Language Switcher Fallback

News

A trust office had failed to report a transfer of shares /depositary receipts for shares in time to FIU-Netherlands and consequently received an administrative penalty.

This judgment was rendered by the Dutch Trade and Industry Appeals Tribunal (College van Beroep voor het Bedrijfsleven) on 17 January last. Earlier, the court had come to the same conclusion.

We started the new year with our 185th case since the launch in 2012. A high-profile case. In the week before Christmas the court convicted a detained accused for laundering nearly half a million euros.  He was sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 20 months and the court ordered the confiscation of laptops among other things, and ordered that income obtained from crime should be taken from him.  The term of imprisonment was partly suspended on account of the person’s ill- health, but he would not be able to spend Christmas with his family.  

Last month three accused heard sentences of up to 16 months demanded against them for fraud and embezzlement of more than one million euros.

A civil-law notary who had been removed from office and appealed against the sentence received an even heavier sentence. 

A man was convicted for a crime that had earned him a handsome amount of money. That is why, in addition to the sentence, a confiscation order was imposed to deprive him of his criminal profits. The Central Fine Collection Agency is responsible for the collection of such confiscated assets. FIU-the Netherlands also searches its data for these confiscation procedures in order to detect money flows that the parties concerned are trying to keep out of the confiscation. If the fines or confiscations concern large amounts, payment arrangements are often made between the convicted criminal and the Central Fine Collection Agency. After agreeing to the arrangement, those convicted frequently contact the Central Fine Collection Agency some time later to argue that they have insufficient funds to meet their payment obligations. In such a case, the instalment amount can be reduced by agreement.

Two months ago, the Fiscal Intelligence and Investigation Service searched a house and a business premises and seized considerable assets, including a car that was transported to the State Property Service by means of a recovery vehicle. This was the preliminary result of a long investigation that was launched on the basis of an FIU file.

Last month, the police and the Fiscal Intelligence and Investigation Service interviewed a lawyer, a tax consultant, an accountant, and a civil law notary about their failure to report unusual transactions or to screen clients properly. It was the first time a lawyer was interrogated as a suspect in the ‘Project on parties failing to report’, according to the Public Prosecution Service.

Earlier this month the newspapers reported that the Dutch banks are planning to reintroduce computerized checks on the account number and account holder in the case of funds transfer transactions. One of the reasons for this move has to do with so-called CEO fraud; in recent years this has been a real plague for companies, which have suffered losses running to millions of euros.

Individuals with a criminal background donated a large cash sum to a charitable foundation. This is a summary of the contents of a report from one of our foreign counterparts that made its way to the screens of FIU-the Netherlands. In the country in question, well-known drug traffickers had handed over a wad of banknotes to a foundation with an idealistic mission. One of the officers of FIU-the Netherlands searched through our data in relation to the individuals in question and found out that they had also carried out financial transactions in the Netherlands. They had spent almost half a million euros on cars, for example. Without exception, these vehicles were paid for in cash. In addition, the individuals spent €150,000 on gambling transactions in casinos. A file was drawn up and passed on to the FIU in the country in which the donation had been carried out; that FIU will carry out a more detailed investigation.

A 27-year-old man entered a showroom, where he expressed his interest in a Porsche Cayenne. Although it was a used car, its price amounted to € 55,000. The man agreed with the price, signed a contract of sale, and put down the money in cash. After which he drove off in his fast car. 

Pages