Search
Contact
03.06.2019 | KPMG Law Insights

Subsequent declarations during an ongoing external audit – Important amendment to the AStBV

Subsequent declarations during an ongoing external audit – Important change to the AStBV

Tightening of the administrative instruction on the treatment of subsequent declarations during an ongoing external audit

I. Background
As soon as a taxpayer realizes before the expiry of the assessment period that a tax return submitted by him or on his behalf is incorrect, he must immediately notify the tax office and correct it (Section 153 (1) sentence 1 AO). This obligation exists irrespective of whether an external audit has already been ordered for the tax period in question or whether it has even already begun. A notification is only dispensable for the specific audit period insofar as the tax audit has already determined the error in question (AEAO to § 153 AO, No. 3 sentence 5). As part of preventive counseling, the aim is regularly to ensure that a mandatory correction report also fulfills the requirements of a self-disclosure that exempts from penalties or fines (Section 371 of the German Fiscal Code (AO)) as a precautionary measure (as a so-called self-disclosure correction). However, an exempting voluntary disclosure is no longer effectively possible for taxation periods and tax types for which an audit order has already been announced. A voluntary disclosure exempting from fines pursuant to Sec. 378 para. 3 AO is still permissible in these cases, however.

II. Previous situation of instructions of the tax authorities
The treatment of such notifications is mainly regulated within the tax authorities by the Application Decree on Section 153 of the German Fiscal Code (AO) and the Instructions for Criminal and Penalty Proceedings (Tax) (AStBV). Accordingly, voluntary disclosures (even if they are not designated as such but are at least recognizable) are and were always to be forwarded to the Office for Fines and Criminal Matters (BuStra) for examination. In addition, such declarations must also be forwarded to the BuStra where there are indications that taxes have previously been intentionally or recklessly evaded. There is no obligation to submit declarations to the BuStra if they are undoubtedly based on subsequent knowledge of the taxpayer (no. 132, para. 1 AStBV). De facto, this resulted in a very considerable scope of judgment for the assessment officer when dealing with notices of correction.

III. Change due to the AStBV 2019
Effective January 1, 2019, the current 2019 AStBV went into effect.
This massively restricts the tax offices’ scope for assessment when dealing with subsequent declarations. Specifically, the tax offices are now instructed to submit all subsequent declarations (regardless of their designation or material content) that are submitted in the course of an ongoing external audit to the BuStra for examination (No. 131 (1) sentence 2 AStBV ). In our opinion, it can be assumed that this instruction will be interpreted comprehensively by the assessment officials and that, in the case of ongoing external audits, subsequent declarations for periods not (yet) covered by this audit will also be submitted directly to the BuStra.

IV. Recommendation for action
The tightened audit procedures outlined above can prove extremely treacherous in correction and post-declaration cases. In the future, the BuStra will receive significantly more cases of supplementary declarations for review than before. This applies in particular to cases in which it is no longer possible to make an exempting voluntary disclosure due to the blocking effect caused by the external audit. It is obvious that this also increases the risk of prosecution. If the specialists in the form of the BuStra are always brought on board in correction cases on the part of the tax office, it is advisable from the company’s point of view to also involve specialized lawyers and tax consultants at an early stage, in particular also with regard to a defense under criminal tax law that may subsequently be necessary. Together with our tax experts at KPMG AG Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft, we will be happy to assist you.

Please feel free to contact us with any questions you may have on these topics.

Explore #more

19.11.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

New Packaging Implementation Act tightens obligations for companies

With a new Packaging Implementation Act (VerpackDG), German law is to be adapted to the EU Packaging Regulation. The Federal Ministry for the Environment…

18.11.2025 | In the media

KPMG Law Statement in the FAZ on the subject of deepfakes

Fraudsters can easily falsify invoices or even act as company bosses. Companies can defend themselves against this, but there are no miracle weapons against AI…

17.11.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

Video surveillance in rental properties: What should landlords be aware of?

Video surveillance of rented properties is only possible under strict legal conditions. More and more owners want to keep an eye on and secure their…

13.11.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

Implementing AI in the legal department – these are the success factors

Artificial intelligence (AI) only benefits the legal department if it is implemented correctly. The technology promises to automate time-consuming routine work and fundamentally improve the…

13.11.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

First omnibus package to relax CSDDD, CSRD and EU taxonomy obligations

On November 13, 2025, the EU Parliament voted on its negotiating position regarding the so-called omnibus package, which provides for a relaxation of the CSRD,…

12.11.2025 | In the media

KPMG Law Statement in In-house Counsel: More stability under the umbrella of corporate governance

There is a lot of talk about “corporate governance” in the face of multiple crises and regulatory tendencies on the part of legislators. But what…

07.11.2025 | Deal Notifications

KPMG Law and KPMG advise Diehl Defence on the acquisition of the Tauber Group

KPMG Law Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft mbH (KPMG Law) and KPMG AG Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft (KPMG) advised Diehl Defence on the acquisition of the Tauber Group. KPMG Law provided legal…

07.11.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

Changes to the H-1B visa and their consequences for US hiring and secondment practices

President Trump’s administration has introduced two significant changes to the highly popular H-1B visa program for skilled workers: The previous random lottery will be replaced…

07.11.2025 | In the media

KPMG Law Statement on HAUFE: Confusion surrounding the EU Deforestation Regulation – and what companies should do now

Possibly, perhaps, under certain circumstances, the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) will not be binding for large and medium-sized enterprises on December 30, 2025 and for…

06.11.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

External personnel: authorities tighten checks with AI support

AI is a blessing for many companies, but it can also quickly become a curse, especially when authorities use the technology to uncover legal violations…

Contact

Dr. Heiko Hoffmann

Partner
Munich Site Manager
Head of Criminal Tax Law

Friedenstraße 10
81671 München

Tel.: +49 89 59976061652
HHoffmann@kpmg-law.com

Arndt Rodatz

Partner
Head of Criminal Tax Law

Fuhlentwiete 5
20355 Hamburg

Tel.: +49 40 360994 5081
arodatz@kpmg-law.com

© 2024 KPMG Law Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft mbH, associated with KPMG AG Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft, a public limited company under German law and a member of the global KPMG organisation of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Limited, a Private English Company Limited by Guarantee. All rights reserved. For more details on the structure of KPMG’s global organisation, please visit https://home.kpmg/governance.

 KPMG International does not provide services to clients. No member firm is authorised to bind or contract KPMG International or any other member firm to any third party, just as KPMG International is not authorised to bind or contract any other member firm.

Scroll