EPPO

On 11 January 2023, in an investigation into tax evasion carried out by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO), the Italian Financial Police (Guardia di Finanza) executed a freezing order of assets for a value of over €10 million, issued by the pre-trial judge of Lecco, following a request by the European Delegated Prosecutors.

The investigation started in 2019, after a tax audit of a company located in the Lecco-Brianza area. This company was the tax representative for VAT purposes of a legal entity under Dutch law, with its registered office in Amsterdam.

The investigation showed that the real headquarters of the company – i.e., the so-called ‘place of effective management’ – were in fact in the Lecco area, and not in the Netherlands. The company is suspected of using an international tax evasion mechanism, also known as ‘tax inversion’.

According to the investigation, the Brianza-based company marketed its products – electrical components for automation – within the Italian territory, while fraudulently pretending that the goods were destined for other EU Member States, and therefore exempt of VAT, abusing the fictitious foreign seat of the company.

Furthermore, it is believed that the company ostensibly based in the Netherlands created a complex corporate system, by which it was controlled by a holding company registered in the Netherlands Antilles (under a preferential tax regime), and in turn by another company, also apparently based in the Netherlands –  a scheme known as a ‘Dutch sandwich’, a form of tax evasion technique that involves using parent companies in different countries to shift profits to tax havens.

The managers of the company, both of Italian nationality, are under investigation for VAT fraud from 2013 to 2018. The investigation established an effective turnover in Italy of approximately €50 million, and unpaid VAT of over €10 million.

The execution of the searches, seizure and freezing of assets is still ongoing.

All persons concerned are presumed to be innocent until proven guilty in the competent Italian courts of law.

Pubblichiamo l’ORDINANZA DEL TRIBUNALE DI MODENA DEPOSITATA IL 29.07.2022 nei procedimenti riuniti numeri nn.rr. 48 e 49 del 2022. Presidente dr.ssa Ester RUSSO; estensore dr. Danilo DE PADUA. Di seguito le massime che riteniamo estrapolabili dalla lettura del provvedimento.

MASSIMA 1

Costituiscono profitto diretto del reato di truffa aggravata di cui agli artt. 640 – 640 bis c.p. gli edifici che sono stati oggetto di ricostruzione in forza di fondi pubblici in denaro, ottenuti fraudolentemente, destinati a supportare finanziariamente proprio l’attività di ricostruzione degli immobili oggetto di sequestro.

MASSIMA 2

In caso di sequestro preventivo ai sensi dell’art. 321 comma 2 c.p.p. su beni che costituiscono profitto diretto del reato che si assume commesso, la tutela del terzo che su tali beni sia titolare di diritti può trovare accoglimento in caso di sua buona fede; tale situazione soggettiva richiede che il terzo: non si sia avvantaggiato in ragione del delitto commesso dall'autore; non fosse nella condizione di conoscere l'agire illecito, utilizzando l'ordinaria diligenza.

MASSIMA 3

La tutela del terzo che sia titolare di diritti su beni in relazione ai quali il sequestro preventivo, ai sensi dell’art. 321 comma 2 c.p.p., è esercitato per equivalente del valore del profitto del reato, cede solo a fronte di una solida dimostrazione del fatto che i diritti reali formalmente attribuiti al terzo siano un mascheramento dell'effettiva situazione di dominio da parte dell'indagato. È quindi necessario rinvenire la prova di un'intestazione fittizia e di una esclusiva e completa disponibilità dell'immobile in capo al solo indagato. Tale principio è stato affermato in un caso in cui il Pubblico Ministero aveva proceduto al sequestro per intero di beni sui quali i terzi erano titolari del diritto di nuda proprietà e del 50% dell’usufrutto. Il Tribunale ha ritenuto difettare la dimostrazione dell’intestazione fittizia essendo irrilevante l’utilizzo del bene da parte dell’indagato, in quanto titolare del diritto di usufrutto sul 50% dell’immobile; tale utilizzo non implica necessariamente, in mancanza di prova contraria, la natura fittizia dei diritti vantati dai terzi sui medesimi beni, a maggior ragione laddove i terzi abbiano dimostrato un contributo economico per l’acquisto dei beni medesimi ed un utilizzo reale degli stessi beni, in conformità ai diritti loro attribuiti.

More than €1.1 million was preventively seized last Friday from two Italian companies operating in the medical supplies sector, at the request of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO). The two companies and their director are suspected of aggravated fraud against various healthcare facilities and hospitals in the regions of Piedmont, Valle d’Aosta and Sicily, by providing them with more than 100 000 FFP2 and FFP3 face masks and protective suits without suitable certification.

In November 2020, the investigators in Ravenna (Guardia di Finanza – Nucleo di Polizia Economico Finanziaria) started looking into possible fraud relating to the importation of protective material from China to the Emilia-Romagna region, by companies that sold 1.4 million FFP2 face masks without suitable certification to Parma University Hospital. That hospital, at the start of the Covid-19 pandemic, played the role of purchasing centre for the entire healthcare sector of Emilia-Romagna. You can read more about this in our press release from September 2021.

Based on the results of these initial findings, the investigations moved on to all the other healthcare facilities that were customers of the same two companies. The companies in this investigation had provided, between April and November 2020, 24 500 FFP2 and 13 980 FFP3 face masks, and 70 260 protective suits to local healthcare companies and hospitals in the provinces of Caltanissetta, Catania, Trapani, Aosta and Turin.

According to the provisional charges, similar fraudulent activities were quickly discovered: in some cases the products had false and/or unsuitable certifications. In other cases, the healthcare professionals who were using the protective equipment complained about the insufficient quality of the products, and asked for the supply to be withdrawn.

The investigative claim is that the director of the supplying companies refrained from reporting possible critical issues to the other health authorities who were using similar products. Both companies are therefore held administratively responsible for the crimes attributed to their director, as they did not have any suitable organisational model for preventing the unlawful conduct.

The preventive seizure order was issued by the preliminary investigative judge upon the EPPO’s request and executed on Friday, 5 August 2022 for a total value of €1 144 175. This allows compensation for the illicit profit achieved due to the alleged fraud. Liquid assets from the main suspect and the two companies worth €640 000 were seized, as was a commercial property and an apartment, equivalent to €504 976.

A seguito di una complessa e articolata indagine condotta dai Carabinieri Forestali sotto la direzione di EPPO - Ufficio di Torino, sono stati denunciati all’Autorità Giudiziaria per truffa quattro soggetti collegati ad altrettante aziende agricole operanti in Piemonte e nel nord ovest. In allegato il comunicato stampa completo.

Today in Sicily (Italy), the Carabinieri Command for the Protection of Agri-food of Messina (Reparto Carabinieri per la Tutela Agroalimentare di Messina) seized over €160 000 in movable assets and real estate, in an investigation into agricultural funding fraud carried out by the Palermo office of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO).

The two suspects are alleged to have falsified statements and declared ownership and possession of lands in the province of Reggio Calabria, to obtain European Union agricultural funds. As the suspects were not the actual owners of the land, they committed aggravated fraud and managed to obtain over €160 000 in EU agricultural funds between 2013 and 2021.

Moreover, one of the suspects had previously received an anti-mafia prohibition from the Prefect of Reggio Calabria, which excludes him/her from obtaining public contributions, according to the Italian Anti-mafia Code.