Accused person: clarify allegation and file first.
Do not give a spontaneous explanation before the allegation, file position and evidence are known. From a lawyer’s perspective, defence starts with file access and a reliable chronology.
White-collar crime
Financial regulatory offence under the FinStrG: payment, deadline and defence
Financial regulatory offence under the Austrian FinStrG: late payment, deadlines, allegation and defence in financial criminal proceedings.
Your personal attorney
Mag. Christopher Angerer, Rechtsanwalt
Your lawyer for criminal defence
Criminal proceedings are a matter of trust. One lawyer who walks with you from the first consultation through to the trial, everything from one hand.
25 August 2026 · Mag. Christopher Angerer, Rechtsanwalt
A financial regulatory offence may sound less serious than tax evasion, but it can immediately burden entrepreneurs, managing directors and accounting staff. It often concerns payment, reporting, missed dates or formal duties under Austrian financial criminal law.
This article distinguishes a financial regulatory offence from more serious tax offences and shows which documents should be organised before any explanation.
Stay informed. New notes from the Brandauer network and current articles are available at brandauer-news.at.
Quick assessment
Which question should be clarified first?
The first reaction depends on whether there is already a summons, a seizure or only an initial suspicion.
Already know that you want to send an inquiry? Go directly to the inquiry form.
Which situation fits best?
This assessment does not replace file access. It only helps to sort the first step.
All paths at a glance
Overview of all answers.
Prepare file access →
Business role: do not accept responsibility too early.
In a business, technical access, management responsibility and actual decision making may be separate. Roles, approvals and documentation routes must be reviewed separately.
Evidence: preserve original state and records.
If data, devices or documents have already been secured, records, copies, timing and scope matter. Only then can a remedy or statement be assessed.
Urgent situation: take the appointment seriously and stay calm.
A summons or official deadline is not a reason for improvised explanations. First check status, addressee and legal consequence of the letter.
A regulatory offence is not automatically tax evasion
A regulatory offence is not automatically tax evasion
Financial regulatory offences under the FinStrG typically concern duties relating to payment, reporting or timely conduct. The distinction from tax evasion matters because intent, tax shortfall and statutory elements differ.
If you receive a letter from the financial criminal authority, do not formulate an admission too early. First clarify which tax, period and specific duty are meant.
The article on tax evasion and voluntary disclosure covers the broader section 33 FinStrG. This article is narrower.
Reconstruct payment, deadline and notice carefully
Reconstruct payment, deadline and notice carefully
Due date, service, payment route, booking confirmation, extension request and communication with tax adviser or authority are decisive. Without a chronology, any statement remains vague.
No deadline should be estimated from memory. The concrete letters, notices and account movements are decisive. If several years or tax types are involved, a table is useful.
From a lawyer’s perspective, it must also be assessed whether an error is organisational or whether the authority alleges intent.
Defence in a formal financial criminal allegation
Defence in a formal financial criminal allegation
Defence does not start with long explanations, but with file access and ordering of evidence. Only then can payment, correction, objection or silence be assessed.
If financial police or WKStA have already acted, the article on illegal work and financial police may be useful.
Financial criminal law and corporate criminal law must remain separate. A management role explains the review framework but does not replace personal offence analysis.
Typical mistakes after a letter from the authority
Typical mistakes after a letter from the authority
A common mistake is sending incomplete documents before the allegation is understood. Spontaneous calls are also risky if accounting uncertainty becomes an incriminating statement.
Another mistake is mixing tax correction with criminal defence. What is useful before the tax authority must be reviewed separately in financial criminal proceedings.
A short internal stop is useful: preserve documents, write a chronology, coordinate tax advisers and then respond legally.
Overview
Review points in a financial regulatory offence
Quick assessment
| Point | Meaning | First question |
|---|---|---|
| Tax | period concerned | Which tax is meant? |
| Deadline | due date or date | When was service effected? |
| Payment | account record and booking | What can be proven? |
| Intent | authority assumption | What shows knowledge? |
Important: Do not give a premature explanation. First review notice, deadline, payment and file position.
Frequently asked questions
Financial regulatory offence under the FinStrG: key questions.
Is a financial regulatory offence the same as tax evasion? +
No. The distinction depends on the precise offence, allegation and alleged intent.
Should I pay immediately? +
Payment can matter, but it does not replace criminal law review. The right step depends on the file.
Which documents matter first? +
Notices, service records, payment evidence, accounting extracts and communication with advisers or authority.
Topics
FinStrGfinancial regulatory offencepaymentdeadlinefinancial criminal lawdefence
Interview, house search, indictment?
In criminal matters every hour counts. Call us directly or send an email, callback within one business day, earlier in urgent cases.
Contact
A direct line to the firm.
Address
BRANDAUER Rechtsanwälte GmbH Giselakai 51 5020 Salzburg
Phone
+43 660 2407152