New Financial Administration Guideline on the Waiver of Tax Accessories

A new directive from the General Financial Directorate, "GFŘ-D-72," will take effect on September 15, 2025, and is available on the Financial Administration website HERE.

The new guideline was issued primarily in response to an amendment to the Tax Code effective from July 1, 2025, which now allows for the waiver of up to 100% of penalties (previously, the maximum was 75%).

According to the law, the new procedure will apply to penalties incurred from July 1, 2025. The guideline specifies that "The decisive moment is the date of notification of the additional tax assessment." 

As with all types of tax relief upon request, the applicant must meet the condition that they have not committed a serious violation of accounting or tax regulations. In the words of the law: Tax or tax accessories cannot be waived if the taxpayer or a member of its statutory body has seriously violated tax or accounting regulations in the last three years.  

But beware, while the waiver of the 75% penalty under the current regime (which still applies even after the amendment) is based primarily on the degree of procedural cooperation in the assessment of tax, and in practice we can usually achieve a full 75% waiver, the new possibility of a waiver of up to 100% is linked to two specific situations: 

 1. Situation pursuant to Section 259a(2), second sentence, of the Tax Code: As is the case with the waiver of interest and penalties for late tax returns, penalties of up to 100% may be waived if there is a "justifiable reason" for doing so. The guideline refers to this as a "justifiable situation" and recognizes only one such situation, which is rewarded with a 100% waiver, as follows: 

"The taxpayer filed an inadmissible additional tax return before the start of the audit procedure, and the tax administrator used the information claimed therein to determine the final tax, with the additional tax not exceeding twice the tax claimed by the taxpayer." 

In footnote 19, the guideline points out an important fact, namely that the definition of one justifiable reason (situation) "does not prevent the tax administrator from waiving penalties with a higher percentage base also on the basis of another justifiable situation, i.e. beyond the guideline." 

The explanatory memorandum to the amendment to the Tax Code then states that "In a specific case, both the existing and the newly added grounds for remission may apply, and both options may be combined depending on the circumstances of the specific case." The General Financial Directorate dealt with this in its guidance by stating that the tax administrator must first assess whether the taxpayer has fulfilled the condition for remission of the penalty due to an excusable situation. If no excusable situation has arisen for the taxpayer, a maximum of 75% of the assessed penalty may be remitted, based on an assessment of cooperation in the additional tax assessment. 

 

2.  Situation under Section 259a(5) of the Tax Code: Reflection of the prohibition of double punishment – in connection with the punishment imposed for a tax offense in criminal proceedings – where the guideline assigns a percentage to individual types and amounts of punishment from criminal proceedings. 

The instruction further states: 

  • Contains a brief description of the tax administrator's procedure in the event of concurrent remission and judicial review 

  • Contains further minor wording and clarification changes 

 

Summary: 

The new GFŘ-D-72 guideline on the remission of interest, penalties, and fines in tax administration reflects an amendment to the Tax Code, which followed developments in the area of penalties and the fulfillment of the legal principle of double jeopardy. This development responds to the fact that sometimes it may be fair to waive not only 75% of the penalty, as has been the case to date, but 100%. However, as previous waiver practice has shown, the Financial Administration will accept the fulfillment of a "justifiable reason" in practice, particularly in the case described in the guideline itself. Other options are possible, but in practice it is often difficult to convince the tax office of the validity of such a request. Nevertheless, I consider it essential for taxpayers that neither the amendment to the law nor the instructions have changed the existing possibility of requesting a 75% penalty waiver on the basis of cooperation with the tax administrator, as these requests are usually successful in practice and we therefore submit them on behalf of our clients at the appropriate stage of the proceedings, or actively recommend their submission.