A tax penalty as a punishment? Legal aspects of the concurrence of tax and criminal sanctions

Authors

Keywords:

tax penalty, criminal offence, tax evasion, concurrent sanctions, ne bis in idem principle

Abstract

Tax crime in the Czech Republic has become increasingly important in recent years. This article focuses on an unintended consequence of tax crime, namely the issue of double jeopardy. In the Czech legal system, tax proceedings and criminal proceedings are conducted separately. The aim of this article is to determine whether it is possible to impose a tax penalty and a penalty in criminal proceedings at the same time without violating the ne bis in idem principle. The hypothesis assumes that the concurrence of these sanctions is possible if the penalty is not considered as a punishment in the sense of criminal law. For these purposes, the legal framework that defines tax and criminal proceedings in the Czech Republic is first analysed. Subsequently, the conditions under which it is possible to conduct these proceedings in the same case are identified, using an analysis of the case law of European and domestic courts. The authors conclude that tax penalties are punitive in nature and therefore the sanctions imposed must be considered. However, the current legal framework in the Czech Republic makes this very difficult, as the tax administrator is not granted discretionary powers when imposing penalties. Therefore, the following solutions are proposed: 1) change the legislation and allow discretion in imposing penalties, 2) do not impose penalties at all if a punishment has already been imposed in criminal proceedings, 3) merge the two proceedings and impose one sanction.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Bakeš, M.: Finanční právo [Financial Law], Prague: C.H.Beck, 2003

Geiß, R.: Ne bis in idem, Available at: http://opil.ouplaw.com/view/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e66, accessed: 15th May 2025

Janderová, J.: Rozložení důkazního břemene v daňovém řízení [Distribution of the Burden of Proof in Tax Proceedings], Acta Iuridica Olomucensia, nr 2 [17], 2022

Kmec, J.: Reflexe recentní judikatury Evropského soudu pro lidská práva k zásadě ne bis in idem v judikatuře Nejvyššího soudu [Reflection of Recent Case Law of the European Court of Human Rights on the ne bis in idem Principle in the Case Law of the Supreme Court] (in:) Gřivna, T. (ed.): Pocta Pavlu Šámalovi k 65. narozeninám. Čtvrtstoletí hledání spravedlnosti na Nejvyšším soudě ČR [Tribute to Pavel Šámal on the Occasion of His 65th Birthday. A Quarter Century of Seeking Justice at the Supreme Court of the Czech Republic], Praha: C. H. Beck, 2018

Kopřiva, M.: § 134 [Section 134] (in:) Kopřiva, M. et al. (eds.): Manuál k daňovému řádu [Manual to the Tax Code], Ostrava: Sagit, 2022

Lasagni, G., Mirandola, S.: The European ne bis in idem at the Crossroads of Administrative and Criminal Law, Available at: https://eucrim.eu/articles/european-ne-bis-in-idem-crossroads-administrative-and-criminal-law/, accessed: 15th May 2025

Lichnovský, O.: Daňový řád: komentář [Tax Code: Commentary], Prague: C.H.Beck, 2016

Martiník, P.: Vázanost správce daně rozhodnutím v trestní věci [Tax Administrator’s Binding by a Decision in Criminal Proceedings] (in:) Málek, O. et al. (eds.), Správa daní. Soubor statí z odborné konference konané na Právnické fakultě Univerzity Karlovy dne 6. října 2023 [Tax Administration. A Collection of Papers from the Expert Conference Held at the Faculty of Law, Charles University, on 6 October 2023], Prague: Charles University, Faculty of Law, 2023, pp. 134–143

Radvan, M.: Je berní právo samostatným odvětvím práva? [Is Tax Law an Independent Branch of Law?], Dny práva – 2008 – Days of Law, 2008, Available at: http://www.law.muni.cz/sborniky/dp08/files/pdf/financ/radvan.pdf, accessed: 15th May 2025

Radvan, M.: Právo důchodových daní [Income Tax Law] (in:) Mrkývka, P. et al. (eds.), Důchodové daně [Income Taxes], Brno: Masaryk University, 2016

Tomášek, M. et al.: Právo Evropské unie [Law of the European Union], Prague: Leges, 2013

Šimánová, H.: Trestní sankce v daňovém řádu: k prolínání daňového a trestního práva a zásadě ne bis in idem [Criminal sanctions in the tax code: on the interplay between tax and criminal law and the ne bis in idem principle]. COFOLA 2019, 342

Vetzo, M.: The Past, Present and Future of the Ne Bis In Idem Dialogue between the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights: The Cases of Menci, Garlsson and Di Puma, Review of European Administrative Law, nr [2], 2018

Court rulings

Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ), ruling of 29th June 2006, Showa Denko KK v. Commission of the European Communities, C-289/04, (ECR 2006 I-05851)

Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), Grand Chamber ruling of 26th February 2013, Åklagaren v. Hans Åkerberg Fransson, C-617/10, (ECR 2013 I-00000)

Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), Grand Chamber ruling of 20th March 2018, Menci, C-524/15

European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), Second Section, ruling of 13th December 2005, Nilsson v. Sweden, no. 73661/01

European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), ruling of 15th November 2016, A and B v. Norway, no. 24130/11 and 29758/11

European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), Fourth Section, ruling of 20th May 2014, Glantz v. Finland, no. 37394/11, HUDOC

Regional Court in Prague (Krajský soud v Praze), ruling of 29th October 2024, 59 Af 9/2022–78

Supreme Administrative Court of the Czech Republic, ruling of 28th February 2023, 6 Afs 125/2021–56, published in: No. 4469/2023 Coll. of the SAC Decisions

Supreme Administrative Court of the Czech Republic, ruling of 27th June 2024, 10 Afs 26/2024-62

Supreme Administrative Court of the Czech Republic, ruling of 30th January 2008, 2 Afs 24/2007–119, published in: No. 1572/2008 Coll. of the SAC Decisions

Supreme Administrative Court of the Czech Republic, ruling of 24th November 2015, case no. 4 Afs 210/2014-57, published in: No. 3348/2016 Coll. of the SAC Decisions

Supreme Administrative Court of the Czech Republic, ruling of 25th September 2014, case no. 7 Aps 3/2013-34

Supreme Court of the Czech Republic, ruling of 4th January 2017, case no. 15 Tdo 832/2016, published in: No. 15/2017 Coll. of Court Decisions and Opinions

Legal Acts

Act of 4 November, 1950 on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (consolidated text Council of Europe Treaty Series No. 005, as amended)

Act of 1 January 1962, Criminal Procedure Code, No. 141/1961 Coll. (consolidated text Journal of Laws 2025, as amended)

Act of 7 December, 2000 on the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (consolidated text Official Journal of the European Union C 303, 14 December 2007, as amended)

Act of 1 January 2010, Criminal Code, No. 40/2009 Coll. (consolidated text Journal of Laws 2025, as amended)

Act of 1 January 2011, Tax Code, No. 280/2009 Coll. (consolidated text Journal of Laws 2025, as amended)

Other official documents

Parliamentary press no. 784/0, Act amending certain acts in the field of tax administration – EU, Available at: https://www.psp.cz/sqw/historie.sqw?o=9&t=784, accessed: 14th May 2025

Pinto de Albuquerque, P.: Dissenting opinion in A and B v. Norway, Strasbourg: European Court of Human Rights, 2016. Available at: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/tur#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-168972%22]}, accessed: 14th May 2025

Report on the activities of the National Rapporteur on Combating Tax Crime for 2023 Available at: https://verejnazaloba.cz/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Zpr%C3%A1va-NZ-2023-dan%C4%9B.pdf, accessed: 14th May 2025

Downloads

Published

25.08.2025

How to Cite

Svobodová, T., & Radvan, M. (2025). A tax penalty as a punishment? Legal aspects of the concurrence of tax and criminal sanctions. Financial Law Review, (37(1), 25–47. Retrieved from https://czasopisma.bg.ug.edu.pl/index.php/flr/article/view/12607

Issue

Section

Articles