strafsachen.at
DE EN BKS
Menü
White-collar crime

Fraudulent bankruptcy under section 156 StGB: diminution of assets to the detriment of creditors

Fraudulent bankruptcy under section 156 StGB: elements, typical examples such as concealment and fictitious liabilities.

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.

Call directly +43 660 2407152 WhatsApp Send email
Book consultation
2 July 2026 · Mag. Christopher Angerer, Rechtsanwalt

Fraudulent bankruptcy under section 156 StGB sanctions the intentional diminution or concealment of assets that prevents one or several creditors from obtaining satisfaction. It targets constellations in which a debtor actively shields assets from creditor access or removes them from the proceedings.

This post explains from a legal perspective the elements, typical examples, the delineation from grossly negligent bankruptcy under section 159 StGB and prejudicing other creditors under section 157 StGB as well as the qualification threshold. This is general information, not advice in an individual case.

What is your situation regarding the section 156 StGB charge?

Four constellations, one clear next step.

Whether administrator complaint, asset transfer, gift to relatives or dispute about the amount of damage: choose the constellation that applies to you.

Already know you want to send an enquiry? Go straight to the contact form.

01 Question 1

What is your situation regarding the section 156 StGB charge?

From a legal perspective the precise constellation determines the next step. Choose the situation that applies to you.

All paths at a glance

Overview of all answers.

01

Complaint by the insolvency administrator: review the report and build a counter-position.

Complaints by insolvency administrators are often based on the insolvency report and the review of business records. From a legal perspective the report must be examined in detail, since it typically collects indicators of asset shifts, fictitious liabilities or gratuitous transfers. These indicators are not conclusive; they can be unsettled or interpreted differently.

The defence should confront the administrator's report with its own submissions, contractual documents and expert assessments rather than confine itself to a general denial.

In depth: elements of section 156 StGB →
02

Asset transfer shortly before insolvency: work out the economic background.

Transfers shortly before insolvency quickly come under suspicion as asset shifts. From a legal perspective it must be examined whether the transfer had an economic background, for instance as performance of an existing liability, the provision of security or as a market-customary transaction.

The subjective element, that is the intent to harm creditors, is the decisive point. If it is not established, section 156 StGB does not apply and only an examination under section 159 StGB remains.

In depth: typical examples →
03

Gift to relatives: examine the purpose and timing of the transfer.

Transfers to close relatives in the crisis are in practice frequently treated as concealment. From a legal perspective it must be examined whether the transaction was a regular maintenance payment, performance of an existing liability or an actual gratuitous diminution of assets.

The timing of the transfer, its proportion to total assets and the economic background determine whether the threshold of section 156 StGB is crossed. Here too the question of intent is central.

In depth: typical examples →
04

Amount of damage disputed: examine the 300,000 euro threshold.

The penalty under section 156 StGB rises significantly where the damage exceeds 300,000 euro. From a legal perspective the precise calculation of the damage is therefore a defence priority in its own right. Damages that remain below the qualification threshold fall under the basic offence with a markedly lower sentencing range.

The defence should systematically question the methodology and basis of the damage calculation and where appropriate introduce its own calculations and expert assessments.

In depth: penalty and qualification →

Elements of section 156 StGB

Section 156 StGB applies to a person who conceals, removes, alienates or damages a component of their assets, asserts or acknowledges a non-existent liability or otherwise reduces their assets in reality or apparently, and thereby frustrates or diminishes the satisfaction of their creditors or at least of one of them.

The subjective element requires intent. The perpetrator must will the diminution of assets or at least consider it seriously possible and accept it. This intent component is the central difference from grossly negligent bankruptcy under section 159 StGB.

The suitable perpetrator is the debtor. The conduct can be committed in the crisis as well as before the crisis sets in, provided that the intent is aimed at harming creditors.

Typical examples

Classic constellations are the concealment of assets, for instance through transfer to nominees, the asserting of non-existent liabilities to favour third parties, and gratuitous transfers to close relatives in the crisis.

Selling components of the assets below value or acknowledging fictitious claims also fulfils the offence. What is always decisive is that the assets are reduced in reality or apparently and that creditor satisfaction suffers as a result.

From a legal perspective the economic rationale of the transaction is an important defence point. A transfer on market-customary conditions, the provision of security or the performance of a due liability is regularly not a diminution of assets within the meaning of section 156 StGB.

Penalty and qualification

The basic offence provides for imprisonment of up to two years. Where the damage exceeds 300,000 euro, the penalty rises to imprisonment of up to ten years. This qualification threshold marks the transition into the area of serious economic crime with considerable consequences for sentencing and procedural scope.

From a legal perspective the precise calculation of damage is therefore a defence priority in its own right. Damages just above the threshold can, through careful damage calculation, be brought back into the basic offence.

The delineation from grossly negligent bankruptcy under section 159 StGB concerns the subjective element; the delineation from prejudicing other creditors under section 157 StGB concerns the protective scope. Section 157 sanctions the preferential satisfaction of individual creditors to the detriment of others, while section 156 protects the satisfaction interest as a whole.

Intent and amount of damage are the key points. Under section 156 StGB the question of intent decides whether the offence applies, while the amount of damage decides whether the qualification threshold is crossed. A systematic preparation of both levels is the most important foundation of the defence.

Frequently asked questions

What you need to know about section 156 StGB.

What does fraudulent bankruptcy mean? +

Fraudulent bankruptcy is the intentional diminution or concealment of assets with the aim of preventing one or several creditors from obtaining satisfaction. The focus lies on the targeted removal of assets from creditor access.

What penalty does section 156 StGB carry? +

The basic offence provides for imprisonment of up to two years. Where the damage exceeds 300,000 euro, the penalty rises to imprisonment of up to ten years.

What distinguishes section 156 from section 159 StGB? +

Section 156 requires intent, that is the will to diminish assets or the acceptance of such diminution. Section 159 captures grossly negligent conduct without intent to harm, with a markedly lower penalty.

Are gifts to relatives always punishable? +

No. Regular maintenance payments or minor transfers do not constitute a diminution of assets within the meaning of section 156. Only where a substantial gratuitous transfer is made with intent to harm creditors does section 156 come into consideration.

When is the 300,000 euro qualification threshold reached? +

The qualification threshold is tied to the amount of the damage, that is the sum by which creditor satisfaction is frustrated or diminished. A precise damage calculation is therefore a central defence point.

What role do avoidance actions in insolvency play? +

Avoidance actions under the Insolvency Code are a civil-law instrument and differ from criminal proceedings under section 156 StGB. They can however provide indications of possible asset shifts and trigger criminal investigations.

Related topics

You might also be interested in

Grossly negligent impairment of creditor interests section 159 StGB

Delineation from grossly negligent bankruptcy at a glance.

What to do after a criminal complaint in Austria

The first steps when criminal proceedings are initiated against you.

Topics
section 156 StGBfraudulent bankruptcydiminution of assetscreditor harmbusiness 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.

+43 660 2407152 [email protected]
Contact

A direct line to the firm.

Address

BRANDAUER Rechtsanwälte GmbH Giselakai 51 5020 Salzburg