This is a screenshot of the homepage on the website of the national agency for fiscal administration of the country of Romania in the year 2026.
The public institution recently anounced the launch of ANA it’s so called ‘virtual assistant / chatbot’, and this successful launch inspired me to write this article.
Basically what ANA the ‘virtual assistant / chatbot’ should do, is answer various questions asked by any of the law-abiding tax paying citizens of the country of Romania, for example, ‘how much do I owe to the tax man?’.
But, based on statements made by the representatives of the public institution themselves, also highlighted in the press (https://www.euronews.ro/articole/ana-de-la-anaf-asistentul-virtual-care-da-informatii-despre-obligatiile-fiscale), ANA ‘can’t do too much yet’. Basically how that reads is, that it ‘virtually’ does f**k all.
It doing ‘virtually’ f**ck all, must be a positive thing though, if you ask me, because I have a minuscule doubt that honest working taxpaying citizens and entrepreneurs, really have any time on their hands or an actual real desire to chat with the nothing-doing virtual assistant / chatbot, of the public entity that on one hand is already elbow deep in their pockets, never failing to pursue them rellentlessly in getting a big cut out of their hard earned money, while at the same time ignoring the tax evasion or lack of compliance of large corporations (some private, but most, publicly owned companies that are abismally mismanaged by other public servants with astronomical paychecks) owing hundreds of millions in unpaid tax, with the reason for ignoring the ‘big guys’ being, as their representatives publicly stated in the media, ‘because it’s easier to pursue small taxpayers, than the larger ones’. Because of course, the institution that runs the money making machine of a country, does not employ people that are sufficiently competent to carry out such a job (why would they?), or maybe, just maybe, they’re shielding their buddies, who knows.
It’s still a good thing to learn though, that in the year 2026 in the age of AI, in times of high uncertainty in which everything seems to move at break neck speed, the public institutions of the country of Romania are keeping up with the trends and the best of the best in the field of AI, making sure that besides doing their usual routine of cyclical tax increases to cover the losses caused by the equally cyclical sprees of embezlement conducted by (any of) the governing parties alternately through a finely tuned corruption machinery, also spend undisclosed amounts of public money (undisclosed as of yet) on very ‘useful’ projects such as this virtual assistant / chatbot, the tool that does nothing (yet), which conversely also massively improves exactly the same thing.
Now, circling back to the attached screenshot, that is yet another example of resounding success of the aforementioned public institution’s past endeavours.
I for one, as a designer I am absolutely blown away by all it’s exceptional characteristics, and I want to highlight a few of the more obvious ones, here:
1. The overall mastery in institutional design: You be the judge of it’s aeshtetics, of course design is a subjective matter (no it’s not).
2. The finesse of the visual identity / rebranding: Including the unique, exceptionally crafted logo, also visible in the screenshot, which ‘only’ cost 6000 euros (for the design of the logo only). The institution had to come out with a public statement shortly after its launch, to calm things down, because people were mad at the (approximately) 1.5 million euro price tag (in 2013). As a comparison, Pepsi paid less than 1 million euros for their own rebranding. Pepsi being a pretty well known company internationally. Thank heavens the logo’s cost was only 6000 euros though. The rest of the almost 1.5 millions of euros of total cost of the ‘rebranding’ project, included the ‘research’, ‘strategy’ and ‘training’ (the training at least obviously went well, as everything looks and works spectacularly since implementing the changes).
The contents of the research and strategy are not public information (why should they be?), but basically the results of the findings (as described in the media) stated that the low level of performance of the public institution as well as the low-ish levels of compliance of the ordinary citizen stemmed from the fact that the public institution had a negative or weak perception in the eye of the citizen, justifying the obvious need for an expensive rebranding to improve the metrics. Basically, the well researched conclusion at the time seems to have been that the low performance of the institution as well as low compliance on the citizens side was because the previous logo was ugly.
3. The accuracy of the user experience: The website is obviously a prime example of top-notch information architecture, friendly and informationally useful copywriting that guides the user easily through the websites sections, clear calls to action, clear differentiation of the sections etc. To put everything in one sentence, it is very easy for the user to get any kind of information when visiting this website and the interaction with the institution through their digital touch points is exemplary, with no evidence of friction, inefficiencies or unclear user journeys that could impede a citizen in reaching their desired goal while using the institutions digital interface.
4. The refinement of the applied semiotics, through pixel perfect iconography: Not one single icon is stretched or inconsistent as if none of the icons came from the same set. It is obvious that the 1.5 million euro project definitely included a thoroughly designed pixel perfect icon system, for better visual communication and useful interfaces of all the touch points of the citizen with the institution;
5. Mobile friendly responsive version of the website: It is a no-brainer that in the year 2026, where over 60% of the worlds web browsing is made on a mobile phone, that a public institutions website should also work seamlessly on a mobile phone. Useful when also considering that most of the relevant traffic in Romania such as that of eCommerce websites (70%+) is made on a mobile phone.
6. The thoughtfulness and empathy towards disabled citizens: The institution has implemented the latest accessibility features and compliance with the latest WCAG standards. It is obvious from the screenshot that the accessibility plugin has many options for all kinds of visual or auditory impairments, and it is also very accessible and has no usability flaws. It is equally obvious that public institutions are the first ones to adopt the technical measures required by European laws and they are leading by example, so obviously they are entitled to hand out hefty fines, no warning, no excuses, to the shameless private businesses that are running almost non-existing (private) budgets, when they don’t comply instantly with any legal requirements, such as accessibility requirements.
7. The exemplary compliance with legal frameworks regarding data privacy such as GDPR: As an institutional website, it is obvious from the non-existent data privacy banner, and the hidden GTM tag (Google tag manager) tracking users visits, without giving any means and options for disabling that tracking.
So yeah, the brand research results from more than 10 years ago, were 100% correct. The negative perception that the institution had at the time (it obviously improved since then) was purely because the previous logo was ugly. Thank heavens that the actual problems weren’t trivial things such as endless bureaucracy, forever condescending attitudes of public servants thorough every touch point with the citizen, abusive tax compliance audit practices, systemic institutional corruption, bloated institutional org-charts, lack of transparency, bad communication, non-compliance with multiple applicable laws (such as GDPR or the Web Accessibility Directive, to name just two of the evident ones).
Should this public institution be a private business, it is without a doubt that the success in attracting flocks of new customers would be phenomenal and the business would be booming, after all, who in their right mind wouldn’t want to buy something after after just a short visit to this marvel of a website.
In conclusion, it is obvious that the performance of this public institution is exceptional and very expensive projects done with taxpayer money are always a resounding success, unlike other similar initiatives done in other EU countries. One example of a ‘badly done’ similar project that comes to mind being the brand and visual identity of city of Helsinki, Finland.
Artwork: Portrait of Louis XIV of France in coronation robes (legs only) • Hyacinthe Rigaud