ANAF Anti-Fraud uncovered damage of more than 13 million lei at a real estate developer in Iași that recorded revenue late to avoid profit tax. The mechanism was identified by comparing operational documents (handover records, utilities) with the accounting records. The file moves to the criminal stage.
On 12 May 2026, ANAF announced a case worth studying if you have a real estate company or if you follow how Anti-Fraud identifies tax evasion mechanisms. In Iași, ANAF Anti-Fraud inspectors uncovered total damage of more than 13 million lei generated by a real estate developer and by the individual who controlled the company, a useful x-ray of what ANAF looks for in inspections in the sector.
According to the ANAF announcement, the developer had built and sold eight apartment blocks. The evasion mechanism described is simple but long-running: the company used “a repetitive and constant mechanism of unreal accounting entries, contradicting the factual situation, to unjustifiably postpone recording in the accounts the taxable income obtained from the sale of the properties”.
In plain terms, even though the apartments had already been handed over to the buyers (with handover records and utilities paid directly to the developer), the income did not appear in the accounts at the right time. ANAF looked at the concrete facts (who occupies the apartment, who pays the utilities, who signed the handover records) and compared them with the accounting entries. The discrepancy generated 10.80 million lei of damage at company level, plus another 2.28 million lei found at the individual who did not fully declare the income from the sale of land and apartments in their own name.
What it means for your business. If you work in real estate development or in any business where income can be delimited chronologically (deliveries of physical products with handover, services with a verifiable result), watch the gap between operational reality and the accounting entries. ANAF no longer relies only on your declarations: it directly checks the match between the documents reported, the financial flows, the services actually carried out and the economic benefits declared. The signals of discrepancy (utilities paid at an address you have not yet sold, undeclared handover records, cash-in flows that are not reflected in revenue) are visible with the current tools.
What you should do. Check the alignment between operational documents (records, handovers, contracts) and the moment the income is recorded in the accounts. For the income of individuals who control the company (sole associate, administrator), make sure that sales in their own name are fully declared: ANAF follows both dimensions in extended inspection cases, as this case shows. If you have doubts about the correct moment to recognise income in the accounts, talk to your accountant and, for complex cases, to an authorised tax consultant.
ANAF stated that it will continue “actions to encourage tax compliance, both through preventive activities informing taxpayers about the legal tax obligations in specific fields, and through combating and sanctioning acts of tax evasion”. For the concrete case in Iași, ANAF Anti-Fraud “will order the legal measures that are required, including referral to the criminal investigation bodies”: the situation moves from administrative to criminal.