Romania has introduced significant changes to its transfer pricing documentation framework through Order 828/2026. The new rules affect documentation thresholds, filing requirements, the content of transfer pricing files and the preparation of benchmarking studies. For large taxpayers in particular, the changes introduce additional compliance obligations, including mandatory annual filing of the transfer pricing documentation file through the SPV platform.
The information in this article was prepared by TPS Romania, our Quantera Global Network partner in Romania, and provides a local perspective on the new requirements and their practical implications.
Overview
On 2 July 2026, Romania published in the Official Gazette the National Agency for Fiscal Administration (“NAFA”) Order no. 828/2026 regarding the amount of transactions, the deadlines for preparation, the content and conditions for requesting the transfer pricing file and the procedure for adjusting / estimating transfer prices (“Order 828/2026”), the most significant change to Romanian transfer pricing documentation requirements in the last decade;
Order 828/2026 thus replaces the old NAFA Order 442/2016, which represented the basis for the Romanian transfer pricing documentation requirements for the period 2016 – 2025;
The new rules apply to related-party transactions carried out from 2026 onwards and to all tax administration procedures initiated after 1 January 2027.
Briefly, Order 828/2026:
clarifies some things from the old legislation – e.g. the fact that the materiality thresholds used for selecting the related-party transactions subject to documentation should be viewed as annual amounts by related party and type of transaction;
introduces new extensive content requirements for the transfer pricing documentation file, with a new chapter with standard detailed data regarding related-party transactions and new information regarding the group and the local company needing to be filled;
imposes stricter rules for large taxpayers, including the need to file the yearly transfer pricing documentation file through the online NAFA platform (i.e. SPV);
sets new rules regarding the way in which benchmarking studies need to be performed and documented (with great emphasis on the transparency and the documentation of the entire process undertaken for selecting comparables).
Start With Clear Entity Characterisation
One of the most important elements of any transfer pricing policy is a clear definition of the role of each entity within the group.
Terms such as routine distributor, contract manufacturer, entrepreneur, or tested party are familiar concepts for transfer pricing professionals. However, they are often less clear to the people responsible for implementing the policy.
A transfer pricing framework should clearly explain how each entity is characterised and why. This provides the foundation for selecting the transfer pricing method, setting target margins, preparing documentation, and defending the position during an audit.
Without this clarity, inconsistencies can quickly arise across jurisdictions.
Key changes
Lower thresholds for documentation for large taxpayers (meaning more transactions to be documented): EUR 100,000 for services transactions (previously EUR 250,000), EUR 250,000 for transactions with intangibles (previously EUR 350,000).
Higher thresholds for documentation for small and medium-sized taxpayers: EUR 100,000 for intra-group loans (previously EUR 50,000), EUR 150,000 for transactions with intangibles (previously EUR 100,000), EUR 200,000 for transactions with tangible goods (previously EUR 100,000).
Per-party, per-transaction test: thresholds are to be assessed separately for each related party and each type of transaction, although there is still “room” for aggressive interpretation by the Romanian tax authorities (“RTA”). Moreover, RTA retain the right to request the transfer pricing documentation file for any additional transaction they deem necessary.
Mandatory annual SPV filing for large taxpayers: large taxpayers must file the transfer pricing documentation file through SPV within 30 working days from the deadline for submitting the annual corporate income tax return.
Expanded, restructured content: a new introductory transaction list with details plus group information aligned to the OECD Master File and new data to be added to the Local File.
New rules for benchmarking studies: including a new geographic hierarchy for selecting comparables depending on the jurisdiction of the tested party and a list of details regarding the search process that need to be provided.
A more in-depth view on the main changes
1. Revised materiality thresholds
Order 828/2026 lowers several thresholds for large taxpayers while adjusting some upwards for small and medium-sized taxpayers. Importantly, the thresholds are assessed at the level of each related party and each type of transaction, rather than on an aggregate basis.
How does this impact you?
Re-mapping of transactions is required. Reassess which categories of transactions now require documentation; for large taxpayers, in practice, the lower thresholds for services and intangibles bring more transactions into scope.
Higher compliance costs. This applies mainly to large taxpayers and is generated by the need to document more transactions.
Definitional care. Some categories, as defined by the new order, raise practical questions regarding which threshold applies – e.g. financing transactions not remunerated through interest (e.g. guarantees, factoring, etc.) are to be viewed as services? Tangible assets include all tangible goods? Etc.
2. Mandatory annual filing via SPV for large taxpayers
Large taxpayers must now not only prepare, but also file the transfer pricing documentation file proactively, in electronic format, through SPV (the “Virtual Private Space” platform), rather than only presenting it on request during a tax inspection (as was the care under the previous rules).
The file must be filed within 30 working days of the deadline for submitting the annual corporate income tax return.
If the taxpayer does not file proactively, the RTA may request the transfer pricing documentation file during a tax inspection with only 5 working days as a deadline (extension is not possible).
Small and medium-sized taxpayers continue to prepare and present the transfer pricing documentation file only on request, within a 30 to 60 working days deadline, extendable once, by a maximum of an additional 30 working days.
How does this impact you?
Finding the right timing. The tight deadline overlaps with an already busy period, including year-end closing operations, group reporting, budgeting, statutory financial statements, statutory audit, etc. As such, finding the right timing for starting the documentation process is key. In most cases, a transition should be made towards a proactive approach, by collecting information during the year and starting to update some sections of the transfer pricing documentation file (including some benchmarking studies) before the year-end.
Possible lack of information. Group-level information may not be ready in time to be reflected in the local file before its submission deadline.
The technical capacity of SPV. This is a practical question, given that transfer pricing files are typically large and the capacity of the system is capped currently to a certain file size.
A bit of uncertainty. It is somehow unclear which are the sanctions for large taxpayers that fail to file the documentation via SPV – e.g. whether a fine applies automatically, whether the non filing triggers automatically a tax inspection, whether some of the “benefits” offered by the tax legislation in general will be denied for non-compliant taxpayers (e.g. VAT refunds with subsequent control will no longer be granted to them).
3. Power to request the file in any situation and any additional information
In addition to the obligations generally applicable, the new order allows the RTA the possibility to request the preparation and presentation of the transfer pricing documentation file without a clearly stated reason to be provided to the taxpayer, using as the sole basis for the request a largely opaque internal risk analysis process. In such a case, the deadline is 30 working days (which may be extended once, by up to an additional 30 working days).
It also allows the RTA to request any information considered necessary, in addition to what is already required to be included in the transfer pricing documentation file, and failure to provide it may trigger the transfer pricing documentation file to be treated as incomplete (giving them the possibility to perform transfer pricing adjustments / estimations).
How does this impact you?
Focus on providing the right information. Preparing the transfer pricing documentation file should not be viewed only as an “ticking the boxes” exercise; rather, emphasis should be given to providing the right information allowing the RTA to understand the business model of the group and the taxpayer, the economic substance of each category of related-party transactions and the way in which the arm’s length principle is met.
No transaction is “safe”. Even the transactions which are below the thresholds mentioned in the legislation can be subject to documentation, if the RTA decides.
4. A restructured and expanded transfer pricing documentation file
The structure and content of the file changed, with new data needing to be provided.
A new introductory section was added, including a standardized presentation (in a tabular format) of the list of transactions carried out with related parties which are above the materiality thresholds. The details to be presented include the category of transactions and a brief description, the name of the corresponding related-party and its fiscal jurisdiction, and the annual value of the transaction (including the value of any year-end adjustments).
The section with information on the group was aligned to include all information included in Annex 1 to Chapter V of the OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and Tax Administrations (“OECD TP Guidelines”). Compared with the previous applicable legislation, additional items to be included are: the supply chain for the five most important products or services of the group and any other products or services generating more than 5% of the consolidated turnover; the group’s most important service arrangements (including a description of the capabilities of the providers and the transfer pricing methodologies applied); the most important intangible transfers within the group; how the group is financed; or the group’s consolidated financial statements.
The section with information on the local taxpayer requires further details, such as: the list of changes in the activities carried out by each department of the company; the strategic and operational management positions relevant to the related-party transactions and their role; the amount and nature of costs recharged without a profit mark-up; a statement on the taxpayer’s own responsibility as to the accuracy and correctness of the information included in the transfer pricing documentation file; the list of information subject to commercial, industrial or professional secrecy.
Although Order 828/2026 takes a step forward by offering some indication regarding which missing information may cause the transfer pricing documentation file to be considered incomplete (e.g. the description of the related-party transactions, the contractual framework between the parties, the functional analysis, etc.), as previously mentioned (under point 3 above) the RTA still have complete leverage in this respect.
How does this impact you?
Re-mapping the content of the transfer pricing documentation file. Any existing transfer pricing documentation file should be subject to a detailed review, in order to assess which additional information needs to be added starting with 2026. In order to keep things consistent and traceable, keep as much of the old structure as possible and just add the new items (by creating new chapters / sections or by adding information to existing ones).
Higher compliance costs. The need to include additional information will trigger additional costs which need to be budgeted accordingly.
Additional information needed, not available locally. Considering that additional data will be required from the group central team as well as other related parties, communication is key and all parties should be informed in order to be able to collect the necessary information / documents in due time (this may imply the need for changing the internal deadlines for some processes – e.g. the consolidation of financial statements). In addition to the new descriptive content requirements, now the transfer pricing documentation file must include supporting documents evidencing various matters (even though the new order does not clearly define what qualifies as a “supporting document”). In particular, where the tested party is not the local company, the taxpayer must present supporting documents on the calculation of the profitability indicator of the tested party.
Accuracy and correctness now trigger direct responsibility. One of the changes introduced by the new order refers to the need to include a formal statement on the taxpayer’s own responsibility as to the accuracy and correctness of the information included in the transfer pricing documentation file. Considering that some of this data is provided by the headquarter or other related parties, without the possibility of the local taxpayer to independently verify them, a decision should be made at group level regarding how such things are to be handled.
5. New benchmarking study requirements
The new order introduces specific content and methodological requirements for benchmarking studies. As such, benchmarking studies (the report and all related appendices) are expected in Word / Excel format, showing relevant details such as the applicable search strategy (including the rationale behind applying each step), the selection formulas, the complete accept – reject matrix with the rejection reason for each potential comparable, the source of information used in the selection process, the final sample of comparables, and the computation of the interquartile range.
One major change relates to the geographic hierarchy (territoriality) for selecting comparables, which is now treated differently if the tested party is the local taxpayer (case in which comparables from Romania are preferred, and then the search can be extended to the EU level – including UK, then the wider EMEA region, and finally internationally), and if the tested party is not resident in Romania (case in which the comparables from the jurisdiction in which the tested party is resident are preferred, and then the search can be extended to the EU level – including UK, then the wider EMEA / APAC / Americas region, and finally internationally).
Additional information may be requested by the RTA on the database used – e.g. its geographic coverage, the source of the data, the update frequency and the criteria for including information. The benchmarking study should also evidence that the data used in the analysis was the most recent available on the date when the study was prepared. A multiannual analysis should include a period of at least 3 years, and the number of comparables should suffice to compute an interquartile range.
How does this impact you?
Deciding if old studies are still applicable. This analysis should be viewed first from a territoriality perspective, as it may be the case that a transaction previously documented using Romanian comparables – as required by the old legislation (e.g. provision of IT services by a German related-party) requires now a search to be made on the market in which the tested party is active (i.e. Germany).
Higher compliance costs. The new territoriality criteria may require new benchmarking studies to be performed (as old ones become obsolete), thus triggering additional costs which need to be budgeted accordingly.
New information / editable formats (e.g. Excel). Although old benchmarking studies may still be used as a reference (or as building blocks for future updates), care must be taken in order to ensure that the reports and appendices include all new details required, in the specific format (an editable one). Traceability is now key.
Moving forward – how to prepare
Review the content of your existing transfer pricing file or, if no such file is available, get familiar with the content requirements introduced by Order 828/2026. Having a clear understanding of what is currently available and can serve as building blocks and what is required may prove to be a big asset in the long run.
Test your related-party transactions against the new thresholds (per party and per type of transaction) to confirm what must be documented. Depending on whether you are a large, medium-sized or small taxpayer, some transactions will be newly in scope while others will need to be excluded from the documentation.
Revisit comparability. Reconsider your approach towards benchmarking studies in light of the new territoriality hierarchy, depending on the market of the tested party, and make sure your advisor can evidence database coverage and data recency.
Reevaluate your budget. New documentation requirements usually translate into additional compliance costs.
If you are a large taxpayer, get ready for SPV filing. Prepare operationally for the 30 working days deadline and align the timetable for drafting the local transfer pricing documentation file with other significant events needing attention during the same period (e.g. year-end reporting, statutory audit, etc.). Where possible, plan and execute ahead – collect information and documents during the year; perform / update benchmarking studies as soon as reasonable data becomes available.
Engage the group early. Much of the new content sits at group level: consolidated financial statements, service arrangements, the financing structure, etc. Local entities will therefore depend on timely input from the group, while remaining responsible for the file they submit.
Build an evidence trail. Assemble supporting documents for service transactions, profitability calculations and comparability data.
Plan for continuity. Keep both the old and new transfer pricing file templates administrable, so the years before 2025 and those after 2026 remain consistently documented for a future tax inspection.
Want to Learn More?
Listen to The Transfer Pricing Method Podcast here.
Subscribe to our newsletter for key transfer pricing and tax updates here.
Explore the latest transfer pricing news and blogs here.
Quantera Global Strengthens U.S. Capabilities Through Strategic Alliance with TP Analytics
Quantera Global is pleased to announce its strategic alliance with TP Analytics, a specialized transfer pricing consulting firm based in Arlington, Virginia, USA. Through this alliance, Quantera Global further strengthens its transfer pricing capabilities in the United States, enhancing its ability to support multinational businesses with high-quality, cross-border transfer pricing services. Quantera Global Quantera Global, […]
In this edition of the newsletter, you will find the most important national and global developments in tax law that are (closely) related to the transfer pricing world. Please feel free to contact us if you have any questions. Quantera Global news, developments, and blogs Quantera Global Specialties In the past month, we successfully completed several challenging and noteworthy projects, including: […]
Oliver Treidler, Founder and Managing Director of TP&C and part of the Quantera Global network, shares a practical perspective on a challenge many multinational groups face: creating transfer pricing policies is one thing, but successfully implementing them is something entirely different. Most transfer pricing professionals have experienced it. A policy is designed, intercompany agreements are […]
