White-Collar Crime and Corporate Defence

White-collar defence in Germany: an overview

White-collar defence in Germany covers the representation of companies, managers and employees in criminal and administrative proceedings concerning business-related offences. German criminal law applies only to natural persons: a company cannot be convicted of a crime. But companies are exposed in other ways. They can be fined if a manager commits an offence connected with the business (§ 30 of the Administrative Offences Act, OWiG), the proceeds of offences can be confiscated from them (§ 73b StGB), they can be excluded from public tenders, and they bear the reputational and commercial consequences of investigations against their staff.

Investigations are conducted by the public prosecutor's office (Staatsanwaltschaft), often by specialised departments for business crime, supported by police, tax investigators, customs and, in some areas, regulators such as BaFin or the Federal Cartel Office. Investigations of fraud against the EU budget, including cross-border VAT fraud above a set threshold, can be conducted by the European Public Prosecutor's Office. Proceedings often last several years, and the most intense phase, searches, seizures and asset freezes, usually comes at the beginning, before the company has had a chance to explain itself.

Effective white-collar defence therefore starts early. Companies need a plan for searches and authority requests, a clear structure for representing the company and individuals, and a strategy that connects defence with internal investigations, remediation and civil claims. This page outlines the main offences, the procedure, the exposure of companies and individuals, and the options for resolving proceedings.

Typical offences in business crime

Most business crime cases in Germany concern a limited group of offences. Fraud (Betrug, § 263 StGB) requires deception that causes a financial loss to another; variants cover subsidy fraud, capital investment fraud and credit fraud. Breach of trust (Untreue, § 266 StGB) is the classic offence of managers: anyone who abuses a power to dispose of another's assets, or breaches a duty to look after another's financial interests, and thereby causes a disadvantage, is punishable by up to five years' imprisonment. It is used in cases ranging from risky investments and unauthorised payments to slush funds and excessive remuneration.

Corruption offences include bribery of public officials (§§ 331 ff. StGB), including foreign officials, and commercial bribery (§ 299 StGB), which covers employees and agents who request or accept advantages in return for unfair preference in the purchase of goods or services, and those who offer them. Tax evasion (§ 370 of the Fiscal Code, AO) is prosecuted vigorously and often arises alongside other offences. Further fields are insolvency offences, including delayed filing for insolvency under § 15a of the Insolvency Code and bankruptcy offences, capital markets offences such as market manipulation and insider dealing, sanctions and export control offences, labour offences such as withholding social security contributions (§ 266a StGB) and environmental crime (§§ 324 ff. StGB).

Environmental criminal law is about to be tightened. The EU Environmental Crime Directive (EU) 2024/1203 had to be transposed by 21 May 2026 and requires fines for companies of up to 5% or 3% of worldwide turnover for certain offences, or fixed amounts. The German government introduced a bill for its transposition in the Bundestag on 26 May 2026 (BT-Drs. 21/6133); companies in industry, waste management and chemicals should track the final text.

Searches, seizures and asset freezes

Searches of business premises are usually ordered by an investigating judge on application of the prosecutor. A search of the suspect's premises requires only a suspicion that evidence will be found (§ 102 StPO); premises of third parties, including the company where only employees are suspects, can be searched to find specific evidence (§ 103 StPO). Investigators typically copy large volumes of electronic data, which are then reviewed; the company can request that data be reviewed in its presence and object to seizures that exceed the warrant. Documents protected by the defence relationship cannot be seized (§ 97 StPO), but the protection is narrower than many expect.

Asset recovery is a central part of modern white-collar enforcement. Where there are grounds to believe that the conditions for confiscation of the value of proceeds are met, the court can order a freezing of assets (Vermögensarrest) over movable and immovable property (§ 111e StPO). Because confiscation targets the gross amount obtained, freezes can affect bank accounts and liquidity of the company considerably. Defence counsel should engage early on the calculation of the amount and on alternatives such as security deposits.

Corporate exposure: fines and confiscation

A company is fined under § 30 OWiG where a manager, or another person responsible for running the business, commits an offence that breaches the company's duties or enriches it. A breach of supervisory duty under § 130 OWiG by management is a sufficient link, so even where the actual offender was a junior employee, the company can be fined if better supervision would have prevented the offence. The fine has a punitive part, up to EUR 10 million for intentional offences, and a part that skims off the economic benefit of the offence, which is not capped.

Confiscation can also be ordered against the company directly, even without a fine, where it has obtained something through an offence committed for it (§ 73b StGB). Since the reform of confiscation law in 2017, the gross principle applies: what was obtained is confiscated in full, and expenses are deducted only within narrow limits. The company's defence therefore focuses on the facts, on attribution and on the calculation of benefit, and increasingly on demonstrating that the offence was not a result of deficient organisation but occurred despite an effective compliance management system, which can reduce or avoid a fine.

Beyond the criminal proceedings, convictions and fines for certain offences are entered in the competition register and can lead to exclusion from public procurement unless the company proves self-cleaning. Regulated companies face supervisory consequences, and listed companies must consider disclosure obligations. Claims for damages by the company against responsible managers, and by third parties against the company, often follow. Coordinated white-collar defence takes all of these consequences into account from the outset.

Defending individuals and resolving proceedings

Individuals under investigation have the right to remain silent and to be assisted by defence counsel at every stage. Their interests may differ from the company's, so separate counsel is the rule: the company's lawyer cannot defend an employee, and defence counsel for an individual must act solely in that person's interest. Companies often pay for individual counsel under their articles, a D&O policy or a specific agreement, subject to clawback if intentional misconduct is established. Coordination between defence counsel, within professional rules, avoids contradictions and duplicated work.

Many white-collar cases are resolved without a full trial. The prosecutor can close proceedings for minor offences against conditions, such as a payment to the state or a charity, with the consent of the court and the accused (§ 153a StPO); this is not a conviction. A penalty order (Strafbefehl) allows a sanction to be imposed in writing without a main hearing (§ 407 StPO). In court, the parties can reach an agreement on the range of the sentence under the strict rules of § 257c StPO. For tax offences, a complete voluntary disclosure to the tax authorities before detection can lead to exemption from punishment (§ 371 AO), subject to exclusions and surcharges for larger amounts.

Time also matters. Most business offences that carry a maximum sentence of more than one and up to five years' imprisonment become time-barred after five years (§ 78(3) no. 4 StGB), but the period is interrupted by many investigative steps, and particularly serious cases of tax evasion have longer periods. A realistic assessment of limitation is part of every defence strategy.

Tax matters: correction or voluntary disclosure

Tax issues deserve special attention because they arise in almost every business crime case and because the rules differ. If a company or its managers later recognise that a tax return was incorrect, they must notify the tax office without undue delay and correct it (§ 153 AO); this applies even where the original error was unintentional.

Where there was intent, only a complete voluntary disclosure under § 371 AO, made before the offence has been discovered and before an audit or investigation has been announced, can lead to exemption from punishment. Distinguishing between correction and disclosure, and coordinating them with the tax advisers and the criminal defence, is a core task of tax-related white-collar defence; see our page on tax disputes.

The company as injured party

In many cases the company is not the target but the victim, for example of embezzlement, kickbacks or fraud by employees or business partners. As the injured party, it can file a criminal complaint, gain access to the investigation file through a lawyer where it shows a legitimate interest (§ 406e StPO), and benefit from asset freezes and confiscation, which in German law also serve to compensate victims. Using the criminal proceedings to secure assets and evidence, while pursuing civil claims in parallel, is often the most effective recovery strategy.

Personal risks of managers

For directors and senior managers, a criminal investigation rarely comes alone. The company may have to examine damages claims against them, and supervisory boards of stock corporations must in principle pursue such claims where they are well-founded. D&O insurers will assess coverage, often subject to exclusions for intentional breaches. Employment or service contracts may be terminated, and regulators may question the reliability of managers in supervised firms. White-collar defence for an individual therefore includes managing these parallel risks, including notification of insurers, preservation of documents needed for the defence and negotiation of indemnity and cost arrangements with the company.

Communication with authorities and the public

What is said in the first days of an investigation shapes its course. Statements to investigators should be made only after access to the file and in consultation with counsel; a written statement through counsel is often better than an interview. Public communication should be coordinated with defence counsel, because press statements can be used as evidence and can affect the positions of individuals. Investor and customer communication, and for listed companies ad hoc disclosure, must be accurate without prejudging the outcome.

Cross-border white-collar defence

Many white-collar defence matters have an international dimension: bribery of foreign officials, sanctions breaches, VAT carousels, investment fraud with foreign investors or parallel investigations by authorities in other countries, including the United States. German prosecutors cooperate with other EU member states through European Investigation Orders and joint investigation teams, and with third countries through mutual legal assistance.

The European Public Prosecutor's Office investigates offences against the EU's financial interests in the participating member states, including Germany. Parallel proceedings raise the question of double jeopardy, which protects only against prosecution for the same acts in certain constellations, and require consistent positions in all jurisdictions. Data transfers to foreign authorities, witness availability and the timing of settlements abroad all need to be coordinated with the German proceedings, and vice versa.

Illustration: prosecutors search the offices of a German engineering company on suspicion that a regional sales director paid bribes to obtain public contracts abroad. The company's response team follows its protocol, counsel attends the search and ensures that seized data is copied in a controlled way. The company retains separate counsel for the sales director, launches an internal investigation, and after three months presents its findings and remedial measures to the prosecutor. The prosecutor later imposes a corporate fine that takes the cooperation and the improved compliance system into account, and the company applies for self-cleaning in the competition register.

How TRW & Co helps

We provide white-collar defence for companies in Germany and coordinate the representation of their managers and employees. We prepare companies for searches, respond to search warrants and authority requests, review seized data, and challenge seizures and asset freezes. We defend companies in corporate fine and confiscation proceedings, negotiate with prosecutors on cooperation and outcomes, and handle voluntary tax disclosures. We connect defence work with internal investigations, remediation, self-cleaning in the competition register and civil claims against or by the company. In cross-border matters we coordinate with counsel abroad. To discuss a matter in confidence, please contact us.