Economic & Tax Crime Defence | Criminal Lawyer in Bucharest

If a tax audit, internal investigation, bank alert or a prosecutor’s act suddenly turns into a criminal file, the priorities are usually the same: clarify your procedural status, secure documents, control communications, and react quickly to measures such as searches, hearings, seizures and account freezes under the Romanian Criminal Procedure Code (Law no. 135/2010).

This page is for company directors, shareholders, CFOs, accountants, compliance officers, and entrepreneurs who need a coherent defence plan in economic and fiscal cases (tax evasion, fraud, money laundering), often running in parallel with ANAF procedures and disputes.

Informațiile sunt generale și nu înlocuiesc consultanța juridică. Contează faptele, actele și cronologia.

When you typically need this

You receive a summons from the police or prosecutor’s office as a suspect/defendant (or you are informed informally and asked to “come in”).
An ANAF audit or DGAF anti-fraud control escalates into a criminal complaint for tax evasion under Law no. 241/2005.
Your company’s bank accounts are frozen (criminal seizure) or assets are placed under seizure to secure damages/confiscation under Law no. 135/2010.
There is a risk of searches (office/home), IT searches, device collection, or requests for access to cloud accounts.
You are suspected of money laundering and need to understand both the criminal side and the compliance/AML context (Law no. 129/2019 and related EU framework).
The file involves invoices, VAT chains, “missing trader” patterns, fictitious transactions, or accounting documentation disputes.
Directors or shareholders are accused of causing damage to the company or creditors (embezzlement, breach of trust, fraudulent bankruptcy scenarios).
You have parallel procedures: criminal investigation plus tax administrative proceedings under the Tax Procedure Code (Law no. 207/2015).
The company’s reputation and operations are affected by seizures, blocked suppliers, tender exclusions, or compliance reviews.
The matter has a cross-border angle (EU cooperation, evidence abroad, freezing/confiscation across Member States under Regulation (EU) 2018/1805).

What we do, step by step

Immediate triage: identify your procedural status, the competent authority, and the urgent risks (hearings, searches, seizure, deadlines) based on the acts you already have.
Secure the document trail: accounting records, contracts, invoices, bank statements, correspondence, audit reports, IT logs, and evidence chain (what exists, where it is, who controls it).
Create a timeline that matches the documents (transactions, invoices, deliveries, payments, tax filings, internal approvals, and key communications).
Plan the first procedural actions: how to respond to summons, what to request from the file, what evidence to preserve, and what not to say or sign without review.
Assistance during hearings and investigative acts: preparation, presence, and structured approach under the rules in Law no. 135/2010.
Challenge or adjust measures: seizure scope, proportionality, necessity, and documentation supporting lawful origin of funds and assets (including EU standards on freezing and confiscation in Directive 2014/42/EU).
Coordinate the criminal defence with the tax side: tax administrative steps, evidence, and positions that can affect the criminal narrative under Law no. 207/2015.
Prepare written submissions: factual clarifications, document explanations, expert needs, and targeted requests for evidence actions.
Manage communications: internal instructions (who talks to investigators, who collects documents), employee handling, and external messaging when needed.
Ongoing strategy: reassess after each procedural step, keep the defence consistent, and adapt to new evidence and prosecutor theory.

Useful documents & information for the first assessment

Document	Why it matters	Notes
Summons, minutes, prosecutor’s orders, indictments (if any)	Clarifies your status, stage, and immediate deadlines under Law no. 135/2010	Bring everything you received (including envelopes, proof of communication, emails).
ANAF/DGAF documents: audit report, findings, minutes, requests, decisions	Often the factual base for tax evasion allegations (Law no. 241/2005)	Include annexes, working papers, and your responses/objections.
Accounting records & exports (trial balance, ledgers, VAT journals, ERP exports)	Shows transaction reality, consistency, and traceability	Keep original formats and backup copies; avoid “clean-up” edits.
Contracts, orders, delivery notes, acceptance protocols, CMRs	Supports economic substance behind invoices and payments	Match documents to each invoice and each payment.
Invoices, credit notes, payment orders, bank statements	Core evidence in most fiscal and laundering narratives	Prepare a structured map: invoice → delivery → payment → booking → tax filing.
Emails, messaging, internal approvals, board decisions	Can confirm who decided what and when (intent and knowledge are often disputed)	Preserve metadata where possible; avoid selective forwarding without context.
Bank communications: freezing notices, AML requests, transaction queries	Relevant for money laundering context and account blocks (Law no. 129/2019)	Bring the exact bank wording and dates; note all affected IBANs.
Asset list (company and personal): accounts, receivables, vehicles, real estate	Needed to respond to seizure scope and proportionality, and to plan continuity	Include ownership documents, financing, and lawful income proof where relevant.

Risks and common mistakes

Giving statements without knowing your status and what evidence exists in the file.
Missing short deadlines (especially for challenging measures or responding to tax acts under Law no. 207/2015).
Trying to “fix” accounting records after the fact, which can create new exposure and credibility issues.
Uncontrolled internal communication: employees “explaining” things inconsistently to investigators.
Mixing company and personal cash flows without clear documentation and justification.
Ignoring seizure and over-blocking effects until operations are already paralysed (suppliers, payroll, taxes, loans).
Assuming the tax procedure and the criminal procedure are independent (in practice, they influence each other).
Relying on informal promises or “it will be fine” approaches instead of document-driven defence.

FAQ

What should we do in the first 24–48 hours after an account freeze or seizure?

Secure the documents behind the affected funds and assets, clarify the legal basis and issuing authority, and act quickly on procedural options under Law no. 135/2010. Also map operational impact (payroll, suppliers, taxes) so the response is both legal and practical.

Can a Romanian company be criminally liable, or only the directors?

Romanian law can engage criminal liability for legal entities in certain conditions (separate from individual liability), so defence must address both the corporate and personal tracks where applicable.

Does paying the alleged tax loss end a tax evasion case?

Payment can be legally relevant in some scenarios under Law no. 241/2005, but outcomes depend on timing, amounts, the exact accusation and the evidence. It must be assessed case-by-case with documents and chronology.

Can ANAF and the prosecutor sanction the same facts?

There are situations where tax measures and criminal proceedings overlap; the analysis often involves both national rules and European standards (including EU and ECHR case-law), so coordination between the tracks matters from the start.

What if the evidence is digital or stored abroad (cloud, foreign servers, foreign accounts)?

Cross-border evidence gathering and asset measures may involve EU mechanisms and mutual recognition instruments, including Regulation (EU) 2018/1805 for freezing and confiscation orders between Member States.

How do money laundering allegations connect to business documentation?

Money laundering analysis often turns on the traceability of funds, the economic rationale of transactions and documentation consistency, within the national AML framework in Law no. 129/2019 and EU instruments such as Directive (EU) 2018/1673.

Do you work with foreign directors, investors, or English-speaking teams?

Yes, communication and document review can be handled in Romanian and English, and the defence can be structured for mixed teams (local finance, foreign HQ, compliance, auditors), depending on the case needs.