Why are administrative–tax disputes often more time-consuming and therefore more expensive than simple civil cases?

Administrative–tax disputes tend to be more time-consuming because they usually involve a mandatory preliminary administrative challenge, large volumes of documents, technical or accounting issues that may require expert evidence, and multiple procedural stages before different courts. This complexity translates into more hours of work for the lawyer and experts and into longer case durations, which naturally increases the overall budget compared to a simple civil dispute.

What if I cannot afford all the costs? Is legal aid (public judicial assistance) available?

For individuals with low income, GEO no. 51/2008 on public judicial aid allows the state to cover court fees and, in some cases, part of the lawyer’s, expert’s or interpreter’s fees, depending on the applicant’s income in relation to the gross national minimum salary. The aid is granted upon application, supported by documents proving income and assets, and is intended to prevent litigation costs from becoming a barrier to effective access to justice in civil and administrative cases.

Administrative–tax lawsuit costs in Romania

Q: What court fees (court stamp duties) do I pay when I challenge an administrative act?

In administrative disputes, court stamp duties are governed by GEO no. 80/2013: actions seeking annulment of an administrative act or recognition of a right are generally subject to a fixed, relatively low fee, while monetary claims for compensation are taxed at 10% of the value claimed, capped at 300 RON. Other non-monetary applications are usually taxed as generic non-monetary actions, and the court registry may require completion of the fee if the amount initially paid is insufficient.

Q: Are tax disputes more expensive in terms of court fees?

From a pure court fee perspective, tax disputes broadly follow the same rules as other administrative disputes under GEO no. 80/2013, with fixed fees for annulment or recognition and a capped percentage for compensation. However, tax disputes may become more expensive overall because, in order to suspend enforcement of a tax claim, the Fiscal Procedure Code often requires a security (guarantee) calculated as a percentage of the contested amount, which can represent a significant temporary cash outlay.

Q: How are lawyer’s fees structured in an administrative–tax dispute?

Lawyer’s fees are freely agreed with the client within the framework of Law no. 51/1995 and the Statute of the Legal Profession and are usually structured as hourly fees, flat fees for certain stages or a combination including a success fee. Fees must be fair and proportionate to the complexity, time involved and importance of the case, and pure quota litis arrangements, where the fee consists exclusively of a percentage of the outcome without any basic fee, are expressly prohibited.

Q: What other costs should I budget for (experts, translations, travel)?

Beyond court fees and lawyer’s fees, you should budget for judicial or private expert reports (technical, accounting, tax, urban planning), authorised translations of foreign documents, possible legalisation or apostille, and logistical costs such as travel, courier services and obtaining certified copies. In many cases, expert fees are among the largest additional costs, especially in high-value tax disputes or complex urban planning and construction cases.

Q: Can I recover my costs if I win?

As a general rule, if you win the case and you request it, the court can order the losing party, including a public authority, to reimburse your trial costs such as court fees, reasonable lawyer’s fees, expert fees and other documented expenses. The court retains a margin of appreciation and may reduce excessive lawyer’s fees, so recovery is not automatically full, but well-documented and proportionate costs are often granted to the winning party.

Q: Which factors make my administrative–tax case cheaper or more expensive?

The total cost of an administrative–tax case depends on factors such as the number and type of acts challenged, the financial value and strategic importance of the dispute, the availability and organisation of evidence, the need for expert reports and the use of urgent measures like suspension of enforcement. Geographic distance and the number of parties involved can also increase costs, whereas providing your lawyer with complete, well-organised documentation from the start usually helps keep costs under better control.

Q: How should I discuss and control costs with my lawyer?

It is advisable to start with an initial consultation in which the lawyer reviews key documents, outlines possible legal routes and gives a preliminary estimate of complexity and costs. You should ask for a clear fee structure by stages, discuss the risk of adverse costs if you lose, agree on a realistic budget and request periodic updates on time spent and expenses so that you can adjust the strategy or budget as the case evolves.

Q: When does it make sense to actually go to court?

Going to court usually makes sense when the value or nature of the stake is significant, the legal chances of success are reasonable in light of legislation and case-law, and there is no realistic administrative or negotiated solution. The decision should be based on a cost–benefit analysis carried out together with your lawyer, weighing the likely costs and duration of the proceedings against the potential financial and strategic benefits of a favourable judgment.

This article is for information only and does not constitute legal advice. Each case must be analysed individually, together with a lawyer, based on the specific documents, deadlines and risks involved.

1. Why it is essential to think about costs from the very beginning

Administrative and tax disputes in Romania usually arise when a public authority issues an administrative or fiscal act (for example, a building permit, a tax assessment decision, a fine, a decision on EU funds) that you consider unlawful and harmful to your rights or legitimate interests. The general framework is given by Law no. 554/2004 on administrative disputes and by the Fiscal Procedure Code for tax matters.

Before you reach the court, in most situations you must first go through a prior administrative challenge (plângere prealabilă or tax contestation) directly before the issuing authority or a hierarchical superior authority. Only afterwards can you bring the dispute before an administrative court, usually in two instances (tribunal and court of appeal, sometimes also the High Court of Cassation and Justice for extraordinary remedies).

Because of this multi-stage structure, an administrative–tax dispute is rarely a “one-hearing” case. It can run for 6–12 months in simpler matters and several years in complex tax disputes, especially when expert evidence is required. This has a direct impact on all cost components: the lawyer’s fee, court fees, expert fees and other ancillary costs.

Having at least a realistic minimum budget from the outset helps you:

decide whether it is proportionate to litigate or to search for an alternative solution (for example, a negotiated solution with the authority);
avoid situations where you run out of funds mid-process and have to abandon a case that you started correctly;
structure with your lawyer a strategy that takes into account both the legal chances of success and the financial effort required over time.

2. What is an administrative–tax dispute, in practice?

Very briefly, administrative and tax disputes cover situations such as:

Building permits and urban planning – challenges to building permits, refusals to issue permits or planning certificates, demolition orders, fines from local authorities.
Classic administrative acts – decisions issued by ministries, local councils, inspectorates, authorities in charge of public order, health, education, environmental protection etc.
Tax disputes – tax inspection reports, tax assessment decisions, additional VAT obligations, corporate income tax, excise duties, classification as “taxable person” for VAT, denial of tax deductions or refund claims, etc.
Public procurement – complaints to the National Council for Solving Complaints (CNSC) and challenges before the court against CNSC decisions.
EU funds and other financing schemes – recovery decisions, ineligibility findings, refusals to pay reimbursements.

The legal rules differ depending on the type of act, and this difference also influences the cost structure (for example, tax disputes frequently involve complex accounting and fiscal expertise, while urban planning disputes often involve technical expertise in construction or urban planning).

3. Main categories of costs in an administrative–tax dispute

In practice, the main cost components are:

Official fees and documents – fees charged by authorities or institutions for issuing extracts, certificates, land book excerpts, urban planning documentation, fiscal certificates, etc.
Court stamp duties (judicial taxes) – fees paid to the state for filing an action, a request for suspension, appeals, extraordinary remedies, etc.
Lawyer’s fees – for legal advice, drafting the administrative complaint, drafting the court action, representation during hearings, drafting appeals, settlement negotiations, etc.
Expert fees – costs of judicial or extra-judicial expertise (technical, accounting, fiscal, urban planning, environmental, etc.).
Translations and legalisation – translations of documents issued in foreign languages, sometimes with legalisation or apostille if the documents come from abroad.
Travel and logistics – travel costs for you and/or your lawyer, courier costs, obtaining additional documents, photocopies, certified copies.
Risk of paying the other party’s costs – if you lose completely or partly, the court may order you to reimburse the winning party’s costs (including that party’s lawyer’s fee and its expert fees).

All these elements are part of the category of “trial costs” in the sense of the Civil Procedure Code (taxes, lawyers’ fees, experts’ fees, etc.).

4. Typical budgets and what they actually cover

The figures below are purely indicative, based on practice and on the minimum recommended fees in the guide adopted by the National Union of Romanian Bar Associations (UNBR). They are not an offer and are not a maximum or standard tariff. Each lawyer is free to set his own fee, within the framework of Law no. 51/1995, the Statute of the Legal Profession and the UNBR decisions on the orientative guide of minimum fees.

For a “classic” administrative dispute (for example, challenging a building permit, a fine or a refusal to issue an administrative act), a realistic starting budget is often in the range of 5,000–7,000 lei, distributed along the entire case (prior complaint + first instance, with or without appeal).
For a tax dispute (challenging a tax assessment decision, significant VAT adjustments, reclassification as taxable person, etc.), a realistic starting budget is often in the range of 7,000–10,000 lei, because these cases are usually more document-intensive and may involve accounting and fiscal expertise.

These ranges reflect a sustained professional activity in the case (analysis of documents, strategy, drafting of complex procedural documents, attendance at several hearings, possible appeal), not just the drafting of a single action. In very simple cases or when the client requests a strictly limited mandate (for example, only drafting a complaint, without representation in court), the costs can be lower; in complex cases (high tax amounts, several acts attacked, multiple expert reports, multiple appeals), the total budget can be significantly higher.

In the practice of Măglaș Alexandru – Cabinet de Avocat, the cost structure for complex projects (administrative–tax, criminal economic, IP, urban planning, real estate, etc.) may also involve mixed teams (lawyer + technical advisor/expert) and, where applicable, an hourly component in addition to a fixed fee, as explained in more detail on the Fees page.

5. FAQ – Frequent questions about costs in administrative–tax litigation

5.1. What court fees (“court stamp duties”) do I pay when I challenge an administrative act?

In administrative disputes, court fees are regulated by Government Emergency Ordinance (GEO) no. 80/2013 on court stamp duties. For actions brought under Law no. 554/2004 (annulment of administrative acts, recognition of rights, compensation), the main rules are:

Requests for annulment or recognition of an administrative act that are not patrimonial (for example, annulment of a decision or order, recognition of a right): a fixed fee (for example, 50 lei) under the special rule on administrative disputes; the exact amount must be checked in the current version of GEO no. 80/2013.
Requests for compensation together with the annulment (when you also claim a certain monetary damage): the law provides a fee of 10% of the value claimed, but not more than 300 lei. This rule is designed to keep the access to court affordable even when the damage is very high.
Other non-patrimonial applications (requests that cannot be expressed in money and are not subject to a special rule, such as some incidental applications): they are usually taxed as “other non-monetary actions”, at 20 lei, under the general rule for non-monetary actions.

In practice, the court registry will check the court fee and may indicate the missing amount if you have paid too little. But responsibility for correct payment lies with the claimant, and errors may lead to delays (for example, the action being annulled as not stamped, if the deficiency is not remedied in time).

For up-to-date amounts applicable to your specific case, it is recommended to check the latest consolidated version of GEO no. 80/2013 and the associated commentaries.

5.2. Are tax disputes more expensive in terms of court fees?

From the point of view of court stamp duties, tax disputes (for example, challenges to tax assessment decisions) follow broadly the same rules as other administrative disputes. However, there is an important additional element in tax disputes: the guarantee (security) required for suspending the enforcement of a tax claim.

Under the Fiscal Procedure Code, if you want to obtain suspension (temporary stopping) of the enforcement of a tax claim, you may be required to provide a security (cauţiune) calculated as a percentage of the contested amount, with several successive thresholds (for example: 10%, 5%, 1%, 0.1%), with an overall limit. This security is not a court fee – it is a guarantee that can later be returned if you win – but it is a real cash outflow that must be taken into account in your budget.

By contrast, a “classic” administrative dispute (for example, a building permit) usually does not involve such guarantees, but may require payment of other costs (technical expertise, urban planning documentation, etc.).

Your lawyer can calculate, for your concrete tax case, both the court fees due under GEO no. 80/2013 and the security potentially due under the Fiscal Procedure Code, depending on the value of the tax debt and the type of measures requested.

5.3. How are lawyer’s fees structured in an administrative–tax dispute?

According to Law no. 51/1995 on the organisation and practice of the legal profession and the Statute of the Legal Profession, the lawyer has the right to a fee and to have his professional expenses reimbursed. The fee must be fair and justified by the nature and difficulty of the case, the time and volume of work, and the importance of the interests at stake.

The Statute provides that fees may be structured as:

Hourly fees – a fixed amount for each hour of professional services;
Flat (fixed) fees – a fixed amount for a particular service or category of services (for example, drafting the administrative complaint, drafting the statement of claim, representation in first instance);
Success fees – an additional component, agreed in addition to an hourly or fixed fee, depending on the result achieved (for example, partial recovery of tax amounts);
Mixed structures – combinations of hourly, fixed and success fees.

The Statute explicitly prohibits “quota litis” pacts, i.e. agreements under which the lawyer’s entire fee consists exclusively of a percentage of the result obtained in the case (for example, only 20% of what is recovered), without any basic fee. At least a basic fee (hourly or flat) is required; any success fee is complementary.

For a detailed explanation of the possible fee structures and of how the firm works in complex administrative–tax cases, you can consult the Fee policy of Măglaș Alexandru – Cabinet de Avocat.

5.4. Why are administrative–tax disputes often more time-consuming – and thus more expensive – than “simple civil” cases?

Several characteristics increase the complexity and duration of administrative–tax disputes:

Special preliminary procedure – before going to court, you usually need to file a prior complaint with the issuing authority (plângere prealabilă under Law no. 554/2004 or tax contestation under the Fiscal Procedure Code). Drafting these complaints requires careful analysis of the administrative file and of the applicable special rules.
Volume of documents – in a tax dispute, for example, the file may contain hundreds of pages: tax inspection reports, annexes, invoices, contracts, bank statements, correspondence. Analysing and reconstructing the factual and tax logic may require dozens of hours.
Technical issues – in urban planning disputes, courts often order expert reports on compliance with planning rules, technical compliance of works, etc. In tax disputes, accounting and tax expertise may be needed, comparing tax inspection calculations with the company’s actual records.
Multiple instances and remedies – typically at least two instances (tribunal and court of appeal), sometimes also extraordinary remedies. Each instance requires new written submissions (statement of claim, defence, appeal, counter-appeal), as well as hearings.
Multiple parties – in many cases, several authorities and private parties are involved (local authority, central authority, beneficiaries, contractors), which complicates procedure and increases the volume of documents and submissions.

All these elements mean that, even if the court fees are relatively modest, the professional work required from the lawyer and experts can be significant, and the budget must reflect this reality.

5.5. What other costs should I budget for (experts, translations, travel)?

Depending on the case, additional costs may include:

Judicial expert reports – courts can order expert reports in the fields of construction, urban planning, accounting, taxation, environmental protection, traffic, public health, etc. The fee is initially advanced by the parties (often by the claimant) and may range, depending on complexity and the expert’s specialisation, from a few hundred lei to several thousand lei per expert report.
Private expert opinions – in complex tax cases or major urban projects, it is sometimes useful to obtain private opinions from experts (for example, a tax consultant or an urban planner) even before going to court, to clarify strategy and evidence. These fees are negotiated directly with the expert.
Translations – if you use documents issued abroad (invoices, contracts, certificates), you may need authorised translations into Romanian. In some cases, legalisation or apostille may be required, depending on the origin country and the authority’s requirements.
Travel and logistics – travel to the court, to expert’s premises, to authorities, courier services, copying large volumes of documents, obtaining land book excerpts, technical documentation, etc.

In practice, your lawyer should warn you from the beginning about the likelihood of expert evidence and translations, because expert fees can significantly increase the total budget, especially in cases involving high values or complex technical issues.

5.6. Can I recover my costs if I win?

As a rule, under the Civil Procedure Code, the party who loses the case is ordered, at the request of the winning party, to reimburse the latter’s trial costs. Trial costs include court fees, lawyer’s fees, expert fees and certain other documented expenses.

In administrative–tax disputes, if your action is admitted (e.g. the act is annulled and the authority is ordered to issue a new act or to pay damages), you can ask the court to order the authority to reimburse the costs you have proven (court fees, justified lawyer’s fee, expert fees, translations, etc.). The court may, however, reduce or adjust the lawyer’s fee, if it considers it manifestly excessive in relation to the case.

Conversely, if you lose the case completely, you may be ordered to pay the authority’s trial costs (including the lawyer’s fee for the authority, where applicable). In case of partial success (for example, the court reduces a tax debt but does not annul it entirely), the court may allocate costs pro rata to the degree of success of each party, or may order each party to bear its own costs.

This cost-risk is one of the key aspects that you should clarify with your lawyer at the beginning, especially when the dispute concerns high values.

5.7. What if I cannot afford all the costs? Legal aid (public judicial assistance)

For persons with low income, Romanian law provides the possibility of obtaining public judicial aid in civil and administrative cases, including assistance with court fees and, under certain conditions, lawyer’s fees, expert fees, translator fees and enforcement costs. The main framework is GEO no. 51/2008 on public judicial aid in civil matters, applicable also to certain administrative disputes.

In its current version (updated by Law no. 31/2023), the act provides in essence that:

People whose average net monthly income per family member in the last two months is below 25% of the gross national minimum basic salary may receive public judicial aid in full (100%), entirely advanced by the state.
If the income is below 50% of the gross national minimum basic salary, the state may cover 50% of the trial costs.
The annual ceiling for public judicial aid is generally 10 gross minimum salaries per person.

Courts examine in detail the supporting documents (income, family situation, assets) and may grant, reduce or refuse the aid depending on the concrete situation. For up-to-date details, you can consult the official text of GEO no. 51/2008 and specialised analyses, for example the article on public judicial aid published on the blog Ajutorul public judiciar.

5.8. Which factors make my administrative–tax case cheaper or more expensive?

Among the factors that can significantly influence the total cost are:

Number and type of acts challenged – it is one thing to challenge a single building permit, and another to challenge multiple interrelated acts (permits, fines, orders, inspection reports).
Value of the dispute – in tax disputes, the value can be hundreds of thousands or millions of lei. The higher the value and the stakes, the more time the lawyer must allocate and the more complex the strategy will be.
Evidence available – if you already have most of the relevant documents (contracts, correspondence, calculations, technical documentation) organised from the beginning, the time for reconstruction is reduced and costs can be optimised.
Need for expert evidence – each judicial expert report adds both time and costs (fees, possible supplementary or contradictory reports).
Urgent measures (suspension) – if you need urgent measures (for example, suspension of enforcement of a tax assessment to avoid blocking accounts), additional documents must be prepared and sometimes a security (guarantee) must be provided.
Geographical distance – if the dispute is heard in a court far from your lawyer’s usual location, travel time and costs will have to be taken into account.

Good collaboration between client and lawyer (providing documents in an organised manner, respecting deadlines, transparent discussion on expectations and constraints) helps to keep costs under control and to avoid unnecessary expenses.

5.9. How should I discuss and control costs with my lawyer?

Some practical suggestions for structuring the discussion on costs:

Start with a consultation – in a first meeting (online or in person), the lawyer can analyse the main documents, identify the possible legal routes and estimate the approximate complexity.
Ask for a clear fee structure – hourly, flat, mixed, success component, instalments, what is included and what is not included in each component (for example, whether appeal is included in the fee for first instance or is charged separately).
Clarify what “budget” means – for example, a budget for the entire case (administrative phase + first instance), with the understanding that appeals will be budgeted separately; or separate budgets for each procedural phase.
Discuss the risk of adverse costs – the lawyer should explain in concrete terms what costs you might have to pay if you lose, based on similar cases (lawyer’s fees for the authority, expert fees, etc.).
Ask for periodic updates – in complex cases, it is useful to receive periodic updates of time spent and costs incurred, so you can adjust strategy or budget.

On the firm’s website, you can find more general information about fee policy and quality standards at the page Onorarii avocatură, as well as details of services in administrative and urban planning law and tax law.

5.10. When does it make sense to actually go to court?

There is no universal answer, but some pragmatic criteria are:

Value and nature of the stake – for a very small amount or a minor administrative inconvenience, the cost–benefit ratio may not justify a multi-year dispute. For high amounts, strategic business implications or serious long-term consequences, litigation is often justified.
Legal chances – after analysing the documents and current case-law, the lawyer should be able to outline the legal chances and risks (for example, whether similar actions have been admitted or rejected by courts in recent years).
Possibility of an administrative solution – in some situations, the dispute can be resolved at administrative level (by an internal appeal, by amending the act, by negotiation), without getting to court.
Time horizon – some clients need a rapid practical solution rather than a principled victory “in a few years”. Others, especially companies, may be willing to litigate over the long term for amounts or principles that justify this.

The role of the lawyer is not only to file actions and attend hearings, but also to help you decide rationally whether and how to litigate, based on the combination of legal chances and overall cost–benefit.

6. Summary: costs in an administrative–tax case – what to remember

An administrative–tax dispute has several stages (administrative complaint, court – one or two instances, possibly extraordinary remedies) and usually lasts from several months to several years.
The main cost components are court fees, lawyer’s fees, expert fees, translations and documents, travel/logistics and the potential risk of paying the other party’s costs if you lose.
Indicatively, for a classic administrative dispute, a realistic starting budget is often 5,000–7,000 lei, and for a tax dispute 7,000–10,000 lei, for sustained activity in the case (analysis, drafting, representation), not just for a single document.
Court fees in administrative–tax disputes are regulated by GEO no. 80/2013, which provides special rules for administrative disputes (fixed fee for annulment/recognition and 10% of the value claimed, up to 300 lei, for compensation), as well as a general rule of 20 lei for other non-monetary applications.
For persons with low income, public judicial aid under GEO no. 51/2008 may cover wholly or partly court fees, lawyer’s fees and other costs, depending on the level of income compared with the gross national minimum basic salary.
Lawyer’s fees are free and are structured according to the Statute (hourly, flat, success, mixed), with the prohibition of pure “quota litis” pacts (fees exclusively based on a percentage of the result).
Good planning (from the first consultation), clear communication on the fee structure and a realistic budget adapted to the case help you avoid unpleasant surprises and keep control over the dispute, both legally and financially.

If you are facing an administrative or tax act that you consider unlawful and want to understand concretely what costs and steps a potential case would involve, you can schedule an individual consultation via the contact details available on the website www.maglas.ro or in the section Blog Avocat, where you will also find other materials on costs and strategy in various types of disputes.