Romania Cancels VAT Split Payment Mechanism Effective 1 February 2020

Joanna Hysi
January 23, 2020

Controls to close the VAT gap and combat VAT fraud

The VAT gap for Europe remains around €137 billion every year, according to the latest report from the European Commission. This represents a loss of 11.2% of the expected VAT revenue for the region. The largest gaps were in Romania at 37.89%, Greece 33.6%, and Lithuania at 25.3%.

To reduce the VAT gap and combat VAT fraud, countries around the globe including India, Thailand, Vietnam, and in Latin America are taking rapid legislative measures to implement different types of VAT controls. And this has spread to an increasing number of European countries such as Italy, France, and Greece. Such requirements are often contradictory to the EU VAT rules.

For example, an e-invoicing mandate like Italy’s contradicts the freedom established in the VAT Directive 2006/112.  The Directive allows trading parties to freely exchange invoices in the form (paper or electronic) and format they have agreed. Similarly, a split payment mechanism contradicts the VAT payment rules where, in a B2B situation, the supplier charges and pays VAT periodically to the tax authority after filing its periodical VAT return.

What is VAT split payment?

A split payment system is an alternative VAT collection system where the VAT amount and the tax base are paid in two separate accounts. There are variations of the split payment system across the globe, but in general, the net amount is paid to the supplier’s business bank account, and the VAT amount is paid directly to a dedicated bank account of the supplier, called a VAT account.

In December 2017 the European Commission carried out a study to design and assess legally and technically feasible scenarios for a split payment mechanism as a VAT collection tool.  According to the study, split payment “is regarded as a measure that can combat VAT fraud and non-compliance by removing the opportunity of suppliers to charge VAT and disappear without declaring or paying it to the tax authority (‘missing trader fraud’). It deviates from the current EU VAT regime, which mainly relies on vendor-based collection of VAT and on periodical reporting and payment of VAT by registered traders.”

The study found “no strong evidence that the benefits of split payment would outweigh its costs. The main identified effects were that a wider scope of split payment would potentially provide a larger decrease of the VAT gap but would also significantly increase the related administrative costs”.

EU countries that have adopted a split-payment mechanism

Despite the European Commission’s concerns as to the value and benefits of a split payment regime and its compatibility with the Treaty, this mechanism has been adopted by several countries.  They are mainly outside the EU (such as LatAm countries and Turkey, where alternative terms are inconsistently used, i.e. “withholding of VAT” or “reverse charge”). In the EU, Italy applies a limited split payment regime (only to B2G transactions). Poland adopted a mandatory system and the UK is considering a possible split payment mechanism by exploring its benefits and costs during consultations with relevant stakeholders.

VAT split payment in Romania

Since 1 January 2018, Romania applied a mandatory split payment mechanism for taxpayers above a certain threshold for outstanding VAT liabilities. However, later in the same year Romania received its first letter of formal notice from the European Commission and its request to derogate from EU rules in the VAT Directive in this area was rejected. Romania was given a deadline to take remedial actions to comply with the EU rules but only a year later, December 2019, it actually passed legislative measures detailed by Emergency Ordinance No. 78/2019  replacing the VAT split payment mechanism with an effective date as early as 1 February 2020.

What this means for Romanian taxpayers:

  • Taxpayers applying the VAT split payment mechanism will have the available balance of their VAT account transferred by default into their current treasury/bank account between 1 and 11 February 2020;
  • Starting 23 December 2019, taxpayers will no longer be enrolled in the VAT split payment mechanism;
  • By 1 February 2020 the VAT account can be subject to enforcement proceedings by any creditor.

 The future of SAF-T in Romania

Despite developments on the topic of the split payment system, in the same spirit of enforcing VAT collection, Romania’s SAF-T plans are expected to continue as planned. SAF-T reporting is expected to be introduced in Romania, starting in January 2020, with a pilot for large taxpayers. The goal is full adoption of SAF-T reports by the end of 2020. This is different to the split payment mechanism, local SAF-T implementations are not within the realm of the Common Market, and therefore not something the EU can influence.

Take Action

To find out more about what we believe the future holds, download Trends: Continuous Global VAT Compliance and follow us on LinkedIn and Twitter to keep up-to-date with regulatory news and other updates.

Sign up for Email Updates

Stay up to date with the latest tax and compliance updates that may impact your business.


Joanna Hysi

Joanna is a Regulatory Counsel at Sovos TrustWeaver. Based in Stockholm and originally from Greece, Joanna’s background is in commercial and corporate law with research focus on EU law and financial innovation. Joanna earned her degree in Law in Greece and her masters in Commercial and Corporate from London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) in London.
Share This Post

LATAM VAT & Fiscal Reporting
May 20, 2020
Sovos Acquires Taxweb, Extends Tax Determination Capabilities in World’s Most Challenging Compliance Landscape

Earlier this month Sovos announced its second acquisition of 2020, completing our solution for Brazil with an unparalleled offering that solves tax compliance in the place where it is most challenging to do so.  Too many companies doing business in Brazil have been burdened by managing multiple point solutions for continuous transaction controls (CTCs), tax […]

Tax Compliance Tax Information Reporting United States
September 22, 2020
2020 GCS Speaker Spotlight Series | KPMG & Zions Bancorporation

Sovos’ Global Compliance Summit – Intelligent Reporting “Speaker Spotlight” Series kicks off with the introduction to two brilliant women in the world of tax, Kelli Wooten of KPMG LLP and Susie Jensen of Zions Bancorporation, who will be attending & presenting at our upcoming conference in early October. These two professionals are particularly well-versed in […]

September 22, 2020
The Benefits of Insurtech to Captive Insurers

Tax filing, wherever you are in the world, is becoming increasingly complex, with regular rate updates and governments eager to close tax gaps via new mandates that demand real-time reporting. Despite this, many captive insurers still rely on resource-heavy, manual procedures to capture, validate and process large volumes of data. As well as taking significant […]

September 18, 2020
The Data: Wine DtC Shipments and Off-Premise Retail (August 2020 Special Report)

The wine market is in greater flux than ever as producers, retailers and consumers navigate the impacts of a global pandemic. Keeping a pulse on marketplace data has never been so important given these shifting dynamics. Nielsen is collaborating with Wines Vines Analytics and Sovos ShipCompliant to provide a much more comprehensive view of the […]

Tax Compliance Tax Information Reporting
September 18, 2020
Updated Publication 1220 Pushes States Towards Direct State Reporting for Form 1099-NEC

The IRS has released the 2020 version of Publication 1220. One of the most notable changes is that Form 1099-NEC (Nonemployee Compensation)—which was previously reported on Form 1099-MISC utilizing Box 7—will not be a Combined Federal/State Filing (CFS) form. This means that Form 1099-NEC cannot be filed with the states through the CFS Program. The […]

September 16, 2020
Navigating Insurance’s Digital Highway

From underwriting to reporting, the insurance industry is having to adjust and by choice or imposed, is embracing the digital evolution of its practices. On the reporting front, more tax authorities are forcing insurance companies to tailor their internal processes by jurisdiction, directly impacting the collection of information at the underwriting stage. Digitized services continue […]