Looking back at the covid pandemic, investigating authorities are reviewing emergency aid applications submitted in this context.
In a case defended by attorney Wagner, an entrepreneur was accused of applying for both emergency aid and, subsequently, the so-called Bridging Aid III (“Überbrückungshilfe III”) as well as Bridging Aid III Plus (“Überbrückungshilfe III Plus”) fraudfully by providing incorrect sales figures. As a result of the incorrect information, the entrepreneur was allegedly granted excessive aid.
Although the entrepreneur made corrections advised by his tax advisor within the subsequent final invoices, the public prosecutor’s office charged him with intentional subsidy fraud in three separate cases.
The defense was not only focused on avoiding a penalty. In the event of a conviction, there was not only the threat of having to repay the alleged overpayments, but also of having to repay all subsidies due to the lack of eligibility for subsidies as a result of the alleged offense – an enormous financial risk in this case.
In its ruling handed down in July 2025, Ref.: 47 Ds 524 js 3363/23, the District Court of Nuremberg acquitted the entrepreneur of all charges after several days of contentious main hearings.
The ruling is subject to appeal.
In its ruling, the court agreed with the defense on several points.
One of the decisive factors was the fact, highlighted by the defense, that the defendant would have been entitled to higher subsidies if he had truthfully reported the actual sales revenues.
This is because the offense of subsidy fraud under Section 264 I No. 1 of the German Criminal Code (“StGB”) requires that the incorrect information must confer an advantage on the perpetrator. This was not the case here. Thus, there was no basis for conviction.
Reality shows that if incorrect information is provided in applications for emergency aid and/or bridging aid, subsidy fraud can be assumed prematurely by authorities.
A thorough examination of each individual case is particularly important given the complex and frequently changing subsidy regulations for covid aid.
There were also other legal positions of significance set out in the ruling of the District Court of Nuremberg. In particular, the court discussed that corrected final invoices could potentially lead to impunity.
Are you affected by a similar or related case? We offer you a thorough review and targeted defense.
