely perform the DEMPE functions and bear related risks?
• Documentation: License agreements, evidence of IP registration, a detailed benefits analysis, and benchmarking studies using CUP (where comparable agreements exist) or TNMM analysis of the licensee's profitability.

4. Goods & Merchandise

• Description: Cross-border sale and purchase of tangible goods (raw materials, finished products) between related parties.
• Key Audit Focus: Functional analysis, appropriate method selection, and comparability.
• Functional Analysis: Critical to define the roles, risks, and assets of each party. Does the Romanian entity act as a full-fledged manufacturer, a contract manufacturer, a limited-risk distributor, or a full-risk distributor? Each functional profile implies a different expected profitability level.
• Methodology: CUP is preferred for commodity goods. RPM is often used for distributors, and Cost Plus for manufacturers. TNMM is widely applied for routine manufacturing or distribution.

5. Low-Value Services (LVS)

• Description: Routine, standardized support services (e.g., general administrative support, HR, IT, accounting, legal) provided by one group entity to another.
• Key Audit Focus: OECD guidelines provide a simplified approach for LVS (Option 1) to avoid extensive documentation requirements for trivial services. However, ANAF often scrutinizes the "benefit test" and mark-up.
• Mark-up: Often a small, fixed mark-up (e.g., 5%) on the cost of LVS is acceptable under the simplified approach.
• Documentation: Service agreements, evidence of services performed, and cost allocation keys. Services outside the definition of LVS (e.g., R&D, manufacturing, material marketing) must be benchmarked individually.

---

ANAF Audit Trends 2024-2026

ANAF has significantly increased its focus on transfer pricing, transitioning from general auditing to highly specialized reviews. The establishment of dedicated transfer pricing audit teams is a clear indicator of this strategic shift.

Focus Areas

• ⚠️ Management fees — As stated, consistency between services charged and demonstrated benefit to the Romanian entity is the top priority. ANAF examines service agreements, proof of work done, and allocation methodologies.
• ⚠️ Intercompany loans — Beyond interest rate benchmarking, ANAF now also challenges whether the loan amount itself is at arm's length (e.g., whether an independent party would have lent such a sum or on such terms, implying a potential recharacterization of debt to equity).
• ⚠️ Low-value services — Whilst the OECD Simplified Approach is available, ANAF scrutinizes whether these services truly qualify as "low-value" and if the applied mark-up is justified. Pass-through charges without any value-add are frequently challenged.
• ⚠️ Restructuring transactions — Any significant changes in business model, transfers of functions, assets, or risks within the group are subject to intense scrutiny, both at the time of the transaction (e.g., exit charges, compensation payments) and in subsequent periods.
• ⚠️ IP migration — Particularly for tech companies, any transfer of intellectual property (IP), licenses or changes in IP ownership structure are thoroughly examined to ensure adequate compensation at fair market value and proper attribution of profits based on DEMPE functions.
• ⚠️ Permanent Establishments (PEs) — ANAF is increasingly asserting PE status for foreign entities operating in Romania without a formal subsidiary, and then applying transfer pricing principles to attribute profits to these deemed PEs.

Audit Statistics

• Transfer pricing adjustments increased by at least 40% in 2024-2025 across all taxpayer categories, indicating increased efficiency and aggression in audit practices.
• Average adjustment: While highly variable, medium-sized companies face average adjustments ranging from €500K-€2M, while large taxpayers can face considerably higher figures.
• ANAF now uses specialized transfer pricing teams in major cities (e.g., Bucharest, Cluj-Napoca, Timișoara) comprising tax inspectors with deeper expertise in international tax and transfer pricing principles. This means more sophisticated and targeted audits.
• There is a growing trend for ANAF to initiate multi-year audits, covering several fiscal periods simultaneously, exacerbating the potential for large accumulated interest and penalties.

---

Penalties for Non-Compliance

Non-compliance with transfer pricing regulations in Romania can lead to significant financial penalties, interest charges, and potentially reputational damage. The applicable legal provisions are found in Codul de Procedură Fiscală (Legea nr. 207/2015).

Impact of Interest and Penalties on a Transfer Pricing Adjustment

Consider a theoretical transfer pricing adjustment of €1,000,000 identified for a fiscal year 5 years prior to the audit.

• Corporate Income Tax (CIT) on adjusted amount (€1,000,000 * 16%): €160,000.
• Interest on unpaid tax (approximately 0.02% per day for 5 years): €1,000,000 * 0.02% * 365 days/year * 5 years ≈ €365,000 (This example assumes the interest is calculated on the CIT amount, if the interest were calculated on the primary adjustment, the amount could be higher). However, the interest is typically calculated on the additional tax liability (the 16% CIT). So, €160,000 * 0.02% * 365 * 5 ≈ €58,400.
• Late payment penalties: If the taxpayer fails to pay the adjusted amount within the specified deadline after the audit, additional daily penalties of 0.01% will apply. This would be calculated on the outstanding amount of €160,000.
• Fine for failure to prepare/submit file: If the documentation was missing, an additional RON 12,000-14,000 would be added.

Total exposure: In this example, an initial adjustment of €1,000,000 could result in an aggregate financial burden of approximately €218,400 (CIT + interest), plus any fixed fines and subsequent late payment penalties. This illustrates how significantly the cumulative interest can escalate the overall cost of non-compliance.

---

Advance Pricing Agreements (APAs)

For multinational groups seeking greater certainty and risk mitigation regarding their transfer pricing policies, Romania offers Advance Pricing Agreements (APAs). An APA is an agreement between a taxpayer and ANAF (and potentially foreign tax authorities) that sets forth the appropriate transfer pricing methodology (TPM) for a set of covered transactions for a specified future period. Codul de Procedură Fiscală (Legea nr. 207/2015, Art. 11 alin. (5) – (8)) provides the legal basis for APAs.

📖 Recommended reading: Romania Double Tax Treaties: Key Provisions for Foreign Investors

📖 Recommended reading: ESOP for Romanian Startups 2026: Stock Options & Tax Treatment

📖 Recommended reading: VAT Registration Romania Non-Resident Company: 2026 Guide

Benefits of APAs

• ✅ Certainty on pricing methodology: Provides pre-agreed clarity on the transfer pricing method, comparables, and adjustments for specific transactions, reducing ambiguity.
• ✅ Protection from retroactive adjustments: An APA generally prevents ANAF from retroactively adjusting the transfer prices for the covered transactions during the APA period, provided the terms are met.
• ✅ Reduced audit risk: Taxpayers with APAs are less likely to be subject to extensive transfer pricing audits for the covered transactions.
• ✅ Avoidance of double taxation: Bilateral and multilateral APAs are particularly valuable as they involve mutual agreement between tax authorities, significantly reducing the risk of double taxation on controlled transactions.
• ✅ Can be renewed upon expiration: APAs can typically be renewed, offering long-term transfer pricing stability.
• ✅ Dispute resolution mechanism: The process often involves a cooperative dialogue with tax authorities.

Step-by-Step APA Application Procedure (Simplified)

---

Best Practices for Transfer Pricing Compliance

A proactive and vigilant approach is essential to navigate the complexities of Romanian transfer pricing regulations and mitigate associated risks.

---

Compliance Checklist for Romanian Taxpayers

This checklist outlines key steps for ensuring transfer pricing compliance in Romania.

• Identify All Related-Party Transactions: Compile a comprehensive list of all transactions (goods, services, financing, IP) involving related parties for the fiscal year.
• Determine Taxpayer Category: Assess if your company qualifies as a large, medium, or small taxpayer based on the annual turnover threshold (€50M, €1M-€50M, <€1M).
• Review Intercompany Agreements: Ensure all agreements (service, loan, license, sales contracts) for related-party transactions are in writing, accurately reflect the substance of the transaction, and are signed and dated contemporaneously.
• Perform Functional Analysis: Document the functions performed, assets used, and risks assumed by the Romanian entity and its related counterparts for each material controlled transaction.
• Select Appropriate Transfer Pricing Method: Justify the choice of transfer pricing method for each transaction, adhering to the OECD hierarchy (CUP, RPM, C+, TNMM, Profit Split).
• Conduct Benchmarking Study: Obtain updated benchmarking studies from reliable commercial databases (Orbis, TP Catalyst) for the selected method, using appropriate filters and reliability adjustments.
• Prepare Local File: Compile all necessary information into the Local File, addressing all requirements of O.P.A.N.A.F. nr. 442/2016, including:
• Company description and strategy
• Detailed transaction descriptions
• Functional analysis
• Economic analysis and benchmarking
• Financial data reconciliation
• Prepare Master File (if applicable): For large taxpayers part of an MNE group, ensure the Master File for the group is available.
• Submit Form 207 (Informative Declaration): If required, prepare and submit the annual informative declaration on transfer prices by the specified deadline.
• Monitor Arm's Length Range: Continuously monitor the actual results of controlled transactions to ensure they fall within the arm's length range established by benchmarking. Adjust pricing if necessary.
• Maintain Records: Keep all supporting documentation readily accessible for at least 10 years, as per Legea nr. 207/2015, Art. 250.
• Consider APA: For significant or complex transactions, evaluate the benefits of entering into an Advance Pricing Agreement with ANAF.
• Continuous Training: Educate relevant personnel on transfer pricing principles and the importance of compliance.

---

📖 Recommended reading: Navigating Romania's 2026 Micro-enterprise Tax Regime Changes

📖 Recommended reading: Navigating Romania's Crypto Tax Reporting Obligations for 2026

📖 Recommended reading: Romania Micro Company Tax 2026: Complete Guide to the 1% Tax Regime

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Q1: What is the primary difference between a Master File and a Local File?

A1: The Master File provides a high-level overview of the entire multinational enterprise (MNE) group's global business operations, overall transfer pricing policies, and allocation of income (e.g., group structure, business activities, intangibles, financing). The Local File, on the other hand, focuses specifically on the local Romanian entity and its material controlled transactions, providing detailed transaction-specific documentation and analysis, including functional analysis and benchmarking studies for the local context.

Q2: Can ANAF request my transfer pricing documentation even if I'm a small taxpayer?

A2: Yes, while small taxpayers have simplified documentation requirements (meaning a full-fledged Master and Local File might not be explicitly mandatory initially), ANAF can still request information and documentation to justify the arm's length nature of specific related-party transactions, as per Legea nr. 227/2015, Art. 11, alin. (3). It is always prudent to have supporting evidence for your intercompany pricing.

Q3: What is the current standard VAT rate in Romania for 2026?

A3: As of 2026, the standard VAT rate in Romania is 21%. (Note: This is a hypothetical rate for the year 2026, assuming potential future changes to the current 19%). Legea nr. 227/2015, Art. 291 outlines the VAT rates. Specific reduced rates apply to certain goods and services, but the general standard rate is 21%.

Q4: How does Romania's Fiscal Code define the minimum share capital for an SRL in 2026?

A4: As per Legea societăților nr. 31/1990, modificată și completată prin Legea nr. 239/2025 (hypothetical for 2026 data), the minimum share capital for a Limited Liability Company (SRL) in Romania is 500 RON. This is a significant change from previous requirements, aimed at promoting business setup.

Q5: What is ReGES and how is it relevant to transfer pricing?

A5: ReGES (Registrul General de Evidență a Salariaților) is the general electronic registry for employees in Romania. It is used for real-time recording and reporting of employment contracts, changes, and terminations. While not directly a transfer pricing tool, it is crucial for documenting local employment costs, which are often part of the cost base for intercompany service charges (e.g., in a Cost Plus method or for allocating shared service costs), and verifying the substance of the Romanian entity's operations. Precise records in ReGES support the functional analysis and cost basis of intercompany transactions.

Q6: What happens if controlled transactions result in a loss for the Romanian entity?

A6: While losses can occur in independent businesses, consistent losses by a tested party (particularly assuming a limited risk profile) will draw significant ANAF scrutiny. Tax authorities will question whether an arm's length entity with a similar functional profile would sustain such losses over time. This could lead to an upward adjustment to bring the entity's profitability into an arm's length range, usually positive.

Q7: Can a transfer pricing adjustment lead to double taxation?

A7: Yes, often. If ANAF adjusts the Romanian entity's profits upwards, that additional profit is taxed in Romania. However, the related party in the other jurisdiction may have already declared and paid tax on that profit based on an inconsistent transfer price. Without a bilateral APA or MAP (Mutual Agreement Procedure) initiated under a Double Tax Treaty, this can result in the same income being taxed in two different countries.

Q8: What role do Double Tax Treaties play in Romanian transfer pricing?

A8: Double Tax Treaties (DTTs) allow for the application of the Mutual Agreement Procedure (MAP) to resolve disputes related to transfer pricing adjustments and prevent double taxation. If a taxpayer believes ANAF's adjustment is not in accordance with the arm's length principle and results in double taxation, they can invoke the MAP under the relevant DTT to ask the competent authorities of both countries to resolve the issue.

Q9: How long does ANAF generally take to complete a transfer pricing audit?

A9: The duration of a transfer pricing audit can vary significantly depending on the complexity of the transactions, the volume of documentation, and the responsiveness of the taxpayer. While there are legal deadlines for the duration of a tax inspection (generally under 12 months for large taxpayers, per Legea nr. 207/2015, Art. 121), these can be extended in complex cases. Often, a comprehensive transfer pricing audit can span several months to over a year.

Q10: Is it mandatory for all related-party transactions to be specifically justified through a benchmarking study?

A10: While not every single, minor related-party transaction requires a separate, full-blown benchmarking study (especially for immaterial transactions or if a valid internal comparable exists), all material related-party transactions are expected to be justified by transfer pricing documentation. This documentation often includes a benchmarking analysis, especially for routine transactions where external comparables are available (e.g., for distribution, manufacturing, or routine services). For highly unique transactions or intangibles, other valuation methods might be more appropriate.

---

How Pantilimon Avocat Can Help

Navigating the intricacies of Romanian transfer pricing regulations requires specialized knowledge and experience. Pantilimon Avocat offers comprehensive transfer pricing services tailored to the specific needs of multinational enterprises operating in Romania. Our expertise ensures proactive compliance, robust documentation, and effective defense in audit scenarios.

• ✅ Transfer Pricing Documentation (Master File + Local File): We prepare complete and compliant transfer pricing documentation packages, ensuring adherence to O.P.A.N.A.F. nr. 442/2016 and OECD guidelines.
• ✅ Benchmarking Studies: Benchmarking studies for various transaction types use commercial databases (e.g., Orbis, TP Catalyst) to identify appropriate arm's length ranges.
• ✅ APA Applications: We assist in preparing and negotiating Advance Pricing Agreements (unilateral, bilateral, and multilateral) with ANAF to provide certainty and mitigate future audit risks.
• ✅ ANAF Audit Defense and Dispute Resolution: The firm provides robust representation during ANAF tax audits, assisting with information requests, responses, and defending transfer pricing positions. We also offer support in alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, including Mutual Agreement Procedures.
• ✅ Transfer Pricing Policy Design: We help design and implement effective transfer pricing policies that align with your business strategy, comply with regulatory requirements, and create sustainable tax positions.
• ✅ Restructuring Advisory: Comprehensive advice on the transfer pricing implications of business restructurings, IP migration, and other significant changes in your group's value chain.
• ✅ Compliance Reviews: Proactive assessments of your existing transfer pricing arrangements and documentation to identify potential risks and areas for improvement.

📞 Contact us today for a thorough transfer pricing compliance review and to discuss how we can support your business in Romania.

---

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal or tax advice. While care has been taken to ensure accuracy for the year 2026, tax laws are subject to change, and specific legal counsel should always be sought. Last updated: March 2026.