EN    EN 
 
 
 EUROPEAN  
COMMISSION   
Brussels, 14.7.2016  
SWD(2016) 234 final  
  
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT  
Implemention of Article 325 TFEU by the Member States in 2015  
Accompanying the document  
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND 
THE COUNCIL  
Protection of the European Union's financial interests - Fight against Fraud  
2015 Annual Report  
{COM(2016) 472 final}  
{SWD(2016) 235 final}  
{SWD(2016) 236 final}  
{SWD(2016) 237 final}  
{SWD(2016) 238 final}  
{SWD(2016) 239 final}   
 
2 
 TABLE  OF CONTENTS  
LIST  OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 3 
1. Implementation of article 325 TFEU by Member States  ................................ ....................  4 
2. Most important Anti -Fraud measures adopted by member states in 2015 under the article 
325 TFEU  ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 5 
2.1. Results of the measures reported in the Questionnaire  ................................ .....................  5 
2.2. Actions taken by Member States in the anti -fraud cycle  ................................ ..................  8 
2.3. Measures reported by area  ................................ ................................ ................................  9 
2.3.1.  The ‘Other’ category  ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 10 
2.3.2.  Public Procurement  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 14 
2.3.3. Financial Crime (and money laundering)  ................................ ................................ .... 15 
2.3.4.  Conflict of Interest  ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 16 
2.3.5.  Corruption  ................................ ................................ ................................ ....................  17 
2.3.6.  Measures Reported Concerning Anti -Fraud Coordination Service (AFCOS)  ............  17 
2.3.7.  Measures to prevent organised crime  ................................ ................................ ..........  18 
2.3.8.  Fraud definition  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...........  19 
2.3.9.  Measures on the Protection of Whistle -blowers  ................................ ..........................  20 
2.4. Structured answers of 28 Member States – measures taken concerning the 
EXPENDITURE areas of the EU budget  ................................ ................................ .................  21 
3. Case studies and Best practices by Member States  ................................ ...........................  63 
3.1. Revenue  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..........................  63 
3.1.1.  Tobacco  ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................  63 
3.1.2.  Customs  ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................  68 
3.2. Expenditure  ................................ ................................ ................................ .....................  69 
3.2.1.  Struc tural funds  ................................ ................................ ................................ ............  69 
3.2.2.  Agriculture and Fisheries  ................................ ................................ .............................  73 
3.3. Best practices  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................  74 
3.3.1.  Corruption and conflict of interest  ................................ ................................ ...............  74 
3.3.2.  Managing Authority's kick -off meeting with contract manager  ................................ .. 78 
  
 
3 
 LIST  OF ABBREVIATIONS  
COCOLAF  Advisory Committee for the Coordination of Fraud Prevention   
AFCOS  Anti-Fraud Coordination Service  
CAP Common Agricultural Policy  
CF Cohesion Fund  
CP Cohesion Policy  
CCIP  Community Customs Code Implementing Provisions   
CRMS   Community Customs Risk Management system  
DG Directorate General  
EAFRD  European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development  
EAGF  European Agricultural Guarantee Fund  
EFF European Fishery Fund  
EU European Union  
EUR Euro  
ERDF  European Regional Development Fund  
ESF European Social Fund  
ESIF European Structural and Investment Funds  
FEAGA (EAGF)  European Agricultural Guarantee Fund  
FEADER (EAFRD)  European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development  
NAFS  National Anti -Fraud Strategy   
NSRF  National Strategic Reference Frameworks  
MCS  Management Control System  
MS Member  State  
OLAF  European Anti Fraud Office  
TFEU  Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union  
TOR Traditional Own Resource  
 
 
 
4 
 1. IMPLEMENTATION OF ART ICLE 325  TFEU  BY MEMBER STATES  
Article 325(5) of the TFEU requires the Commission, in cooperation with the Member 
States, to submit a report each year to the European Parliament and the Council on the 
measures taken to implement that article. The Commission bases the part of the report 
relating to the Member States on the answers to the 'Article 325' questionna ire, as agreed 
upon with them within the Advisory Committee for the Cordination of Fraud Prevention 
(COCOLAF), and adapted each year in the light of past experience, so as to facilitate the 
monitoring of anti -fraud measures. Consequently, each year the Com mission draws up a 
report in cooperation with the Member States on the measures taken to implement this 
obligation, according to Article 325 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European 
Union (TFEU). This report is addressed to the European Parliament and the Council and 
it is published.  
This questionnaire covers the period from 1 January to 31 December 2015. Up and until 
the 2014 report, information for this section of the Report was collected by the 
Commission through a questionnaire composed of a gen eral part, where Member States 
listed the three most important measures (legislative, administrative, organisational or 
operational) taken, and of a part dealing with a specific subject agreed with Member 
States' COCOLAF representatives each year. Over tim e the report had become more and 
more voluminous. Both the Council and the European Parliament were concerned that its 
size was increasing and the fact that the document is annual, horizontal and multisectoral 
hampered a detailed assessment of all the aspe cts of the protection of the EU’s financial 
interests by the Member States. To address this and reduce the administrative burden on 
the Member States, the Commission decided to omit the specific part of the 
questionnaire. As in previous years, the general questionnaire asks the Member States to 
present the main measures that give effect to Article 325, i.e. measures to combat fraud 
and all illegal activities affecting the financial interests of the EU. Member States are 
invited to describe a maximum of five  ‘key’ measures taken in 2015, in order to 
implement Article 325 of the Treaty.  
The questionnaire was structured around questions offering multiple ‘closed’ answers 
(with, when required, some sub -questions providing further limited choices) and limiting 
the possibility to submit free text (fixed at 600 characters maximum).  In 2015, the 
Member States were given the possibility to report up to 5 most important measures and 
additional measures, concerning mainly federal countries and countries with devolved 
administration in the field of anti -fraud strategy. As has been the case since 2013, the 
questionnaire was managed through the 'EU survey' platform.  
 
 
5 
 2. MOST IMPORTANT ANTI-FRAUD MEASURES ADOPTE D BY MEMBER STATES I N 2015  
UNDER THE ARTICLE 325  TFEU  
2.1. Results of the measures reported in the Questionnaire  
Member States reported one hundred and nineteen measures adopted in 2015 in total, 
referring to various areas concerning the protection of the EU's financial interests and the 
fight against fraud. Eighteen Member  States1 used the opportunity to report the maximum 
five 'most important' measures adopted to protect the financial interests of the EU.  
Most measures adopted by the Member States targeted public procurement. The majority 
of the measures adopted concerned the fraud prevention phase of the anti -fraud cycle for 
both programming periods 2007 -2013 and 2014 -2020.  
Six Member States2 have so far adopted a National Anti -Fraud Strategy (NAFS) for the 
programming period 2015 -2020. The Czech Republic has reported that it plans to adopt a 
revision of its NAFS and Italy reported that its AFCOS has drawn up and developed a 
NAFS which was inc luded in the 2012 Annual Report to the Italian Parliament (Strategic 
anti-fraud orientations). An additional five Member States3 reported that the adoption of 
their NAFS is on -going. Seven Member States4 have an on -going procedure for the 
adoption of a Nat ional Anti -Fraud Strategy.  
Examples of national anti -fraud measures include:  
 Bulgaria adopted a 2015 -2016 Action Plan for the implementation of the NAFS.  
 Denmark adopted a National Anti -Fraud policy which was launched in 2015 on 
the Danish Business Author ity's website to foster a culture that is not conductive 
to fraud and to promote fraud prevention and detection.  
 Germany adopted an anti -fraud and anti -corruption strategy and performed a 
fraud risk assessment of all European Regional Development Fund meas ures.  
 Ireland reported that it has adopted an Anti -Fraud Policy and Fraud Response 
Plan (Information and Guidelines for Staff dealing with rural development).    
 
                                                            
1  Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, Greece, Spain, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, 
Hungary, Netherlands, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia; Slovakia and Finland.  
2  Bulgaria, Greece, Croatia, Malta, Slovakia, Hungary.   
3  Spain, Latvia, Luxembourg, Romania, Slovenia.  
4  Belgium, France, Netherlands, Austria, Poland, Portugal, and the United Kingdom.  
 
6 
  
The chart above illustrates the analysis of information provided by Member States in the 
documents: "Follow -up recommendations to the Commission report on the protection of 
the EU's financial interests – fight against fraud, 2014" and "Questionnaire on the 
protection of the EU's Financial Interests 2015".  
  6 Member 
States 
adopted NAFS  
2 MS Strategic 
Anti -Fraud 
orientations  
5 MS NAFS 
adoption 
ongoing  7 MS NAFS 
under 
preparation  8 MS no NAFS  National Anti -Fraud Strategies adopted by 2015  
 
7 
 Table 1:  Measures reported by Member States  
 
Single Package Single Package Single Package Single Package Single Package Single Package Single Package Single Package Single Package
BE 5 3 1 1 3 1 1 1
BG 5 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1
CZ 5 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 2
DK 5 1 1 1 3
DE 5 1 3 2 1 1 2 2
EE 4 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 3
IE 3 1 3
GR 5 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1
ES 5 1 1 1 3 1 1
FR 4 3 1
HR 3 3
IT 5 2 1 1 1 1 1 3
CY 1 1
LV 5 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 2
LT 5 1 1 3 1
LU 5 2 1 1 2 1 1
HU 5 1 1 1 2 1
MT 1 1
NL 5 1 4
AT 3 1 1 1 1 1
PL 4 4
PT 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
RO 5 1 3 1 1 3 1 3 1 1 1
SI 5 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1
SK 5 1 3 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 1 1 1 2
FI 5 1 2 2 2 2
SE 4 2 1 2 2
UK 2 1 1
14 22 20 11 8 8 10 15 7 24 7 7 9 8 4 10 38 20
16Conflict of Interest Fraud Definition AFCOS Whistleblower Other
Total 119 36 31 25Member 
StateNo of 
MeasuresPublic 
procurementFinancial Crime (+ 
Money Laundering)
58Organised Crime
31 14 17 14Corruption
The table shows the number of measures  reported by the Member States (118), and the nine areas in which they are reported (p ublic procurement, Financial 
Crime (and money laundering), Organised crime, Corruption, Conflict of Interest, Fraud Definition, AFCOS, Whistleblowers and 'Other'. Measures may be reported 
as a single measure or as a package of measures covering more than one area. 
   
8 
 2.2. Actions taken by Member States in the anti -fraud cycle  
In the questionnaire Member States were asked to indicate which stage or stages of the anti -
fraud cycle (see graphic below) are targeted by each measure reported.  
Stages of the anti -fraud cycle  
 
Prevention should be treated as a priority by managing, cer tifying and audit authorities, in 
order to mitigate the fraud risks. It shall be made more effective through closer cooperation 
between all stakeholders and an overall enhanced co -ordination of actions.  
Detection is a critical stage that should be handled with due diligence and proactively by all 
stakeholders, management and control authorities, including audit authorities as well as law 
enforcement services.  
Investigations and prosecution are closely in terlinked. Their efficiency requires appropriately 
qualified staff, full cooperation of the management and control authorities and smooth 
collaboration among the authorities. Cooperation with other relevant actors at EU and 
national level is also of high i mportance.  
Recovery and sanctions should be effective and rigorously followed up by the relevant 
administrative and law enforcement authorities.  
Table 2 below demonstrates that while the majority of measures focused on prevention, 
Member States pay attent ion to all stages of the anti -fraud cycle, resulting in a holistic 
approach to fraud prevention across the European Union.  
 
 

   
9 
 Table 2: Areas addressed by anti -fraud measures reported and the stages of the anti -fraud cycle 
targeted (prevention, detection, i nvestigation and prosecution, recovery and sanction). Note: a 
measure is counted each time it addresses one or more of the four stages of the anti -fraud cycle, in one 
or more areas.  
 
2.3. Measures reported by area  
In areas pre -selected in the questionnaire5, the largest number of measures reported by the 
Member States were in relation to public procurement (thirty -six), followed by financial 
crime and money laundering (thirty -one), conflict of interest (thirty one), corruption 
(twenty five), AFCOS (seventeen), organised crime (sixteen), fraud definition (fourteen), 
whistle -blowers (fourteen)6.  
The ‘other’ field was selected by the Member States fifty -eight times, separately or in 
combination with the above mentioned areas, in order to clarify a measure, or to 
introduce another area (for example co -ordination of fraud prevention, customs -related 
fraud, etc.), or a strategy in the programming period 2007 -2013 and 2014 -2020 to counter 
fraud affecting the financial interests of the Union.  
The amount of replies repo rted as ‘other’ for the year 2015 increased (from twenty -six in 
2013 to forty -one in 2014 to fifty eight in 2015), which can be explained by the adoption 
of a bulk of provisions concerning the new programming period 2014 -2020 and dealing 
with remaining iss ues regarding the old programing period 2007 -2013.  
                                                            
5  The questionnaire outlined eight areas of specific PIF sectors to which the measures taken by the Member States 
applied; the 'other' field was used to report miscellaneous areas or horizontal strategies.  Federal countries and 
countries with devolved admin istration in the field of anti -fraud strategy had the possibility to list 'additional 
measures' in a special field.  
6  Reference to 'area' is, therefore, not equal to a single measure adopted.  
Prevention DetectionInvestigation and 
prosecutionRecovery and 
sanction
34 24 14 9
26 25 19 16
12 12 9 7
19 12 8 6
33 25 12 12
13 14 9 7
13 11 6 6
11 10 5 4
45 31 17 17
206 164 99 84 TotalPublic procurement
Financial Crime (+ Money 
Laundering)
Organised Crime
Corruption
Conflict of Interest
Fraud Definition
AFCOS
Whistleblower
Other
   
10 
 All of the answers were analysed according to the anti -fraud cycle: prevention, detection, 
prosecution and sanctions.  
2.3.1.  The ‘Other’ category  
The Member States referred, in fifty eight cases, to the category 'other' to clarify the area 
(preselected in the questionnaire as public procurement, financial crime, organised crime 
etc.) or in order to introduce a reference to 'another' area. A comprehe nsive list of 
measures classified as 'other' are detailed in table 3.  
Table 3: Details on measures reported as 'other'  
Member 
State  No 
MEASURE  Other Area reported for each measure  
BE 1 Program Act of 10 August 2015.  
3 1) Customs: Inspection of goods with a view to 
improving measures to combat fiscal and non -fiscal 
crime and improving the collection of EU own resources. 
2) ERDF Brussels -Capital Region: Analysis of State and 
issues under the new grants for the 2014 -2020 
programming period. 3) ERDF Fland ers: Overall 
compliance with the regulations and eligibility. State aid.  
BG 1 Management and control of EU funds. Administration of 
irregularities and electronic reporting. Strengthening of 
administrative capacity. Access to information. 
Databases and inf ormation exchange systems. 
Cooperation with OLAF and the competent authorities of 
the MS. Administrative checks and criminal 
investigations.  
2 Management and control of European Structural and 
Investment Funds.  
3 Unpaid public state receivables established by the 
customs authorities. Penalties for the smuggling of 
goods. Forfeiture to the State. Customs investigation 
activities. Operative -search and convoying activities.  
CZ 2 The CSA covers a large scale of activ ity of the public 
sector, including stability and efficiency of public 
service.  
3 Customs and tax administration.  
DK 1 Management of funds/Anti -fraud or anti -corruption 
strategy.  
2 Increased knowledge of the fraud risk.  
3 Management of funds.  
DE 1 Coordination of fraud prevention in the agriculture and 
fisheries sectors.  
   
11 
 3 Management of funds.  
4 Anti-fraud and anti -corruption strategy, guidelines for 
intermediate bodies combating fraud and corruption, 
fraud risk assessment.  
5 Management of funds.  
EE 1  Management of funds. Integrity and transparency 
measures.  
2  Integrity and transparency measure.  
  3  Management of funds.  
GR 1 The General Secretariat of Anti -Corruption, in 
cooperation with European institutions, international 
organizations and all involved national authorities, draws 
up and coordinates implementation of the National 
Strategic Plan to combat corruption and fraud. The 
National Plan in general: (a) is modular and consists of 
aims, measures and specific actions (b)  covers the public 
sector and includes initiatives that also involve the 
private sector, (c) includes legislative, administrative, 
organizational and operational measures and actions, (d) 
covers inter alia: funding of political parties, ethics and 
integrit y, public procurement, high risk sectors, 
whistleblowing, foreign bribery, etc. (e) enhances and 
facilitates cooperation of the involved administrative, 
inspectorate, law enforcement and judiciary authorities.  
2 The measure of Management and Control System 
adoption targets Structural Actions for the Programming 
Period 2014 -2020.   
5 Update of the Rural Development Programme with new 
Project Selection Procedures.  
ES 3 Improving information exchange between the various 
actors with access to relevant information with the aim of 
detecting irregularities and instances of fraud.  
FR 1 Action to combat the illicit trade in tobacco products. 
This measure is intended to author ise the ratification by 
France of the WHO Protocol to Eliminate the Illicit 
Trade in Tobacco Products.  
2 Traditional Own Resources (TOR).  
3 Community mutual administrative assistance in customs 
matters, as provided for under Regulation (EC) No 
515/97 of 13 March, as amended.  
4 Spontaneous exchange of information relating to customs 
controls and risks between EU Member States' customs 
offices in accordance with the Community Customs Code 
Implementing Provisions (CCIP - Article 4g of 
Regulation (EC) No 1875/2006 of 18 December 200 6). 
These exchanges take place via DG TAXUD's CRMS 
   
12 
 system (Community Customs Risk Management).  
IT 1 Anti-fraud and anti -corruption strategy.  
2 The measure lays down control procedures for 
agricultural payments under the CAP (2013 single 
payment scheme), for checking potentially fraudulent 
declarations of land occupancy made by beneficiaries in 
order to obtain access to applicants for or payment o f 
premiums.  
4 Combating fraud against local, regional, national and EU 
budgets.  
LV 1 Public officials, human resource management in the 
public sector, internal control standards, construction, 
squandering, state aid, judiciary, abolition of 
administrative immunity, investment, education 
(corruption and ethical topics in the education system), 
codes of ethics, illicit enrichment, proceeds of crime, 
financing of political parties, lobbying, management of 
funds, health system, asset declarations , transparency of 
public institutions, private sector, sport organizations, 
awareness raising activities and informative materials.  
2 Management of funds.  
LT 1 Anti-corruption strategy.  
2 Collaboration with law -enforcement authorities for the 
purposes of expeditiously obtaining information relating 
to their pre -trial investigations, investigating 
infringements and recovering unlawfully used funds.  
4 Detection and prevention of artificially created conditions 
for obtaining aid.  
5 Prevention of irregularities and fraud, protection of 
European Union and Lithuanian financial interests.  
LU 3 Management of Structural Investment Funds.  
HU 3 Fraud prevention and detection at the paying agencies for 
the period 2014 -2020, definition of irregularities and 
fraud, fraud typology.  
4 Adoption of an anti -fraud strategy for the 2014 -2020 
programming period for the European Structural and 
Investment Funds (ESIF). Fraud risk assessment, 
   
13 
 management, and relevant procedures. Training in fraud 
prevention, with a view to knowledge -sharing. Themes: 
Introduction to the ESIF system (fraud and corruption 
prevention module), irregularity management, 
presentation of ARACHNE (IT tool for risk analysis  in 
shared management), professional ethics, integrity, 
prevention of corruption. Introduction to ARACHNE, 
development of risk scoring function in own IT system. 
Organisational restructuring, increase of the number of 
on-the-spot checks.  
 
NL 1 Evasion of own resources (anti -dumping duty).  
2 Modernisation/automation of import declarations (AGS).  
3 The payment of own resources (including anti -dumping 
duty) and excise is an explicit administrative priority.  
5 Address the problem of double declarations.  
AT 1 Anti-fraud measures (also includes avoiding conflicts of 
interest).  
3 Organisation update of the paying agency. Uniform 
Application and Central payment of EMFF funds. 
Improved reporting on irregularities according to Reg.  
908/2014 annex II and annex III.  
PL 1 Management of EU funds.  
2 Anti-corruption strategy.  
3 Trade in tobacco products.  
4 Combating fraud in projects co -financed by EU funds.  
PT 1 European funds - EAGF and EAFRD, as well as other 
support payments through the IFAP, in particular under 
the EFF/EMFF.  
2 Management of EAFRD Agricultural Funds.  
RO 2 Management of EU regional development funds.  
3 Measure on fraud prevention and detection.  
SI 3 Administrative measure – more efficient recovery of 
unduly spent European cohesion policy funds: Obligatory 
elements of the 2014 -2020 co -financing contract agreed 
with the State Attorney's Office and the Ministry of 
Finance.  
SK 1 Financial control and audit – fraud detection.  
2 Anti-fraud strategy.  
   
14 
 5 Common Agricultural Policy.  
FI 1 Fraud prevention action plan in the area of agriculture.  
Tasks relating to the misuse of aid and grants.  
3 Tax fraud.  
SE 1 On-the-spot checks and competent authorities: The 
proposals from the inquiry cover on -the-spot checks and 
the role of competent authorities and the AFCOS. 
However, the proposals are still subject to referral.  
3 Seminar dealing with public procurement and state aid.  
UK 1 Management of funds in the case of ESIF.  
 
2.3.2.  Public Procurement  
Member States reported thirty -six references concerning public procurement (legislative, 
administrative, organisational and operational measures). Similar to previous years, these 
were adopted either as a single measure (14) or in combination with provisions in other areas 
(22), such as co rruption, organised crime, conflict of interest, fraud definition, whistle -
blowers and 'other'. The references to public procurement were reported by a majority of 
Member States7. Examples of measures in this area include:  
 Greece introduced procedures for the prevention and fight against fraud in the 
Management and Control System (MCS) of the NSRF 2014 -2020. In addition it 
adopted administrative measures in the framework of the Rural Development 
Programme National Action Plan with the objective of lowering the error rate, 
favouring the use of comparative assessment and programmed cyclical restricted 
invitations.  
 Spain strengthened the ex -ante checks carried out by audit bodies to physically verify 
the effective completion of works, services and acquisitions  financed by public funds 
and to check whether they match the content of the corresponding contract or order.  
 Italy adopted Law No 69 of 27 May 2015 (Italian Official Gazette No 124 of 30 May 
2015) on ‘Provisions on criminal offences against the public adm inistration, and 
involving mafia -like organisations and false accounting’. This measure, the aim of 
which is to lay down harsher penalties for corruption, bribery and embezzlement, 
provides for a number of simultaneous amendments to the Civil Code to incre ase the 
penalties for false accounting for  publicly listed and other companies.  
 Hungary adopted Act CXLIII of 2015 on public procurement, the objective of which 
is to transpose the new public procurement directives adopted by the EU legislature 
into Hunga rian law.  
                                                            
7  The 19 Member States reporting measures on public procurement were: Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech 
Republic, Germany, Estonia, Ireland, Greece, Spain, Italy, Cyprus, Latvia, Luxembourg, Hungary, 
Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Slovakia, Finland, Sweden.  
   
15 
  In Romania the public procurement arrangements will be reformed by transposing the 
new European Directive on this matter; adopting the national public procurement 
strategy; ensuring the global coherence and efficiency of institutional arrangemen ts by 
setting up a National Public Procurement Agency; and strengthening national  
cooperation between the institutions involved in the management and monitoring of 
European funds in order to identify risks arising from public procurement.  
 Slovenia introduc ed changes to public procurement and the remit of the Commission 
for the Prevention of Corruption (KPK): 1. The IT tools have been upgraded in the 
interest of the public authorities, the general public and the media, now allowing 
access to data on spending  by public institutions (through contracts for work and 
material or copyright contracts) on goods and services provided by public sector 
employees; 2. Local authorities have produced integrity plans and identified risks 
(KPK presented its findings at a rou nd-table entitled Municipal assets – a focal point 
for corruption risk.  
 Finland introduced a comprehensive reform of public procurement legislation on the 
basis of EU Directives 2014/23/EU, 2014/24/EU and 2014/25/EU on public 
procurement.  
 The Czech Republi c amended Public Procurement Act No. 40/2015 in compliance 
with Directive 2014/24/EU.  It will come into effect in June 2016 and the first contract 
will be published in 2017.  
 Ireland introduced a National Law, namely Statutory Instrument No. 93 of 2015, 
European Union (Direct Support Rural Development Schemes) Offences and Control 
Regulations 2015. The Statutory Instrument sets out the powers of authorised officers 
and details offences and penalty provisions in relation to measures funded by the 
EAFRD co -funded Rural Development Programme.  
 Cyprus introduced a change in legislation regarding modifications on public contracts.  
 In Latvia the amendments to Public Procurement Law and training entered into force. 
Since 1 August 2015 inspection rules of exclusion only allow suppliers that have 
passed the tax liability to participate in public procurement.  
2.3.3.  Financial Crime (and money laundering)  
Nineteen Member States8 reported thirty -one references to financial crime and money 
laundering. Examples of measures includ e: 
 Belgium organised a series of training courses on anti -money -laundering measures for 
tax officers and magistrates in the public prosecutor's office and at headquarters.  
 Bulgaria adopted an Act amending and supplementing the Tax and Social Security 
Procedure Code and Act amending and supplementing the Customs Act.  
 Estonia implemented the VATSUM system (VAT returns, automatic comparison of 
transactions over EUR 1 000 and the person's background) to facilitate the work of 
inspectors.  
                                                            
8  Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Irela nd, Greece, Spain, Italy, Latvia, Hungary, 
Austria, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Slovakia, Finland, Sweden, United Kingdom.  
   
16 
  Italy adopted Law No 6 9 of 27 May 2015 (Italian Official Gazette No 124 of 30 May 
2015) on ‘Provisions on criminal offences against the public administration, and 
involving mafia -like organisations and false accounting’. This measure, the aim of 
which is to lay down harsher pen alties for corruption, bribery and embezzlement, 
provides for a number of simultaneous amendments to the Civil Code to increase the 
penalties for false accounting for publicly listed and other companies.  
 Approval of the 2015 -2017 Strategic Plan to combat t ax and customs fraud and 
evasion by Portugal.  
 Financial Administration of Slovenia (FURS): The Rules on the exercise of public 
powers by FURS officials was adopted. The 2014 Financial Administration Act 
redefines the powers of officials of the joint custom s and tax authority.  
 Finland organised a campaign against the hidden economy.   
 The Swedish Council for the protection of the European Union's financial interests 
(the SEFI Council) worked on its tri -annual report to the Government for the years 
2013 -2015. The report sets out which measures have been undertaken during this 
period to p romote efficient and correct management of EU -related funds. It also 
contains a description of the coordination of the relevant authorities' work to combat 
fraud, abuse and other improper use of EU funds.  
 In the Czech Republic an Act (86/2015) came into e ffect stipulating new measures 
concerning confiscation of offenders' property in connection with causing financial 
damage to the EU.    
2.3.4.  Conflict of Interest  
Sixteen Member States9 referred to thirty one measures taken in order to eliminate 
conflict of int erest.  
The following are examples of legislative and/or organisational provisions taken:  
 Denmark introduced rules in January 2015 stipulating that all officials working on 
case handling and payment of aid requests under the Common Agricultural Policy will 
have to sign declarations of no conflict of interest. The official's line manager reviews 
rules on conflict of interest when officials are appointed and during annual 
assessments. Officials consequently undertake not to handle cases with which they 
have an y personal or economic connection.  
 In Hungary the Presidential Directive No 18/2015 of 21 May 2015 entered into force 
laying down the detailed rules governing the acceptance and examination/investigation 
of reports on abuses, irregularities and integrity a nd corruption risks within the 
organisation, integrity consultancy activities and the procedure for dealing with 
lobbyists.  
 The Netherlands started the testing of ARACHNE and plans to bring ARACHNE into 
operation for the 2014 -2020 programming period.  
 In 20 15 the Agency of the Republic of Slovenia for Agricultural Markets and Rural 
Development (ARSKTRP) organised courses for all staff on combating fraud.  
                                                            
9  Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Germany, Estonia, Greece, Italy, Latvia, Luxembourg, Hungary, 
Netherlands, Austria, Portugal,  Romania, Slovenia, Slovakia.  
   
17 
  Luxembourg introduced a measure on declaration of conflicts of interests and 
whistleblowing in the agric ultural sector (EAGF and EAFRD) .    
 
2.3.5.  Corruption  
Thirteen Member States10 referred to single or packages of measures taken in order to 
eliminate corruption in the framework of other measures or national strategies 
(corruption, transparency measures, auditing procedures) and introduced specific 
measures to fight corruption in pu blic procurement.  
 Germany introduced several anti -corruption measures including  the entering into 
force of the Prevention of Corruption Law on 26 November 2015, an anti -fraud 
and anti -corruption strategy, including fraud risk assessment of all European 
Regional Development Fund measures, and guidelines for intermediate bodies 
combating fraud and corruption.   
 Estonia introduced a measure to raise awareness about corruption, including 
training for officials and a hotline for reporting suspicions anonymously.  
 Spain introduced a reform of the Penal Code to strengthen penalties for offences 
of corruption in public administration.  
 In May 2015 the Hungarian Government adopted the National Anti -Corruption 
Programme, which constitutes its anti -corruption strategy fo r a four -year period.  
 In Romania a strategy for integrity 2015 -2020 was adopted by the Ministry of 
Regional Development and Public Administration (MDRAP). This document 
introduces measures which aim to tackle certain problems and vulnerabilities that 
are specific to MDRAP’s areas of activity and competences, and offer solutions 
that provide a real and effective response.  
 The Civil Service Act (CSA) came into force on 1 January 2015 in the Czech 
Republic, including measures to prevent corruption in the public service. The 
Czech Republic also adopted a Government Resolution (418/2014) on Basic Anti -
Corruption Directions to g uide the government's fight against corruption.  
 Latvia approved on 16 July 2015 the Corruption Prevention and Combating 
Guidelines for 2015 -2020. This mid -term planning document describes the 
current situation of Latvia’s anticorruption policy, defines pr oblems and stipulates 
tasks to be executed by various state institutions, sets out the implementation time 
frame for individual assignments, and justifies the assignment and overall policy 
results to be expected within a certain period of time.  
2.3.6.  Measures Re ported Concerning Anti -Fraud Coordination Service (AFCOS)  
Twelve Member States11 reported measures concerning their Anti -Fraud Coordination 
Service (AFCOS). Some examples include:  
                                                            
10  Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, Estonia, Greece, Spain, Italy, Latvia, Romania, 
Slovenia, Slovakia, Finland.  
11  Bulgaria, Estonia, Greece, Spain, Croatia, Latvia, Malta, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Slovakia, 
Sweden.   
   
18 
  Estonia reported a measure covering all stages of the anti -fraud cycle aimed at 
improving the cooperation between implementers of support and the investigating 
authorities - regular joint seminars, which provide a place for sharing experiences, 
case studies.  
 The Greek General Secretariat against Corruption was designated as AFCOS. The 
Greek AFCOS a) cooperates with OLAF and all International and European 
Institutions and Organizations as well as the national competent authorities in the field 
of European Financial Interests and the fight against fraud b) coordinates 
administrative, inspectorate, law enforcement and judiciary authorities in the cases of 
suspected fraud, c) develops prevention policies and initiatives d) receives complaints 
for the EU (co) financed actions.   
 Bulgaria adopted a 2015 -2016 Action Plan for the implementati on of the National 
Strategy for the prevention of and fight against irregularities and fraud affecting the 
financial interests of the European Union, adopted by the Council of Ministers on 27 
May 2015. The Plan sets out measures for achieving the following  objectives 
contained in the Strategy: improvement of prevention; increasing the efficiency of the 
detection and counteraction of irregularities and fraud; strengthening cooperation with 
OLAF and the MS; increasing the efficiency of activities related to i nvestigation, 
recovery and imposing of penalties. A deadline, responsible authority and 
implementation indicator is given for each activity.  
 Spain granted legal status to the National Anti -Fraud Coordination Service (Servicio 
Nacional de Coordinación Antif raude - AFCOS).  
 In March 2015, the Swedish Ministry of Finance initiated an inquiry tasked with 
reviewing the legal situation regarding OLAF’s on -the-spot checks in Sweden, inter 
alia in order to bring it up -to-date with the present Multiannual Financial P erspective 
2014 -2020.  
 The Republic of Croatia adopted several AFCOS measures, namely: guidelines on 
management of irregularities for the period 2007 -2013 and 2014 -2020,  a protocol on 
cooperation and information exchange between the ministry of finance and  the 
ministry of the interior, and a protocol on cooperation between the ministry of finance 
and the state attorney in the context of protecting EU financial interests.  
 The Latvian AFCOS organized a seminar with the participation of OLAF to improve 
coopera tion for on -the-spot checks.  
 
2.3.7.  Measures to prevent organised crime  
Thirteen Member States12 reported sixteen measures to prevent organised crime.  
 Spain established an Office of Asset Recovery and Management. This is a new 
body, integrated into the General State Administration to assist the Judiciary, 
which is responsible for (1) locating, (2) recovering, (3) preserving, (4) 
                                                            
12  Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Greece, Spain, Italy, Latvia, Luxembourg, Hungary, Portugal, 
Romania, Slovenia, Finland.  
   
19 
 administering and (5) realising/disposing of effects, assets, instruments and profits 
from criminal activities committed as part of org anised crime.  
 Romania adopted Law No 318/2015 on the establishment, organisation and 
functioning of the National Agency for the administration of seized goods, which 
under the authority of the Ministry of Justice.  
 The Slovenian Ministry of the Interior (Police and the Police and Security 
Directorate) adopted annual guidelines for police work including identifying and 
investigating economic crime and organised forms of corruption.  
 The 2015 -2019 Greek Crime Policy Programme sets the strategic guidelines fo r 
the fight against Financial Crime and Organized Crime. The Programme includes 
specified objectives in the respective fields and constitutes a major priority of the 
Hellenic Police.  
 
2.3.8.  Fraud definition  
Ten Member States13 reported fourteen measures concernin g the definition of fraud. 
Examples include:  
 In Germany, the Anti -fraud and anti -corruption strategy, including fraud risk 
assessment of all European Regional Development Fund measures, and guidelines for 
intermediate bodies combating fraud and corruption,  included some clarifications on 
definitions.  
 Estonia clarified definitions during an AFCOS activity which involved improving the 
cooperation between implementers of support and the investigating authorities.  
 In Lithuania, The internal procedures of the Na tional Paying Agency under the 
Ministry of Agriculture were updated (the description of the procedure for transmitting 
information and receiving information from law -enforcement authorities), taking into 
account the Guidance Note of 26 February 2014 on Ant i-fraud Measures as foreseen 
in the context of Accreditation Criteria.  
 In Latvia, Cabinet regulations adopted regarding financial control of ETC 2014 -2020 
programmes and projects. The Ministry of Welfare of the Republic of Latvia approved 
Guidelines for fr aud prevention in FEAD and Guidelines for financial corrections in 
FEAD.  
 Luxembourg introduced a reporting procedure in case of suspected fraud (FEDER).  
 Portugal's 2015 -2017 Strategic Plan to combat tax and customs fraud and evasion 
included clarifications  of definitions.  
 Slovakia's National Strategy for the Protection of the European Union´s Financial 
Interests  included definitions  
 
                                                            
13  Belgium, Germany, Estonia, Greece, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Portugal, Slovenia and Slovakia.  
   
20 
 2.3.9.  Measures on the Protection of Whistle -blowers  
The ‘whistle -blowers’ area was marked in the responses of ten Member States14. 
Examples of the fourteen measures reported include:  
 In the Czech Republic, the Civil Service Act of 6/11/2014 included procedures to 
anonymise and protect whistle -blowers, as well as rules to process their reports.  
 In Lithuania the EU structural funds website, www.esinvesticijos.lt,  which 
publishes all information relating to the administration and use of EU structural 
funds of interest to project promoters, potential  applicants, EU structural fund 
administration authorities and the public, offers visitors the possibility of 
providing information anonymously on suspected cases  
 Romania applied procedures to report irregularities and protect whistle -blowers 
who report or  notify irregularities at the Ministry of European Funds.  
                                                            
14  Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Greece, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Portugal, Romania, 
Slovakia.  
   
21 
 2.4. Structured answers of 28 Member States – measures taken concerning the 
EXPENDITURE areas of the EU budget  
 
22 
  
SPF Finances: Cayman 
Tax. The Cayman tax is a 
tax charge on certain 
income from certain legal 
constructions, in the 
hands of Belgian 
individuals (and Belgian 
entities subject to legal 
entitites income tax. 1) Training of tax officers in anti-money-laundering 
measures.
2) Training given by an official in the Commission's 
DG AGRI to officers handling EAGF, EAFRD and 
ERDF cases in Wallonia on the prevention and 
detection of fraud in January 2015 and similar 
training in Flanders in October 2014. 3) L'Institut de 
formation judiciaire (the Judicial Training Institute) 
organised courses on 23.10.15 (in Dutch) and 
18.11.15 (in French) on economic and financial 
criminal law, specifically on the subject of 
laundering, aimed at magistrates in the public 
prosecutor's office and at headquarters.Strengthening frontline controls: 1) Customs: 
Modernisation of goods inspections through the 
use of advanced technologies and the 
computerisation of certain parts of the control 
process, e.g. reporting and internal 
communication. 2) ERDF Brussels-Capital 
Region: Recruitment of staff to strengthen 
checks on public procurement and the 
appropriate use of grants.  3) ERDF Flanders: 
Strengthening of double-checks.  4) ESF 
German-speaking community: Guide for ESF 
project promoters on the application of the 
procurement rules.1)Establishment  of Datamining Service  
within  Customs  Administration. In the 
Benelux, VAT carousel  fraud  has been a 
big  fraud  scheme since the 70s. Hereafter, 
this fraud  scheme is extended to  Europe 
because of the Maastricht Treaty  in  1993. 
This scheme is successfully combatted in  
Belgium by   means  of Social  Network 
Analysis.  This know   how  is transferred to 
Greece as  a project of the Belgian Special 
Tax   Inspectorate. 2) Analysis in preparation 
for the use of the ARACHNE IT programme 
for the 2014-2020 ERDF programming 
period in Wallonia.Circular No 11/2015 of 1.10.15 of the 
Collège des procureurs généraux (Board of 
Prosecutors-General) - public corruption, 
private corruption, embezzlement, unlawful 
taking of interest and misappropriation by a 
person holding public office: criminal policy, 
processing of cases and legal framework.
Public corruption cases should be treated 
as a matter of priority. The level of priority is 
assessed particularly in the light of the 
involvement of EU or international officials. 
Cases of corruption involving foreign public 
officials must be given special attention.
Anti-fraud cycleRecovery and Sanction Prevention; Detection; Investigation and ProsecutionPrevention; Detection; Investigation and 
ProsecutionPrevention; Detection Investigation and prosecution
 Measures New New New Administrative & Updated Operational New New
Scope of administrative measureRecovery General trainings and Fraud awareness trainings Eligiblity criteria and Management of fundsReorganisation of existing bodies; Competence 
and Fraud awareness trainingsReorganisation of existing bodies; Competence 
and Streamlining procedures
Scope of operational measureIT tools, Web reporting/Hotline, increased number 
of checks, other.IT tools; Risk indicators
Type of act  within administrative 
measureProgram act Decision/Resolution
    Reasons for administrative measurePrevent Belgian tax payers 
from hiding assets in foreign 
constructionTo clarify or consolidate existing  rules, to enhance 
existing measure
Organisational measure - expected 
results in terms of resources      Increased resources
Date of organisational measure 01/01/2015 01/01/2015 01/01/2015
Expected result of operational measure Enhanced information flow; Targeting of checks and 
Enhanced ex-ante controlsEnhanced coordination;Enhanced information 
flow;Targeting of checks, Enhanced information 
flow and Enhanced ex-ante controls
Operational measure - date 01/01/2015 01/01/2015
Sectoral or Horizontal Sectoral Sectoral Sectoral
Sectors concerned Revenue - Tax FraudRevenue - Tax Fraud; Expenditure - Agriculture; 
Expenditure - Fisheries; Expenditure - Cohesion policyExpenditure - Cohesion policyRevenue - Customs; Revenue - Tax Fraud; 
Expenditure - Cohesion policy.
Sectors addressed by measure against 
corruption in public procurement Public and Private sector  Public and Private sector
Other measures preventing corruption in 
public procurementMeasures to improve the effectiveness of 
prosecution - The circular sets out the criminal 
policy and gives practical guidelines for public 
prosecutors in order to promote efficient 
handling of cases involving public corruption, 
private corruption, embezzlement, unlawful 
taking of interest and misappropriation by a 
person holding public office.BELGIUM    (BE)
MEASURES
 
23 
 
2015-2016 Action plan for the implementation of the National 
strategy for the prevention of and fight against irregularities and 
fraud affecting the financial interests of the European Union, 
adopted by the Council of Ministers on 27 May 2015. The Plan 
sets out measures for achieving the following objectives contained 
in the Strategy:  improvement of prevention; increasing the 
efficiency of the detection and counteraction of irregularities and 
fraud; strengthening cooperation with OLAF and the MS;   
increasing the efficiency of activities related to investigation, 
recovery and imposing of penalties. A deadline, responsible 
authority and implementation indicator is given for each activity.Act on the management of European Structural 
and Investment Funds   The Act amending and supplementing the Customs 
ActThe Hercule III project ‘Increasing the administrative capacity of the 
National Revenue Agency for the prevention and investigation of fraud 
affecting the EU’s own resources system’. Four international seminars 
were held with the participation of 160 representatives of the tax and 
customs authorities of Bulgaria, Romania and Greece, along with OLAF 
and AFCOS, to exchange experience and discuss case studies from the 
fight against fraud. Steps have been taken to improve the interaction 
between administrations of MS in the Balkan region for the prevention 
and detection of fraud affecting the EU budget and national budgets.The Hercule III project ‘Increasing the administrative capacity of the National 
Revenue Agency for the prevention and investigation of fraud affecting the EU’s 
own resources system’. Four international seminars were held with the 
participation of 160 representatives of the tax and customs authorities of 
Bulgaria, Romania and Greece, along with OLAF and AFCOS, to exchange 
experience and discuss case studies from the fight against fraud. Steps have 
been taken to improve the interaction between administrations of MS in the 
Balkan region for the prevention and detection of fraud affecting the EU budget 
and national budgets.
Anti-fraud cyclePrevention; Detection; Investigation and prosecution; Recovery 
and sanctionPrevention; Detection; Recovery and sanctionPrevention; Detection; Investigation and 
prosecution; Recovery and sanctionPrevention; Detection and Recovery and sanction Prevention; Detection; Investigation and prosecution; Recovery and sanction
 Measures New New Amendment Amendment New
Package of measuresOrganisational and Operational Legislative Legislative Legislative Organisational
Competences; Powers; Financial penalties; 
Other administrative penalties and Criminal 
sanctionsCompetences; Powers; Recovery;  Financial 
penalties; Other administrative penalties and 
Criminal sanctions
*Criminal sanctions: more (they have been 
increased)*Criminal sanctions: more (they have been 
increased)
Reorganisation of existing bodies; Competence; Inter-agency 
cooperation; General trainings; Fraud awareness trainings and 
Simpification of procedures
OTHER: The plan provides for the organisation of the 
preparation by the competent national authorities of new 
regulations to enhance efficiency in the fight against fraud 
affecting the financial interests of the EU, and a number of 
other activities implementing the objectives of the National 
Strategy
Scope of operational 
measureIT tools (IT data feeding, other IT); Web reporting/Hotline; 
Flagging practice; Risk indicators; Increased number of checks; 
Structured cooperation with law enforcement and with judicial 
authorities
Expected result of 
operational measureEnhanced coordination; Enhanced cooperation; Enhanced 
information flow; Targeting of checks; Targeting of 
investigations; Enhanced ex-ante controls and Enhanced ex-
post controls 
Expected result of 
organisational  measure: 
resourcesIncreased resources Neutral on resources
Legislative Act - date 22/12/2015 07/08/2015 04/12/2015
Date 27/05/2015 26/10/2015
Legislation - type of Act Law/Act Law/Act Law/Act
Nature of the measure Horizontal Sectoral Sectoral Sectoral Sectoral
Sectors concerned Expediture-Agriculture; Expediture-Fisheries 
and Expediture-Cohesion policyRevenue-Customs; Revenue-Tax fraudRevenue-Tax fraud; Expediture-Agriculture; Expediture-Fisheries and 
Expediture-Cohesion policyRevenue-Customs; Revenue-Tax fraudLegislative Act - numberThe Act on the management of European 
Structural and Investment Funds has been 
adopted by the National Assembly and was 
published in State Gazette No 
101 of 22.12.2015Scope of organisational 
measure 
The Act amending the Customs Act has been 
adopted by the National Assembly and was 
published in State Gazette No 60 of 7.8.2015ZID DOPK has been adopted by the National Assembly and was 
published in State Gazette No 94 of 04.12.2015   Brief description of the 
legislative measureThe Act on the management of European 
Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) lays 
down the national institutional framework for 
the management and control of ESIF funding, 
consolidates the legislation basis for their 
management, and provides for administrative 
liability for infringements. The Act regulates 
the provision of a grant under an 
administrative contract and the interrelation 
of the various authorities and beneficiaries in 
the implementation of projects, the 
verification and certification of expenditure, 
the execution of payments,the administration 
of irregularities and financial correctionsThe Act amending the Customs Act was drawn up 
with a view to aligning national legislation with 
EU customs legislation and fine-tuning the 
practical application of the provisions of the Act.  
The Act provides for the exchange of information 
between the Customs Agency and the Ministry of 
the Interior, strengthens penalties for cigarette 
smuggling, and increases the powers of customs 
officials to prevent, detect and tackle crime in 
respect of VAT obligations on imports and excise 
duties.  Controls were extended that aim at the 
prevention and detection of infringements of 
customs and excise legislationThe ZID DOPK increases the number of bodies with the right of access 
to tax and social security information: OLAF, in connection with 
administrative investigations;  the customs authorities, in exercise of 
their powers;  the Finance Minister, in the course of legal or 
arbitration proceedings.  The Act speeds up the process of collecting 
public and private State receivables in connection with requests from 
bodies managing EU funds, in the context of activities of the National 
Revenue Agency aimed at preventing and countering irregularities 
and fraud affecting the EU budget and the national budget  Reasons for legislative 
measureTo clarify or consolidate existing rules and To 
enforce the rules in line with developments in 
EU lawTo clarify or consolidate existing rules; To remedy 
flaws and To enforce the rules in line with 
developments in EU lawTo clarify or consolidate existing rules; To remedy flaws and To 
enforce the rules in line with developments in EU law Inter-agency cooperation; General trainings and Fraud awareness trainings BULGARIA (BG)
MEASURES
Scope of legislative 
measure Competences; Powers and  Recovery
 
24 
   
Amendment  of Public Procurement Act No. 40./2015 Coll.  
and the  amendment  Act. No. 375/2015 Coll.  This Act 
was   amended  in  compliance with the  Directive  
No.2014/24/EU.  Act No. 340/2015  Coll., on   Contract 
Register (adopted 14.12.2015), which place  the  duty on   
public bodies to  publish every contract  exceeding a value 
of 50   000CZK.  It will come   into effect in June 2016 and 
the  first contract  will  be published in 2017, from then 
concerned contracts  will  be valid after  being published.Civil Service Act  (CSA) -The  CSA is the first law of this  
type in the Czech Republic. It was   adopted in  2014, 
but it came  into effect on   1st  of January 2015. It 
covers  whole agenda of public service,  including 
corruption in public service  and connected topics. It  is 
a single legislative measure, but as a result of its  
implementation, different measures have been taken. By  
adopting this Act the  Czech Republic has fulfilled the 
obligation to professionalise the public service  placed 
on   it by   the EU.   Adoption of the Joint  Declaration of the Customs  Administration of 
the Visegrad  Group (V4)  countries on   18th  September 2015 on   
introduction risk profiles concerning textile and footwear  products  
from Asian countries (Trenčín Declaration).  The   Declaration was   
signed after  negotiations  during the  years  2014 and 2015 to  
respond the  need of common   solution between V4 countries. 
Stipulated measures of the Joint  Declaration came  into effect on 
1st  January 2016. Customs Administration  of the  Czech Republic 
created necessary risk  profiles  and adjusted its internal rules.Government  Resolution  No. 418/2014 on   Basic Anti-
Corruption Directions  on   the Governmental Level  sets-up  
the  main direction  of the government in the fight against 
corruption. Government  Resolution  No. 1057/2014 on   
The   Government Anti-Corruption Conception for  the  
Years 2015 to  2017 and the  Anti-Corruption Action Plan 
for  2015 is strongly  connected to  them. There is  also the 
Action plan for  2016 adopted by   Government  Resolution  
No. 1033/2015 on   14th  December 2015.The   Act No. 86/2015  Coll., that came  into effect on   
1.6.2015, stipulated  new measures concerning  confiscation  of 
the offenders'  property in connection with causing financial  
damage to  the  EU.   More   specifically, when   the offenders 
are not using the EU  money  for the specified  purposes that  
were stipulated in the legal  agreement. The   Section 70   of 
the  Act was   amended, which introduced  in case of gained 
illegal profit by   perpetrators,  the obligatory confiscation of the 
property in each case.
Anti-fraud cycle Prevention Prevention and Detection Prevention and Detection Prevention Prevention; Recovery and sanction
 Measures New and Updated/Amendment New New Updated/Amendment New and Updated/Amendment
Competences; Powers and Definition of a 
specific topic
OTHER: The CSA covers large scale of activity  of 
public sector, including stability and 
professionality of public service
Scope of 
operational 
measureIT tools ('IT date feeding', Other IT) and Risk indicators
Expected result 
of operational 
measureEnhanced coordination; Cooperation and Information 
Flow; Targeting of checks and Targeting of investigations
Legislative Act - 
Date06/03/2015 06/11/201404/06/2014 01/06/2015
Operational  - 
date18/09/2015
Legislation - 
Type of ActLaw/Act Law/Act Decision Law/Act
Nature of the 
measureHorizontal Horizontal Sectoral Horizontal Horizontal
Sectors 
concerned by the 
operational 
measure Revenue - Customs and Tax Fraud
Corruption within  
public 
procurementPublic sector (including political sphere) and 
private sectorPublic sector (including political sphere) Public sector (including political sphere)
Mesures taken in 
the fight against 
corruption in 
public 
procurementAddressing transparency in public procurementTo prevent corruption amongst personnel, 
including management and it is not directly 
connected to corruption in public procurementAddresing transparency in public procurement and 
to improve the effectiveness of management of 
public procurement and to prevent corruption 
amongst personnel, including managementAct No. 86/2015  Coll.Brief description 
of the legislative 
measureNew  Act will  replace the current  Public 
Procurement  Act 137/2006  Coll., by
April  2016.To  implement Section  205 d)  of  the  Civil  
Service  Act,  which impose the  duty on 
government to clarify the topic of protection of 
whistleblowers working under the CSA,   the 
following was   adopted: Government  
Regulation  No. 145/2015 Coll., on   the  
measures related  to reporting suspicion of 
committing the offense in the service office. It  
deals with the possibilities  of  anonymizing 
whistleblowers, their  protection and setting  
up   rules on   how  to process their reports1) The   Conception describes in detail  the 
propositions embedded  in the Basic Directions  
and aims to  define  governmental anti-corruption 
policy limits,  in particular  specify effective 
instruments, formulate basic content of one-year 
anti-corruption  action plans and define its 
institutional framework.
2) The   Action Plans present  a coherent  and 
particular  expression of the Government  anti-
corruption policy.  It stipulates key measures of  
both legislative and non-legislative  nature,  which 
will  be implemented by   the Government in  
upcoming yearThe   Act No. 86/2015  Coll., amended the  Act No. 
141/1961 Coll., Code  of Criminal Procedure.  There is  
a wider possibility  to use the judicial  seizure 
(securing) of the offender's  property as to safeguard 
the rights  of the injured party stipulated  in Section 
47  (Securing a victim‘s claim) of the Code of  Criminal  
Procedure  (this  can include claims of managing 
authorities and similar bodies distributing  the 
resources from the  EU  funds
Legislative Act - 
numberAct No. 40/2015 Coll.  and Act No. 375/2015 Coll.  
(amendment of  Act No.
137/2006 Coll.  (Public  Procurement Act),  Act 
No. 340/2015 Coll.,  (on Contract
Register)Act.  No. 234/2014 Coll.Government  Resolution No. 418/2014  and  
Government Resolution  No. 1057/2014 and
Government  Resolution  No. 1033/2015To clarify or consilidate existing rules and to remedy 
flawsCzech Republic  (CZ)
MEASURES
Scope of 
legislative 
measure Competences and Definition of a specific topic Definition of a specific topic Recovery
  Reasons for 
legislative 
measureTo clarify or consilidate existing rules; remedy 
flaws and to enforce the rules in line with 
developments in EU lawTo clarify or consilidate existing rules and 
enforce the rules in line with developments in 
EU lawTo clarify or consilidate existing rules; remedy 
flaws and enforce the rules in line with 
developments in EU law
 
25 
  
Demark adopted an anti-fraud policy for the 
European Regional Development Fund and 
the European Social Fund which was 
launched in 2015 on the Danish Business 
Authority's website to foster a culture that is 
not conducive to fraud and to promote fraud 
prevention and detection. The policy is 
issued to all aid recipients when they are 
granted an EU cofinancing contract.Draft for case handlers in the managing 
authority and certifying authority to create 
increased awareness of fraud indicatorsInternal coordination of cases where there is a 
suspicion of fraud – uniform decision process 
for cases where there is a suspicion of fraud, 
and gathering of experience and knowledge at 
the central unit.Fight against fraud by setting up the Anti-
fraud Office for all areas dealt with by 
SKAT. The Office's main objective is to 
analyse trends and new areas of fraud 
with a view to uncovering and fighting 
fraud.All officials working on case handling and payment of 
aid requests under the Common Agricultural Policy 
will have to sign declarations of no conflict of interest. 
The official's line manager reviews rules on conflict of 
interest when officials are appointed and during 
annual assessments. Officials consequently 
undertake not to handle cases with which they have 
any personal or economic connection.
Anti-fraud cycle Fraud prevention  Detection  Detection Prevention; Detection Prevention
 Measures New New New New New
Scope of 
administrative 
measureManagement of funds; Irregularities 
reportingMonitoring/desk checks
Scope of 
organisational 
measureCompetence Reorganisation of existing bodies
Scope of operational 
measureInternal coordination of cases where 
there is a suspicion of fraud – uniform 
decision process for cases where there is 
a suspicion of fraud, and gathering of 
experience and knowledge at the central 
unit.
Type of act  within 
administrative 
measureCircular; Instructions; Guidelines; 
ManualsCircular, Instructiions, Gudielines, Manuals.
    Reasons for 
administrative 
measureTo clarify or consolidate existing rules To clarify or consolidate existing rules
Organisational 
measure - expected 
results in terms of 
resources      Neutral Increased resources
Date of organisational 
measure16/12/2015 25/09/2015
Expected result of 
operational measureEnhanced coordination and Enhanced ex-
post controls
Operational measure - 
date07/05/2015
Sectoral or Horizontal Sectoral Sectoral Sectoral Sectoral Sectoral
Sectors concerned Expenditure -Cohesion policy  Expenditure - Cohesion policy Expenditure - Cohesion policy  Revenue - Tax Fraud Expenditure - Agriculture
Sectors addressed by 
measure against 
corruption in public 
procurementPublic sector (including political sphere)
Other measures 
preventing corruption 
in public procurementThe arrangement prevents corruption in 
relation to applications for payment of aid 
and does not concern public procurement.DENMARK   (DK)
MEASURES
 
26 
 
Working group for the federal government and 
federal state paying agents for fraud prevention in 
the agricultural sector. Preparation of guidance for 
the federal government and federal state paying 
agents for implementing fraud guidelines in the 
agricultural sector. In many countries, this guidance 
will also be applied within the context of fraud 
prevention in the fisheries sector (European 
Maritime and Fisheries Fund, EMFF).On 26  November 2015, the Prevention of Corruption 
Law (Gesetz zur Bekämpfung  der Korruption) 
entered into force in Germany (see BGBl. I [Federal 
Law Gazette] No 46, page 2025 et seq.). This 
resulted in changes to the German Criminal Code 
(Strafgesetzbuch, StGB) in the area of corruption 
offences inter alia. Conducting a self-assessment and 
developing a strategy for proportionate anti-
fraud measures in accordance with Article 
125(4), (c) of Regulation (EU) No 
1303/2013. Anti-fraud and anti-corruption strategy, 
including fraud risk assessment of all 
European Regional Development Fund 
measures, and guidelines for intermediate 
bodies combating fraud and corruption.Self-assessment of the risks of fraud and 
corruption in the ERDF Saarland 2014 - 
2020 operational programme.
Anti-fraud cyclePrevention and Detection Investigation and prosecution PreventionPrevention; Detection; Investigation 
and prosecution and Recovery and 
sanctionPrevention
 MeasuresNew Administrative Amendment Legislative Update AdministrativeNew Administrative and Update 
OperationalNew and Up-date (Administrative 
and Operational)
Criminal sanctions
*Criminal sanctions: new (indicates that no 
sanctions were foreseen before)
Monitoring/desk checks & On the spot 
checks & Investigation 
OTHER: Coordination of measures in the 
area of fraud prevention.
Competence; Inter- agency 
cooperation
OTHER:Risk assessment in the areas 
of: selection by the managing 
authority, implementation of the 
programme and auditing of activities, 
certificates and payments as well as 
direct procurement by the managing 
authorities
To clarify or consolidate existing rulesCross-cutting measure, multi-agency 
measure/measure with impact on 
OTHER: Coordination of a uniform 
application of measures in the area of fraud 
Prevention*Cross-cutting measure:Taking into 
account all the authorities and bodies 
involved in the shared management 
of federal government-ESF funds, a 
self-assessment for investigating the 
potential risks faced and a strategy 
Expected result of 
operational measureEnhnced coordination; Enhanced 
information flow and Targeting of 
checks Enhanced information flow; 
Targeting of checks; Trageting of 
investigations and Enhanced ex-post 
controls
Expected result of 
organisational  
measure: resourcesNeutral on resources
Type of act within 
administrative 
measureCirculaire/Circular, Instructions, Guidelines, 
ManualsRecommendationCirculaire/Circular, Instructions, 
Guidelines, Manuals
Expected result of 
organisational  
measure: resources
Brief description of the 
legislative measureThe term ‘European official’ was introduced 
into German criminal law. Both taking bribes 
and accepting advantages from and giving 
bribes and advantages to European officials 
Legislative Act - 
numberPrevention of Corruption Law (see BGB1. I No 
46, page 2025 et seq.) 
Legislative Act - date 26/11/2015
Date 30/11/2015 14/08/2015
Legislation - type of 
ActLaw/Act
Nature of the measure Sectoral Horizontal Sectoral Horizontal Sectoral
Sectors concerned Expediture- Agriculture and Expediture-
FisheriesExpenditure-Cohesion policy Expenditure-Cohesion policy
Corruption within PP Public sector (including political sphere)Public sector (including political 
sphere) and Private sectorPublic sector (including political 
sphere) and Private sector
Mesures taken in the 
fight against 
corruption in PPOTHER: Prevention by extending the Criminal 
Code to cover such cases.Measures to prevent corruption 
amongst personnel, including 
management and Measures to 
improve the effectiveness of control 
and auditMeasures to improve the 
effectiveness of management og the 
PP; Measures to prevent corruption 
amongst personnel, including 
management and Measures to 
improve the efftectiveness of control 
and auditGERMANY (DE)
MEASURES
Scope of legislative 
measure 
Scope of 
administrative 
measure Managment of fundsMonitoring/desk checks & On the 
spot checks & Audit checklist and 
Recovery
Scope of 
organisational 
measure 
Scope of operational 
measureRisk indicators
 Reasons for 
legislative measureOTHER:In order to implement Articles 5, 9 
and 11 of the Council of Europe's Criminal 
Law Convention on Corruption (ETS No 173), 
a more comprehensive treatment than 
before was given to the sanctioning of the 
taking and giving of bribes involving foreign 
and international officials, as well as other 
employees, judges and soldiers.  In this 
context,the criminal offences of taking and 
giving bribes were also extended to cover 
European officials, which went beyond the 
existing German legal requirements (Sections 
331 and 333 StGB).
Reasons of 
administrative 
measureTo clarify or consolidate existing rules 
and To enhance existing measureIT tools ('IT data feeding', Other IT); 
Web reporting/Hotline and Risk 
indicators
 
27 
  
AFCOS activity: improving the cooperation 
between implementers of support and the 
investigating authorities - regular joint 
seminars, which provide a place for sharing 
experiences, case studies.Raising awareness of corruption: 1) training 
undertakings, local government officials and the 
public; 2) opening a hotline, so that public 
procurement and other problems can be passed on 
anonymously.Fraud risk assessment - developing the risk 
management systems in the implementing 
bodies and managing authority.Tax area: implementing the VATSUM 
system (VAT returns, automatic comparison 
of transactions over EUR 1 000 and the 
person's background) to facilitate the work 
of the inspectors.
Anti-fraud cycleFraud prevention; Fraud detection; 
Fraud investigation and prosecution; 
Recovery and Sanctionfraud preventionFraud prevention; Fraud detection; 
Fraud investigation and prosecution; 
Recovery and SanctionDetection; Investigation and 
prosecution; Recovery and sanction
 Measures Up-date Update Update New
Scope of 
organisational 
measure Competence; Inter-agency 
cooperation; General trainings; Fraud 
awareness trainings; Simplification of 
procedures; Improvement of 
coooperationCompetenceCompetence; Inter-agency cooperation; 
General trainings; Fraud awareness 
trainings, Simplification of procedures
Scope of operational 
measureWeb reporting/Hotline; Risk indicators; 
Integrity and transparency measureIT tools; Flagging practice; Risk 
indicators; Structured cooperation with 
law enforcementIT tools; Flagging practice; Risk 
indicators
Type of act  within 
administrative 
measure
    Reasons for 
administrative 
measure
Organisational 
measure - expected 
results in terms of 
resources      Neutral Neutral Neutral
Date of organisational 
measure15/11/2015 30/11/2015 15/10/2015
Expected result of 
operational measureEnhanced information flowTargeting of checks; Enhanced ex-ante 
controlsEnhanced information flow;Targeting 
of checks and Targeting of 
investigations
Operational measure - 
date15/10/2015 01/04/2014
Sectoral or Horizontal Horizontal Horizontal Sectoral Sectoral
Sectors concernedExpenditure - Agriculture; Expenditure - 
Cohestion policyRevenue - Customs; Revenue - Tax 
Fraud; 
Sectors addressed by 
measure against 
corruption in public 
procurement Public and Private sector
Other measures 
preventing corruption 
in public procurementMeasures addressing transparency in public 
procurement; Measures to prevent 
corruption amonst personnel, including 
management; Measrues addressing 
transparency of companies participating in 
puiblic procurementESTONIA   (EE)
MEASURES
 
28 
  
The   introduction  of National Law, namely  Statutory  Instrument No. 93   of 2015, 
European  Union (Direct Support  Rural  Development Schemes) Offences  and 
Control Regulations  2015. The   Statutory Instrument sets  out the powers of 
authorised officers  and details offences and penalty provisions in relation  to 
measures funded by   the EAFRD co-funded  Rural  Development Programme.Taxation - VAT reverse charge for supplies of electricity and gas  and electricity and gas  
certificates. The   reverse  charge makes  the recipient rather that the supplier liable  to account 
for the VAT on   supplies.  This ensures that  the opportunity to generate significant  false  
repayment claims  in
the sector is eliminated.VAT - Publication of cancellation of VAT number and  notification to suppliers of cancellation  of a VAT 
number.    Where it is necessary for the protection of the  revenue the  Revenue Commissioners may  
publish the fact  that  a persons VAT number  has been cancelled  and may  advise that  person's 
supplier of the fact.
Anti-fraud cycleFraud prevention; Fraud detection; Fraud investigation and prosecution; Recovery and Sanction Prevention Prevention
 MeasuresNew legislation New legislation New legislation
Scope of legislationPowers; Financial penalties; (new) Criminal sanctions Alternative VAT accounting Powers
    Reasons for legislative measure To clarify or consolidate existing rules; To enforce the rules in line with developments in EU law To  bring optional anti-fraud  measures in  the VAT Directive  into  domestic legislation. To  prevent the fraudulent  use of VAT numbers to  acquire  goods VAT free.
Breif description of the 
legislative measureThe   legislative measure takes  the  form of a Statutory  Instrument (SI)  which was   signed into Irish  
Law  on   3rd  March 2015.  The   SI sets  out the powers of authorised officers  engaged in carrying 
out inspections on   projects  and beneficiaries funded under the  European Agricultural Fund for  
Rural Development Programme, Axis  3  and Axis  4 
Taxation - VAT reverse charge for supplies of electricity and gas  and electricity and gas  certificates. The   
reverse  charge makes  the recipient rather than the supplier liable  to account for the VAT on   supplies.  This 
ensures that  the opportunity to generate significant  false  repayment claims  in the sector is eliminated.
 
Where a  VAT number has  been cancelled, the Revenue Commissioners  may, for the protection  of the Exchequer, 
notify the person's suppliers of the cancellation of the person's VAT number and  may  also publish the fact that the 
number  has been cancelled.
Legislation - Type of Act Law/Act Law/Act Law/Act
Legislative Act - number S. I. No. 93 of 2015 Finance Bill 2015 Finance Bill 2015
Legislative Act - date 03/03/2015 22/10/2015 22/10/2015
Sectoral or Horizontal Sectoral Sectoral Sectoral
Sectors concerned Expenditure - Agriculture Revenue - Tax Fraud Revenue - Tax FraudIRELAND    (IE)
MEASURES
 
29 
  
ESTABLISHMENT OF THE GENERAL SECRETARIAT AGAINST 
CORRUPTION/DESIGNATION OF THE GREEK AFCOS
The responsibilities of the General Secretariat Against Corruption 
(ΓΕ.Γ.ΚΑ.Δ.) involve ensuring the effectiveness of the national anti -
corruption strategy, focusing on the coordination of the control bodies and 
the effectiveness of their actions, and providing relevant guidelines and 
recommendations. It has been designated as the competent authority for 
the coordination of the fight against fraud (AFCOS). It develops coordinated 
action programmes and monitors their implementation through the audit 
and enforcement mechanisms and the administrative bodies.PROCEDURES FOR THE PREVENTION AND FIGHT AGAINST 
FRAUD IN THE MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL SYSTEM (MCS) 
of the NSRF 2014-2020.
Provision is made for the following procedures under the 
MCS: i) 'fraud risk assessment', based on the EU fraud risk 
assessment tool, ii) the examination of indications of fraud 
and a report of suspicions of fraud, where an irregularity 
involving dolus eventualis is detected, iii) preventive controls 
and checks to prevent and detect irregularities, including 
those which show evidence of fraud, and iv) complaints.CRIME POLICY PROGRAMME (Hellenic Policy)                 In 
the 2015-2019 Crime Policy Programme (a text that 
establishes the strategic guidelines), the fight against 
financial crime is one of the main priorities of the Hellenic 
Police, for which special objectives are set CREATION OF MOBILE CONTROL UNITS by Decision of the 
Secretariat -General for Public Revenue (GGDE ) (Δ.ΟΡΓ.Α. 
1094448 ΕΞ2015/10-7-15, Government Gazette Β 1574/27 July 
2015)ADOPTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE MEASURES IN THE FRAMEWORK OF THE RDA 
NATIONAL ACTION PLAN 
The measure aims to lower the error rate in the Rural Development Programme, in 
accordance with which an improvement in the project selection procedures in the 
public works measures of the RDP has been introduced, involving the use of 
comparative assessment and of programmed cyclical restricted invitations, instead 
of the direct assessment applied in the 2007-2013 programming period. It should be 
noted that the above-mentioned improved procedure has been included in the 
relevant measures of the approved 2014-2020 RDP
Anti-fraud cyclePrevention and DetectionPrevention; Detection; Investigation and prosecution 
and Recovery and sanctionPrevention; Detection and Investigation and 
prosecutionPrevention; Detection and Investigation and 
prosecutionPrevention
 MeasuresNew and Amendment Legislation; New Organisational and New 
OperationalNew and Update Update Admninistrative and Update Organisational  New Organisational and New Operational New and Update 
Package of 
measuresLegislative; Organisational and Operational Administrative Admninistrative and Organisational Organisational and Operational Administrative
Eligibility criteria;Monitoring/desk checks; On the spot 
checks;  Investigation; Irregularities reporting; 
Recovery Monitoring/desk checks; On the spot checks; 
Investigation
OTHER:Since the measure concerns all the 
procedures of the Management and Control System, 
in addition to the above fields, it also covers the 
assessment of fraud risks (composition of assessment 
teams and internal cooperation network), preventive 
checks on procurement approvals and allocation 
approvals and amendment of the legal obligation, all 
the checks by the Managing Authorities of the 
Programmes and inspection by the Certifying 
Authority, and also investigating any evidence of fraud 
and complaintsOTHER:Specific objectives: to combat the illegal 
subsidies taken from national and European 
resources, fraud with regard to tax evasion, 
international fraud, the smuggling of petroleum and 
tobacco products and the illegal handling of 
counterfeit goods and copyright products. In order to 
achieve these objectives, individual actions are taken: 
cooperation with the Ministry of Economic Affairs in 
the field of the collection and analysis of data on 
financial fraud and fraud associated with tax evasion, 
cooperation and joint action with the Financial and 
Economic Crime Unit (SDOE) and informing the 
Commission on money laundering (FIU) where 
applicable
Scope of 
operational 
measureWeb reporting/Hotline; Increased number of checks; Structured 
cooperation with law enforcement; Structured cooperation with 
judicial authoritiesWeb reporting/Hotline; Increased number of checks
 To clarify or consolidate existing rules;To enhance existing measure
Expected result 
of operational 
measureEnhanced coordination; Enhanced cooperation; Enhanced 
information flow; Targeting of checks; Targeting of investigations; 
Enhanced ex-ante controls; Enhanced ex-post controls                                                                              
OTHER:Removal of legislative overlaps.Enhanced coordination; Targeting of checks; Targeting 
of investigations; Enhanced ex-ante controls; Enhanced 
ex-post controls                                                                              
Expected result 
of 
organisational  Increased resources Neutral on resources Increased resources
Type of act 
within 
administrative 
measureCirculaire/circular, Instructions; Guidelines; Manuals Circulaire/circular, Instructions; Guidelines; Manuals Action planGREECE (GR)
MEASURES
Scope of 
legislative 
measure Competences and Powers
OTHER: Project selection procedures
Scope of 
organisational 
measure Reorganisation of existing bodies; Competence; Inter- agency 
cooperation; Fraud awareness trainings; Simplification of 
procedures Inter- agency cooperation; General trainings Reorganisation of existing bodies and CompetenceScope of 
administrative 
measure 
 Reasons for 
legislative 
measureTo clarify or consolidate existing rules; To remedy flaws
 and To enforce the rules in line with developments in EU law
Reasons of 
administrative 
measureOTHER: The need to introduce the above procedures 
for the prevention and fight against fraud in the MCS 
of the new 2014-2020 programming period results 
from both the European institutional framework, which 
raises the issue of fraud as an obligation on the 
Member States and the Managing Authorities, and 
from the National Strategy Against Fraud in the 
structural actions and the related action plan 
implemented. The MCS is addressed to the Managing 
Authorities and the Certifying Authority and 
constitutes the regulatory framework governing the 
implementation of the operational programmes for 
2014-2020.To clarify or consolidate existing  rules and  To 
enhance existing  measure
 
30 
  
ESTABLISHMENT OF THE GENERAL SECRETARIAT AGAINST 
CORRUPTION/DESIGNATION OF THE GREEK AFCOS
The responsibilities of the General Secretariat Against Corruption (ΓΕ.Γ.ΚΑ.Δ.) 
involve ensuring the effectiveness of the national anti-corruption strategy, 
focusing on the coordination of the control bodies and the effectiveness of their 
actions, and providing relevant guidelines and recommendations. It has been 
designated as the competent authority for the coordination of the fight against 
fraud (AFCOS). It develops coordinated action programmes and monitors their 
implementation through the audit and enforcement mechanisms and the 
administrative bodies.PROCEDURES FOR THE PREVENTION AND FIGHT AGAINST 
FRAUD IN THE MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL SYSTEM (MCS) of 
the NSRF 2014-2020.
Provision is made for the following procedures under the MCS: 
i) 'fraud risk assessment', based on the EU fraud risk 
assessment tool, ii) the examination of indications of fraud and 
a report of suspicions of fraud, where an irregularity involving 
dolus eventualis is detected, iii) preventive controls and checks 
to prevent and detect irregularities, including those which show 
evidence of fraud, and iv) complaints.CRIME POLICY PROGRAMME (Hellenic Policy)                 In the 
2015-2019 Crime Policy Programme (a text that establishes 
the strategic guidelines), the fight against financial crime is 
one of the main priorities of the Hellenic Police, for which 
special objectives are set CREATION OF MOBILE CONTROL UNITS by Decision of the 
Secretariat -General for Public Revenue (GGDE ) (Δ.ΟΡΓ.Α. 
1094448 ΕΞ2015/10-7-15, Government Gazette Β 1574/27 July 
2015)ADOPTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE MEASURES IN THE FRAMEWORK OF THE RDA 
NATIONAL ACTION PLAN 
The measure aims to lower the error rate in the Rural Development Programme, in 
accordance with which an improvement in the project selection procedures in the public 
works measures of the RDP has been introduced, involving the use of comparative 
assessment and of programmed cyclical restricted invitations, instead of the direct 
assessment applied in the 2007-2013 programming period. It should be noted that the 
above-mentioned improved procedure has been included in the relevant measures of 
the approved 2014-2020 RDP
Brief description of the 
legislative measureThe General Secretariat Against Corruption was established pursuant 
to Article 6 of Law 4320/2015 (Government Gazette Α 29/19 March 
2015) and is a public service under the competent Deputy Minister for 
Justice, Transparency and Human Rights, in accordance with 
Presidential Decrees 71 and 73/15. It is defined as the competent 
authority for coordinating the fight against fraud (AFCOS), in 
accordance with Article 325 of the Treaty on European Union and 
within the meaning of Article 3(4) of Regulation (EU, EURATOM) No 
883/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 
September 2013.
Legislative Act - numberLaw 4320/2015 (Government Gazette Α 29/19 March 2015)
Law 4325/2015 (Government Gazette Α 47/11 May 2015)
Legislative Act - date 19/03/2015
Date Organisational: 19/03/2015 Operational: 19/03/2015 Organisational: 12/12/2014 Organisationa and Operational: 01/10/2015
Legislation - type of Act Law/Act
Nature of the measure Horizontal Sectoral Horizontal Sectoral Sectoral
Sectors concerned Expenditure - Cohesion policy Revenue -Customs and Revenue- Tax fraud Expenditure Agriculture
Corruption within PP Public sector (including political sphere)
Mesures taken in the fight 
against corruption in PPMeasures to improve the effectiveness of control and audit                                                                                   
OTHER: Since its inception, the General Secretariat Against 
Corruption has worked in close cooperation with the Single Public 
Procurement Authority on matters concerning corruption and fraud. 
This authority processes legislation for public procurement, 
transposing the relevant EU Directives
CommentsADDITIONAL MEASURES: Within its area of competence, the General 
Secretariat Against Corruption carries out the operational control of the 
Financial Police, the Financial and Economic Crime Unit, the internal control 
departments of the Ministries, and the  
Health and Welfare Services Inspectorate, and coordinates and supervises 
their activity, setting the priorities for their control activities and entrusting to 
them the performance of coordinated or individual checks and, together with 
the jointly responsible Ministers, appointing the SDOE Special Secretary and 
the Heads of the Services referred to in this Article.
In the above context, mixed audit teams have been created with the 
participation of the Financial Police, the SDOE, the Coast Guard, the customs 
authorities and the Directorate for Internal Affairs of the Secretariat-General 
for Public Revenue under the coordination of the General Secretariat Against 
Corruption.GREECE (GR) (continue) 
MEASURES
 
31 
 
Establishment of the Office of Asset Recovery 
and Management.  This is a new body, 
integrated into the General State Administration 
to assist the Judiciary, which is responsible for 
(1) locating, (2) recovering, (3) preserving, (4) 
administering and (5) realising/disposing of 
effects, assets, instruments and profits from 
criminal activities committed as part of 
organised crime.Reform of the Penal Code to strengthen 
penalties for offences of corruption in public 
administration.Conclusion of the Cooperation Agreement 
between the General State Audit Body 
(Intervención General de la Administración del 
Estado - IGAE) and the General Council of 
Notaries (Consejo General del Notariado - 
CGN). The Agreement aims to allow the IGAE 
access to the CGN's database, which contains 
information regarding all transactions recorded 
by notarial deed in Spain.  This information 
may be used by the IGAE to perform its duties 
of inspecting and fighting against fraud, at both 
national level and with respect to the financial 
interests of the EU.Granting of legal status to the National 
Anti-Fraud Coordination Service 
(Servicio Nacional de Coordinación 
Antifraude - AFCOS).Strengthening of the ex ante checks carried 
out by IGAE bodies to physically verify the 
effective completion of works, services and 
acquisitions financed by public funds and to 
check whether they match the content of 
the corresponding contract or order.
Anti-fraud cycle Recovery and Sanction Recovery and Sanction  Investigation and Prosecution Prevention; Detection Fraud detection
 Measures New legislation Amendment New New legislation Amendment
Scope of legislation Recovery(more) Criminal sanctions, Time 
barring  (more)Competences Control mechanisms
 Reasons for legislative 
measureTo remedy flaws To remedy flawsTo clarify or consolidate existing 
rules; To remedy flawsTo clarify or consolidate existing 
rules; To remedy flaws
Breif description of the 
legislative measureThe main aim of this measure is (1) to 
combine into one single body the duties 
of locating criminal assets (performed up 
to now by the Ministry of the Interior) 
and administering and 
realising/disposing of these assets 
(performed up to now by a number of 
judicial bodies in an uncoordinated way), 
and (2) to ensure that these duties are 
assigned to a specialised technical body 
focusing solely on the performance of 
these duties and staffed by qualified 
technical personnel, to guarantee that 
these duties are carried out efficiently 
and effectivelyEssentially, (1) it provides for a general 
increase in penalties specifically 
disqualifying offenders from holding 
public employment or office, (2) for 
the most serious offences it adds a 
penalty specifically disqualifying 
offenders from exercising their right to 
stand as a candidate (as an additional 
penalty, not an alternative one), (3) it 
includes the possibility of denying 
parole if the offender has avoided 
discharging financial liabilities or 
repairing the financial damage caused 
to the government, and (4) it extends 
the limitation period for certain 
offences in the most serious cases.Legal status has been granted to 
the National Anti-Fraud 
Coordination Service and tits basic 
duties have been regulated, two 
issues which have so far been 
included in a regulatory 
instrument (Royal Decree 
802/2014). As well as regulating 
the Service, it sets out certain 
aspects necessary for it to perform 
its duties (providing for an 
Advisory Board, establishing a 
legal obligation to cooperate with 
the Service and giving the Service 
the same access to information on 
cases under investigation as 
OLAF).Numerous issues are clarified in 
order to make the ex ante physical 
checks more efficient.  Specifically: 
(1) activities in preparation for the 
physical checks, (2) assistance from 
technical advisers, (3) content and 
scope of the activities to be 
performed during the physical 
checks, (4) demarcation of the 
responsibilities of individuals 
involved in the checks, (5) results of 
the checks and their impact on the 
processing of payment files, (6) 
follow-up of deficiencies detected 
and the corrective measures 
proposed.
Legislation - Type of 
ActDecree Law/Act Law/Act Decision
Legislative Act - 
numberRoyal Decree 948/2015 of 23 October 
2015 regulating the Office of Asset 
Recovery and Management.Organic Law 1/2015 of 30 March 
2015 amending Organic Law 
10/1995 of 23 November 1995 on 
the Criminal Code.Twenty-fifth additional provision 
of the General Subsidies Act 
38/2003 of 17 November 2003, 
introduced by paragraph four of 
the seventh final provision of Law 
40/2015 of 1 October 2015 on the 
legal system for the public sector.The above measures are set out in 
two additional pieces of legislation:  
(1) Royal Decree 109/2015 of 20 
February 2015 amending Royal 
Decree 2188/1995 of 28 December 
1995 implementing the IGAE's 
internal control scheme, and (2) the 
Resolution of 14 July 2015 of the 
Legislative Act - date 23/10/2015 30/03/2015 02/10/2015 14/07/2015
Scope of operational 
measureIT tools; Structured cooperation with 
other public and private entities that 
may have access to information 
Expected result of 
operational measureEnhanced cooperation;Enhanced 
information flow; Targeting of checks; 
Enhanced ex-post controls 
Operational measure - 
date29/07/2015
Sectoral or Horizontal Sectoral Sectoral Sectoral Horizontal
Sectors concerned Expenditure - Agriculture; 
Expenditure - Fisheries; Expenditure - 
Cohesion policy; Expenditure - 
Centralised direct management; 
expenditure - Migration and asylumExpenditure - Agriculture; Expenditure - 
Fisheries; Expenditure - Cohesion policy; 
Expenditure - Centralised direct 
management; expenditure - Migration 
and asylumExpenditure - Agriculture; 
Expenditure - Fisheries; Expenditure - 
Cohesion policy; Expenditure - 
Migration and asylum
Sectors addressed by 
measure against 
corruption in public 
procurement Public and Private sectorPublic sector (including political 
sphere)Public sector (including political 
sphere)
Other measures 
preventing corruption in 
public procurementMeasures aimed at recovering assets 
derived from illegal activities, including 
but not limited to those concerned by 
public procurement.Measures to strengthen penalties 
against corruption. This measure is 
not confined to public procurement, 
but extends to any sector of public 
administration in which it is possible 
to commit corruption offences.Measures to improve the 
effectiveness of control and auditSpain  (ES)
MEASURES
 
32 
 
Action to combat the illicit trade in tobacco products + legislative 
measure: Act authorising the ratification of the World Health 
Organisation (WHO) Protocol to Eliminate the Illicit Trade in Tobacco 
Products, signed in Geneva on 10 January 2013.Traditional own resources + package of measures: instruction on notifying 
the European Commission of cases of fraud or irregularity involving an 
amount of traditional own resources compromised or evaded in excess of 
€10 000 (OWNRES -Web).Customs mutual assistance + administrative measure: framework 
instruction on the management, handling and follow-up of mutual 
assistance cases (MA cases). Exchanges of information on customs inspections and risks + 
administrative measure: framework instruction on the management, 
handling and follow-up of RIF (Risk Information Form) messages.
Anti-fraud cycle Prevention recovery and sanction Prevention  ; Detection  ; Investigation and prosecution Prevention and Detection
 Measures New Update Administratinve; New Organisational and Operational Update New
Package of measures Legislative Admnistrative; Organisational and Operational Administrative Administrative
Recovery Monitoring/desk checks; On the spot checks; 
Investigation; Irregularities reporting 
OTHER: The OWNRES framework instruction allows more 
rigorous input and follow-up of OWNRES reports. It should also 
ensure that the data entered is reliable and thus give a more 
complete, faithful and accurate picture of the facts in cases of 
fraud and irregularity. As a result, both the follow-up of OWNRES 
reports and studies and analyses based on information 
contained in the database should be more reliableOTHER:The instruction on mutual assistance cases 
contributes to improving the effectiveness of measures 
to combat fraud, especially cross-border fraud, 
and,following potential enhancement, to boosting the 
exchange of intelligence between Member States and 
with the Commission, thus helping to strengthen the 
Community anti-fraud mechanism.
IT tools ('IT data feeding', Other IT)
OTHER:Creation and sharing of OWNRES report follow-up logs. 
Creation of an OWNRES dedicated computer support chain 
within the DGDDI to identify potential malfunctions and handle 
'job' queries.
To clarify or consilidate existing rules; To enhance existing 
measure and Cross- cutting measure, multi-agency measure/ 
measure with impact on various bodiesTo clarify or consilidate existing rules; To enhance 
existing measure and Cross- cutting measure, multi-
agency measure/ measure with impact on various 
bodiesTo clarify or consilidate existing rules; To enhance existing 
measure and Cross- cutting measure, multi-agency measure/ 
measure with impact on various bodies
Cross-cutting: On 21 April 2015 the DGDDI (Directorate-General 
of Customs and Indirect Taxes) circulated an instruction to its 
departments clarifying their role in recording in OWNRES cases 
of fraud or irregularity involving amounts of TOR compromised 
or evaded in excess of € 10 000 . The instruction set up a network 
of correspondents in each department concerned, assigned roles 
in the creation and updating of reports, reiterated the statutory 
deadlines and organised oversight of the arrangements by the 
DG (annual survey of correspondents, audit of reports and 
comparison with the information in the legal and accounting 
databases).Cross- cutting: On 8.1.2015, the DGDDI drew up and 
distributed to its departments an instruction on the 
management, handling and follow-up of mutual 
assistance cases. The instruction sets out the roles of 
the different customs departments concerned in 
conducting risk analyses, distributing inspection 
instructions, preparing master-lists, carrying out 
inspections and investigations, establishing and 
implementing profiles for the selection of customs 
declarations, and providing feedback in the form of 
data and results to OLAF. It indicates the MA case 
instruction deadlines.Cross- cutting: On 7.5.2015, the DGDDI drew up and 
distributed to its departments an instruction on the 
management, handling and follow-up of RIF messages. This 
instruction sets out the policy on authorisation of customs 
officers, the rules on creating RIF messages and handling 
messages issued by the other Member States, and the roles of 
the various customs departments.FRANCE (FR)
MEASURES
Scope of legislative 
measure Definition of a specific topic
Reasons of 
administrative 
measureScope of 
administrative 
measure OTHER:The instruction contributes to organising exchanges of 
information relating to customs controls and risks between EU 
Member States' customs offices in order to ensure 
consistency in the handling of RIF messages within the EU.
Scope of 
organisational 
measure 
Scope of operational 
measure
 Reasons for 
legislative measureOTHER: At the beginning of May 2015, the draft Act 
authorising the ratification of the Protocol was submitted 
to the National Assembly, following adoption by the 
Council of Ministers on 29 April 2015. The text was 
unanimously adopted by the National Assembly on 17 
September 2015 and by the Senate on 14 October 2015OTHER: Appointment of four OWNRES correspondents in each 
Regional Directorate of Customs and Indirect Taxes to be 
responsible for the entry and follow-up of OWNRES reports: one 
post-holder and one deputy in each department to deal with 
litigation, and one post-holder and one deputy in each accounts 
department
 
33 
   
Action to combat the illicit trade in tobacco 
products + legislative measure: Act authorising the 
ratification of the World Health Organisation 
(WHO) Protocol to Eliminate the Illicit Trade in 
Tobacco Products, signed in Geneva on 10 
January 2013.Traditional own resources + package of measures: 
instruction on notifying the European Commission 
of cases of fraud or irregularity involving an amount 
of traditional own resources compromised or 
evaded in excess of € 10 000 (OWNRES -Web).Customs mutual assistance + administrative 
measure: framework instruction on the 
management, handling and follow-up of mutual 
assistance cases (MA cases). Exchanges of information on customs inspections 
and risks + administrative measure: framework 
instruction on the management, handling and 
follow-up of RIF (Risk Information Form) 
messages.
Expected result of 
operational measureEnhanced coordination; Enhanced 
information flow
Expected result of 
organisational  
measure: resourcesOTHER:Better follow-up and better 
updating of OWNRES reports through a 
clear and precise division of 
responsibilities.
Type of act within 
administrative 
measureCirculaire/circular, Instructions, Guidelines, 
Manuals Circulaire/circular, Instructions, Guidelines, 
Manuals Circulaire/circular, Instructions, Guidelines, 
Manuals
Brief description of 
the legislative 
measure
Legislative Act - 
numberAct No 2015-1350
Legislative Act - date 26/10/2015
Date 21/04/2015 08/01/2015 07/05/2015
Legislation - type of 
ActLaw/Act
Nature of the 
measureSectoral Sectoral Sectoral Sectoral
Sectors concerned Revenue - Customs Revenue - Customs Revenue - Customs Revenue - CustomsFRANCE (FR) (continued)
MEASURES
 
34 
  
Guidelines on  management of Irregularities 
for the period 2007-2013 and 2014- 2020Protocol on cooperation and information 
exchange between the ministry of finance of 
the Republic of Croatia and the Ministry of 
Interior of the Republic of CroatiaProtocol on cooperation between the 
ministry of finance of the Republic of Croatia 
and state attorney office of the Republic of 
Croatia in the context of protecting EU 
financial interests.
Anti-fraud cyclePrevention & Detection Prevention Prevention
 MeasuresUpdate Administrative New Operational New Operational
Scope of operational 
measureStructured cooperation with law 
enforcementStructured cooperation with judicial 
authorities
Expected result of 
operational measureEnhanced coordination; Enhanced 
cooperation and  Enhanced 
information flowEnhanced coordination; Enhanced 
cooperation and  Enhanced 
information flow
Expected result of 
organisational  
measure: resources
Type of act within 
administrative 
measureCirculaire/Circular, Instructions, 
Guidelines, Manuals
Date 24/03/2015 16/06/2015
Nature of the measure Sectoral Sectoral Sectoral
Sectors concerned Expenditure-Cohesion policyExpenditure -Agriculture; Expenditure-
Fisheries and Expenditure-Cohesion 
policyExpenditure -Agriculture; Expenditure-
Fisheries;  Expenditure-Cohesion 
policy and Expenditure - Centralised 
direct managementReasons of 
administrative 
measureTo enhance existing measureCROATIA (HR)
MEASURES
Scope of 
administrative 
measure Irregularities reporting
 
35 
  
 
Law No 69 of 27 May 2015 (Italian Official Gazette No 124 of 
30 May 2015 ) on ‘Provisions on criminal offences against the 
public administration, and involving mafia-like organisations 
and false accounting’ . This measure , the aim of which is to 
lay down harsher penalties for corruption, bribery and 
embezzlement, provides for a number of simultaneous 
amendments to the Civil Code to increase the penalties for 
false accounting for  publicly listed and other companies.Ministry of Agricultural, Food and Forestry 
Policy Decree of 20 March
2015. (Official Gazette of the Italian Republic 
No 112  of 16 May 2015). Further measures on 
the simplification of CAP management 
2014-2020. In particular Article 9 (Transitional 
measures on checking agricultural payments).Expenditure – Cohesion policy In 2015 an instruction was issued to Guardia di Finanza divisions 
on regulations resulting from the extension - within the meaning of 
Article 29(1)(a) of Law No 161 of 30 October 2014, amending 
Article 25 of Legislative Decree No 83 of 22 June 2012- of anti-
money laundering powers, under Article 8 c. 4 (a and b) of 
Legislative Decree No 231/2007, to the Special Unit for Public 
Spending and Combating EU Fraud for the purposes of checking 
payments from the EU budgetThe Department of National and Community Planning for 
operational units was set up by Decree of the Director 
General No 8133 of 8 July 2014,  with the relevant 
assignment of activities  This decree instituted a new 
operational unit entitled 'Management of Irregularities and 
Recovery", to which a team of experts was assigned to 
perform support activities for the prevention of irregularities 
unit for operations concerning the Calabria ROP, ERDF 
2007/2013
Anti-fraud cyclePrevention; Investigation and prosecution; 
Recovery and sanctionDetection; Investigation and prosecution Prevention; Detection Prevention; Detection;Investigation and prosecution Prevention & Detection
 MeasuresAmendment New Update NewUpdate Administrative, Update Organisational, 
Update Operational
Package of measuresLegislation Administrative Administrative and Operational Administrative Administrative; Organisational and Operational
Recovery; Financial penalties; Criminal sanctions 
and Time barring
*Criminal sanctions: more (indicates that they have 
been increased) *Time barring: more ((indicates 
that they have been increased)
Monitoring/desk checks; On the spot 
checks 
OTHER:Manual of checks on action plans 
eligible for funding
Edition: March 2015 - Edilizia Scolastica
Scope of operational 
measureIT tools (“IT data  feeding” , “Other IT” ); 
Flagging  practice IT tools (“IT data  feeding” , “Other IT” ); Increased 
number of checks and Structured cooperation with 
law enforcement  
To clarify or consolidate existing rules; To remedy 
flaws 
OTHER:To guarantee the implementation of 
recommendations addressed to Italy by 
international fraud prevention organisations on 
both preventive and repressive action on 
corruption. To increase the  suitability and 
deterrent effect of the custodial and financial 
criminal sanctions already in place for financial 
offences and organised crime, and make it easier to 
bring prosecutions for false accounting. To tackle 
time-barring of corruption offences.ITALY (IT)
MEASURES
Scope of legislative 
measure 
Scope of 
organisational 
measure Reorganisation of existing  bodies; Competence; 
General trainings; Fraud  awareness trainings; 
Simplification of procedures  Scope of 
administrative 
measure Eligibility criteria; Monitoring/desk 
checks; Investigation and Irregularities 
reportingMonitoring/desk checks and InvestigationEligibility criteria; Management of funds; 
Monitoring/desk checks; On the spot checks; Audit 
checklist; Irregularities reporting;  Recovery 
 Reasons for 
legislative measure
 
36 
 
Law No 69 of 27 May 2015 (Italian Official Gazette No 124 of 
30 May 2015 ) on ‘Provisions on criminal offences against the 
public administration, and involving mafia-like organisations 
and false accounting’ . This measure , the aim of which is to 
lay down harsher penalties for corruption, bribery and 
embezzlement, provides for a number of simultaneous 
amendments to the Civil Code to increase the penalties for 
false accounting for  publicly listed and other companies.Ministry of Agricultural, Food and Forestry 
Policy Decree of 20 March
2015. (Official Gazette of the Italian Republic 
No 112  of 16 May 2015). Further measures on 
the simplification of CAP management 
2014-2020. In particular Article 9 (Transitional 
measures on checking agricultural payments).Expenditure – Cohesion policy In 2015 an instruction was issued to Guardia di Finanza divisions 
on regulations resulting from the extension - within the meaning of 
Article 29(1)(a) of Law No 161 of 30 October 2014, amending 
Article 25 of Legislative Decree No 83 of 22 June 2012- of anti-
money laundering powers, under Article 8 c. 4 (a and b) of 
Legislative Decree No 231/2007, to the Special Unit for Public 
Spending and Combating EU Fraud for the purposes of checking 
payments from the EU budgetThe Department of National and Community Planning for 
operational units was set up by Decree of the Director 
General No 8133 of 8 July 2014,  with the relevant 
assignment of activities  This decree instituted a new 
operational unit entitled 'Management of Irregularities and 
Recovery", to which a team of experts was assigned to 
perform support activities for the prevention of irregularities 
unit for operations concerning the Calabria ROP, ERDF 
2007/2013
Expected result of 
operational measureEnhanced coordination; Enhanced 
information flow; Enhanced ex-ante 
controls; Enhanced ex-post controls   Enhanced coordination; Enhanced cooperation; 
Enhanced information flow; Targeting of checks; 
Enhanced ex-ante controls;  Enhanced ex-post 
controls  
Expected result of 
organisational  
measure: resourcesNeutral on resources
Type of act within 
administrative 
measureDecision, ResolutionCirculaire/circular, Instructions, 
Guidelines, ManualsCirculaire/circular, Instructions, Guidelines, Manuals  Circulaire/circular, Instructions, Guidelines, Manuals  
Brief description of the 
legislative measureTo guarantee the implementation of 
recommendations addressed to Italy by 
international fraud prevention organisations on 
both preventive and repressive action on 
corruption. To increase the  suitability and 
deterrent effect of the custodial and financial 
criminal sanctions already in place for financial 
criminal offences and organised crime, and make it 
easier to bring prosecutions for false accounting.  
To tackle time-barring of corruption offences.
Legislative Act - 
numberLaw NO 69
Legislative Act - date 27/05/2015
Date 01/01/2015
Legislation - type of 
ActLaw/Act
Nature of the measure Horizontal Sectoral Sectoral Horizontal Sectoral
Sectors concerned Expenditure -Agriculture Expenditure - Cohesion policy Expenditure - Cohesion policy
Corruption within PP Public sector (including political sphere)
Mesures taken in the 
fight against 
corruption in PP* Other measures preventing corruption in PP:The 
Public Prosecutor informs the national anti-
corruption authority when a prosecution is brought 
on corruption charges, including in public tendering 
procedures. Oversight granted to the national anti-
corruption authority of contracts not covered under 
the Public Procurement Code (contracts under 
Article 17 et seq. of Legislative Decree No 
163/2006).To clarify or consolidate existing rulesTo clarify or consolidate existing rules and To 
enhance existing measureReasons of 
administrative 
measureTo clarify or consolidate existing rules To clarify or consolidate existing rulesITALY (IT)(continued)
MEASURES
 
37 
 
CYPRUS (CY)
MEASURES
In 2015 , the  Council of Ministers  has decided : 1)for public contracts of estimated value not less  than  € 500.000 for 
services , €1.000.000 for supplies and € 3.000.000 for  works , qualitative  control of the tender documents
2)change of legislation regarding modifications on   public contracts. Furthermore Public  Proc.Dept selected to enact 
the provision for horizontal exclusion of ec.operators centrally  for better  mgt.
Anti-fraud cyclePrevention
 Measures New
Package of 
measuresLegislative
Legislative Act - 
numberCouncil of Ministers  Decisions -2015
Legislative Act - 
date31/12/2015
Legislation - type 
of ActDecision
Nature of the 
measureHorizontalScope of 
legislative 
measure OTHER:For qualitative  control of the tender documents for public contracts of estimated value not less  than  
€500K,€1.000K for supplies and  € 3.000K for Works . For Modification  on   public contracts for all  authorities 
which until now  was   only to the central  government authorities. Horizontal exclusion of ec.operators for better  
mgt.
 Reasons for 
legislative 
measureTo clarify or consolidate existing rules and To enforce the rules in line with developments in EU law
 
38 
  
On  16   July  2015 the  Government (Cabinet of Ministers)  approved a new   
mid-term policy  planning  document the Corruption Prevention and  
Combating Guidelines for  2015-2020 describing the current situation  of 
Latvia’s anticorruption policy , defining problems  and stipulating tasks to be 
executed  by   various state institutions, implementation time frame for  
individual  assignments, justification of the  assignment and overall policy 
results  to be expected  in certain  period of time.Cabinet regulations adopted regarding financial  control of ETC  2014-2020 programmes and  
projects. Ministry of Welfare of Republic of Latvia has approved Guidelines for  the fraud 
prevention in  FEAD and Guidelines  for financial corrections in FEAD.Legislative Measure / Increase in fines The   Amendments  to  the  Public Procurement Law  and training: 1) entered 
into force on   4  June 2015, transposing the requirements of the Directive  
2014/24/EU regarding amendments  to  the public  procurement contract;  2) 
entered into force 16   October 2014. According to  these  amendments  
since 1  August  2015 inspection rules  of exclusion of tenders restricts a 
supplier to participate  in public procurement, that  have not passed the tax 
liability. The   Procurement Monitoring Bureau provides  trainingFraud prevention,  detection  and investigation: updated 
information  on   the website of the Ministry of Finance about 
the AFCOS and other institutions involved in protection  of 
EU's financial interests and information  for whistle-blowing;  
exchange of best practices  in IT tools  with IT, DK,   BG and 
EL representatives, seminar organized  by   the AFCOS with 
the participation  of OLAF to  improve cooperation for on-the-
spot checks
Anti-fraud cyclePrevention; Detection; Investigation and prosecution and Recovery and 
sanctionPrevention; Detection and Recovery and sanction Recovery and sanction Prevention Prevention; Detection and  Investigation and prosecution
 MeasuresNew & Amendment Legislation; New & Amendment Administrative;New 
& Amendment Organisational    New Legislation and New Administration Amendment Amendment Legislation and Update Organizational New and update Organisational and New Operational
Package of 
measuresLegislative; Admnistrative and Organisational Legislative and Administrative Legislative Legislative and Organisational  Organisational and Operational
Comptences; Powers; Definition of a specific topic; Other administratives 
penaltiesCriminal sanctions
OTHER:Legislation  measures shall  be applied also to following issues:  
public officials, human  resource management  in public sector,  internal 
control standards, construction,  squandering, state aid, judiciary, 
abolition of administrative immunity, investment, education (corruption  
and ethic topics in the state's  education system),  codes of ethic, illicit 
enrichment, proceeds of crime, financing of political  parties, lobbing, 
management  of funds*Criminal sanctions: more (indicates that 
they have been increased)
Management of funds Management of funds
OTHER: Administrative  measures shall  be applied also to following 
issues:  human resource management  in public sector, conflict of 
interests,  public procurement, health  system, awareness raising 
activities,  asset declarations, transparency of public institutions,  private 
sector, sport organizations, informative materials,  embezzlement, 
political partiesOTHER:Fraud prevention, Financial corrections
Competence; General trainingsCompetence; Inter-agency cooperation and General 
trainings
OTHER:Training  and awareness raising activities  for human  resource  
managers in public sector,  public officials, public  procurement experts, 
employees of health sector,  judges, prosecutors, State Revenue  
Service inspectors, entrepreneurs, students, teachers. Special training for 
employees of  EU  funds controlling institutions.
Guidelines  2015-2020 foresee  to  draw up   a review regarding the 
extension of the  competence of  KNAB and allocating  the right  to 
investigate  corruption crimes in private sector.  (Currently corruption Scope of 
operational 
measureStructured cooperation with law enforcement 
OTHER:Strengthened cooperation  with OLAF 
To clarify or consolidate existing  rules; To remedy flaws
OTHER:One   of the objectives included in the Guidelines 2015-2020 is  
to create and improve an independent  internal control system to limit  
cases of corruption or defrauding of financial  resources, including the EU  
and other foreign financial resources, in the public, municipal or private 
sector.
To clarify or consolidate existing  rules; To enhance existing measure 
and Cross-cutting measure, multi-agency measure/ measure with impact 
on various bodies
*Cross-cutting:In the Guidelines particular tasks are assigned to all  
public institutions, e.g. State institutions and municipalities    shall  adopt 
and/or update their Anti-Corruption Action Plans, including risk  based 
anti-fraud  and
anti-corruption measures to  prevent and detect  fraud in  the EU  funds 
and other foreign financial  assistance instruments, if  applicable. Mostly 
tasks are assigned for a single institution,  but there are tasks assigned to 
several institutions.
OTHER:National anti-fraud  measures pursuant  to  Regulation (EU, 
EURATOM) No  966/2012; Article  125(4)(c) of the CPR;   Article  58(1) 
b) of Regulation (EU) No1306/2013; Article  32   (4)  c) of Regulation 
(EU) No  223/2014; Article  5  (4) of Regulation 514/2014. In 2015 
analysis  of a risk  assessment was   caried  out and action (control)  plan 
drawn  up   for  reducing the fraud and corruption risks for the  2014-2020 
ESIF and FEADScope of 
administrative 
measure LATVIA (LV)
MEASURES
Scope of legislative 
measure Comptences and PowerOTHER:Amendments  to  the public  procurement contract;  Clarification  
of exclusion rule for the tax debts
Scope of 
organisational 
measure OTHER: The   Procurement  Monitoring  Bureau (PMB)   regularly 
organizes training  on   public procurement issues  and on   the  
amendments to  the  Public Procurement Law,
raising the competence of  institutions involved in EU  funds  
management and the beneficiaries (In 2015  PMB participated in 34   
training  seminars trained
together  1,820 participants).
 Reasons for 
legislative measureOTHER: To  determine appropriate actions for the institutions responsible for the ETC 
program in  the  new   programming periodOTHER: For the  implementation of the  
recomendation in relation to the level of 
fines to  be increased  wich has been 
expressed in  the  conducted assessment of 
Latvian Phase 1  of  OECD's Working Group 
on   Bribery in International  Business 
Transactions To remedy flaws and To enforce the rules in line with developments in 
EU law
Reasons of 
administrative 
measureTo clarify or consolidate existing  rules
 
39 
    
On  16   July  2015 the  Government (Cabinet of Ministers)  approved a new   
mid-term policy  planning  document the Corruption Prevention and  
Combating Guidelines for  2015-2020 describing the current situation  of 
Latvia’s anticorruption policy , defining problems  and stipulating tasks to be 
executed  by   various state institutions, implementation time frame for  
individual  assignments, justification of the  assignment and overall policy 
results  to be expected  in certain  period of time.Cabinet regulations adopted regarding financial  control of ETC  2014-2020 
programmes and  projects. Ministry of Welfare of Republic of Latvia has 
approved Guidelines for  the fraud prevention in  FEAD and Guidelines  for 
financial corrections in FEAD.Legislative Measure / Increase in fines The   Amendments  to  the  Public Procurement Law  and training: 1) entered into force on   4  June 
2015, transposing the requirements of the Directive  2014/24/EU regarding amendments  to  the public  
procurement contract;  2) entered into force 16   October 2014. According to  these  amendments  since 
1  August  2015 inspection rules  of exclusion of tenders restricts a supplier to participate  in public 
procurement, that  have not passed the tax liability. The   Procurement Monitoring Bureau provides  
trainingFraud prevention,  detection  and investigation: updated information  on   the website of the 
Ministry of Finance about the AFCOS and other institutions involved in protection  of EU's 
financial interests and information  for whistle-blowing;  exchange of best practices  in IT 
tools  with IT, DK,   BG and EL representatives, seminar organized  by   the AFCOS with 
the participation  of OLAF to  improve cooperation for on-the-spot checks
Expected result of 
operational measureEnhanced coordination; Enhanced cooperation and Enhanced information flow
Expected result of 
organisational  
measure: resourcesOTHER:Results of training  and awareness  raising activities  have 
indirect  impact  on resources.
Currently there is  no   calculation  regarding the expected result  in terms 
of
resources if the  competence of  KNAB is extended.Neutral on resources Neutral on resources
Type of act within 
administrative 
measureOTHER:Tasks assigned  to particular institutions  shall be executed  by   
elaboration of guidelines,regulations,reviews,analysis,as  well as 
legislative initiatives.  LV has taken over and approved an instrument of 
fraud risk  assessment for  ERDF, ESF,CF  (approval of specific  
guidance for  assessment of fraud and corruption risk  and a template of 
risk register),for  the EMFF,EAFRD,EAGF-  risk management strategy  
and instructions for filling  risk register and for  the  Asylum, Migration and 
Integration  Fund-Guidelines for application of effective  and proportionate  
measures to  prevent risk  of fraud and corruption.Circulaire/circular, Instructions, Guidelines, Manuals 
Brief description of 
the legislative 
measureThe   Guidelines define precise  tasks  to be executed by   public 
institutions. Those tasks requiring to use legislative  measure will  be 
carried  out as amendments  of existing  laws or regulations  (Regulations 
of Cabinet of Ministers) or elaboration of new   laws, regulations  as well 
as recomendations or  methodology for particular issuesRegulations prescribes the procedures for ensuring of the financial  control 
of the projects  financed by   programmes of  “European Territorial Co -
operation” for 2014 -2020 and the  procedures  by   which reports  shall  be 
submitted regarding irregularities detected in  the implementation of the 
projects  financed by   the 2014 -2020  programme for  “European 
Territorial Co -operation”  and the irregular expenditure recoveredOn  29   October 2015 Parliament  adopted the  
Amendments  to  the  Criminal Law, which entered 
into  force on   3  December 2015,  where the  
Criminal  Law  Article  41 provides to set  higher 
maximum   applicable fine sanctions: 1) for less 
serious crimes up   to 1000  minimum monthly 
wages, 2) for  a serious  crime up   to  2000 
minimum  monthly wages, 3) for  the  most serious  
crimes from 300 to  10000 minimum  monthly wages
Legislative Act - 
numberApproved  by   the  Cabinet Order No. 393 of  16   July 2015, publication  
ref. LV, 138 (5456),  17.07.2015.,  OP  2015/138.7Regulation of the Cabinet of Ministers No  124 adopted  on   10.03.2015., 
publication reference LV,   60   (5378), 25.03.2015., OP  2015/60.7; 
Regulation of the Cabinet of Ministers No  526 adopted  on   15.09.2015, 
publication reference LV,   184 (5502),  21.09.2015.,  OP  2015/184.4The   Amendments  to  the  Criminal Law, 
publication reference LV,   227 (5545),
19.11.2015., OP:   2015/227.4The   Amendments  to  the  Public Procurement Law, publication ref.  LV,   107 (5425),
03.06.2015., OP:   2015/107.7;
The   Amendments  to  the  Public Procurement Law, 02.10.2014. publication  ref. LV,
204 (5264),  15.10.2014.,  OP:   2014/204.7
Legislative Act - date 16/07/2015 10/03/2015 29/10/2015 14/05/2015
Date 04/12/2015 organisational: 11/06/2015 operational: 16/12/2016 
Legislation - type of 
ActLaw/Act Decree Law/Act Law/Act
Nature of the 
measureHorizontal Sectoral Horizontal Horizontal Horizontal
Sectors concerned Expenditure - Cohesion policy
Corruption within PP Public sector (including political sphere) and Private  sectorPublic sector (including political sphere) and Private  
sector
Mesures taken in the 
fight against 
corruption in PPAddresing transparency in public  procurement; To improve the 
effectiveness of management of the public  procurement; To prevent 
corruption amongst personnel, including management; To addressing 
transparency of companies participating in public  procurement                                                                                      
OTHER:The   Guidelines  2015-2020 foresee also following tasks:  
provide training for procurement professionals  developing their capacity 
to identify potential illegal activities of the bidders such as formation of 
cartels.Analyse problems and prepare  recommendations regarding the 
monitoring of procurement contracts  related  to the law „On   
Procurement for  the  Needs of Public Service Providers” .Analyse risks  of 
squandering and corruption risks  in „sub -
threshold”procurements .Evaluate effectiveness  of the measures taken to  
mitigate  the risk  of corruption.OTHER: Measures preventing corruption in public 
procurementBy  increasing the maximum   amount 
of  the  monetary fines for criminal offenses, 
effective,  proportionate and dissuasive criminal 
penalties are established to deter  persons from 
committing the offence, including corruption in public 
procurement
CommentsKNAB - Corruption Prevention and  Combating Bureau  is  an 
independent anti-corruption institution  with comprehensive mandates: 
prevention of corruption,  countering corruption,  monitoring the financing 
of political parties  and education of public officials and the society about 
corruption, ethics  and respect  of law.LATVIA (LV) (continue)
MEASURES
 
40 
 
Resolution No XII-1537 of 10 March 2015 of the Seimas 
[Parliament ] of the Republic of Lithuania approving the 2015 –2025 
Lithuanian National Anti-Corruption Programme. This Resolution 
approved the 2015 –2025 Lithuanian National Anti -Corruption 
Programme, which provides for measures and activities to prevent 
corruption and fraud in the use of EU funds (paragraph 29.2.3 of 
the Programme ). The 2015 –2019 inter-institutional action plan for 
the implementation of the Programme was approved by Lithuanian 
Government Resolution No 648 of 17 June 2015.The procedure for the provision of information to the Lithuanian Ministry of 
Finance on pre-trial investigations relating to European Union structural 
fund projects by the Financial Crime Investigation Service under the 
Ministry of the Interior of the Republic of Lithuania and the Special 
Investigation Service of the Republic of Lithuania. These law-enforcement 
authorities inform the Ministry of Finance when a pre-trial investigation is 
launched (where this does not prejudice the course of the investigation), of 
procedural decisions relating to the investigation (e.g. where the case is 
referred for judicial proceedings), and of its conclusion.The EU structural funds website, 
www.esinvesticijos.lt,  which publishes all information 
relating to the administration and use of EU 
structural funds of interest to project promoters, 
potential applicants, EU structural fund 
administration authorities and the public, offers 
visitors the possibility of providing information 
anonymously on suspected cases
of misuse of EU structural fund finances.Orders of the Minister for Agriculture amending Order No 3D-
889 of 27 November 2014 of the Minister for Agriculture 
approving the methodology for detecting artificially created 
conditions for obtaining aid.
Two orders were adopted in 2015 amending the methodology 
for detecting artificially created conditions for obtaining aid in 
line with Article 60 of Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 of the 
European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 
2013 (circumvention clause).The internal procedures of the National Paying Agency under the Ministry of 
Agriculture were updated (the description of the procedure for transmitting 
information and receiving information from law-enforcement authorities), taking into 
account the Guidance Note of 26 February 2014 on Anti-fraud Measures as 
foreseen in the context of Accreditation Criteria.
Anti-fraud cycle Prevention Investigation and prosecution  Detection Prevention; Detection Prevention; Detection; Fraud investigation and prosecution
 Measures New legislation Update New Amendment Amendment
Scope of legislation PowersDefinition of a specific topic; Prevention or irrgularities and 
fraud; Protection of European Union and Lithuanian 
financial interestsDefinition of a specific topic; Prevention of irregularities and fraud, protection 
of European Union and Lithuanian financial interests
 Reasons for 
legislative measureTo enforce the rules in line with developments in EU lawTo clarify or consolidate existing rules; To remedy flaws; 
To enforce the rules in line with develpoments in EU law; 
Prevention of irregularities and fraud, Protection of 
European Union and Lithuanian Financial interestsTo clarify or consolidate existing rules; To remedy flaws; To enforce the rules 
in line with developments in EU law
Breif description of 
the legislative 
measureanti-corruption strategyThe methodology for detecting artificially created 
conditions for obtaining aid lays down criteria for 
identifying applicants or aid recipients who have artificially 
created conditions for obtaining aid under 2014 –2020 
Lithuanian rural development programme measures, with 
the aim of protecting the financial interests of the 
European Union and the Republic of Lithuania and 
preventing potential irregularities and cases of fraud.The description of the procedure for transmitting information and receiving 
information from law-enforcement authorities includes fraud prevention 
guidelines, indicating the action to be taken by staff at the National Paying 
Agency under the Ministry of Agriculture who are responsible for the 
administration of aid recipients' projects and who suspect instances of fraud in 
these projects. The guidelines also set out potential signs of fraud or a 
suspected criminal offence on the basis of the European Commission's 
Guidance Note of 26 February 2014 on Anti-fraud Measures as foreseen in the 
Legislation - Type 
of ActLaw/Act Regional law/decree/order Regional law/decree/order
Legislative Act - 
numberNo XII - 1537Order No 3D-198 of 20 March 2015 and Order No 3D-330 
of 24 April 2015 of the Lithuanian Minister for Agriculture.Order No BR1-297 of the Director of the National Paying Agency under the 
Ministry of Agriculture
Legislative Act - 
date10/03/2015 24/04/2015 30/09/2015
Scope of 
operational 
measureStructured cooperation with law enforcement Web reporting/Hotline 
Expected result of 
operational Enhanced information flow;Targeting of checks 
Operational 
measure - date30/11/2015
Sectoral or 
HorizontalSectoral Sectoral Sectoral Sectoral Sectoral
Sectors concernedExpenditure - Agriculture; Expenditure - Fisheries; Expenditure 
- Cohesion policy; Expenditure - Migration and asylum Expenditure - Cohesion policy Expenditure - Cohesion policy  Expenditure - Fisheries; Expenditure - Agriculture Expenditure - Agriculture; Expenditure FisheriesLITHUANIA    (LT)
MEASURES
 
41 
  
  
FEDER  - Reporting 
procedure in case of 
suspected fraudFEDER  - Improving control checklists FEDER  - Manual management and  control (point 
1.8)FEAGA +  FEADER - Declaration of conflicts  of 
interests  in the agricultural sector,  
WhistleblowingFEAGA +  FEADER - Anti fraud 
training
Anti-fraud cycleFraud investigation 
and prosecution Detection Prevention Prevention, Detection Prevention; Detection
 MeasuresNew Update New New Update
Scope of 
administrative 
measureEligiblity criteria; On the spot checks; 
Penalty; Recovery; On the 
organisational side: clarifying existing 
rules and enhancing existing measuresReorganisation of existing 
bodies; Competence and 
Streamlining procedures
Scope of operational 
measureStructured 
cooperation with 
judicial authoritiesIncreased number of checks Flagging practice; Increased number of 
checksFlagging practice, Risk 
indicators; Increased number of 
checks
Type of act  within 
administrative 
measureCircular, Instructions, Guidelines, 
Manuals
    Reasons for 
administrative 
measureTo clarify or consolidate existing rules; to 
respect the principle of transparency
Expected result of 
operational measureEnhanced 
cooperation; 
Enhanced ex-post 
controlsTargeting of checks; Enhanced ex-
post controlsEnhanced information flow;Targeting of 
checks; Enhanced ex-ante controls;  
Enhanced ex-post controlsEnhanced coordination;Enhanced 
information flow;Targeting of checks and 
Enhanced ex-ante controlsTargeting of checks; Enhanced 
ex-ante controls
Operational measure - 
date30/09/2016 31/01/2015 31/10/2015 31/01/2015
Sectoral or Horizontal Sectoral Sectoral Sectoral Sectoral Sectoral
Sectors concerned Expenditure - Cohesion policy  Expenditure - Cohesion policy Expenditure - Cohesion policy  Expenditure - Agriculture Expenditure - AgricultureLUXEMBOURG    (LU)
MEASURES
 
42 
 
Liaison and information exchange with a 
view to more effective cooperation with 
bodies and authorities involved in 
auditing EU support, and improvement 
of “operational” cooperation (in 
individual cases)Liaison and information. In May 2015 the Hungarian Government adopted the National 
Anti-Corruption Programme, which constitutes its anti-corruption 
strategy for a four-year period. The anti-corruption strategy was 
drawn up by the National Protective Service, the Hungarian 
police department dealing with crime prevention and detection, 
and submitted to Hungary's Minister for the Interior for 
approval. The specific measures implementing the programme 
are set out in Government Decision No 1336/2015 published on 
27 May 2015.Measures by the Agricultural and Rural Development Agency:
Entry into force of Presidential Directive No 18/2015 of 21 May 2015 laying down the 
detailed rules governing the acceptance and examination/investigation of reports on 
abuses, irregularities and integrity and corruption risks within the organisation, integrity 
consultancy activities and the procedure for dealing with lobbyists;
Follow-up training to DG AGRI's seminar on "Fraud in the Common Agricultural Policy" to 
be held at the Agency. The training material is to be made available to all Agency staff.
Measures by the Agricultural and Rural Development Agency:
Entry into force of Presidential Directive No 18/2015 of 21 May 2015 laying down the 
detailed rules governing the acceptance and examination/investigation of reports on 
abuses, irregularities and integrity and corruption risks within the organisation, integrity 
consultancy activities and the procedure for dealing with lobbyists;
Follow-up training to DG AGRI's seminar on "Fraud in the Common Agricultural Policy" to 
be held at the Agency. The training material is to be made available to all Agency staff.Adoption of an anti-fraud strategy for the 2014-2020 
programming period for the European Structural and 
Investment Funds (ESIF). Fraud risk assessment, 
management, and relevant procedures. Training in fraud 
prevention, with a view to knowledge-sharing. Themes: 
Introduction to the ESIF system (fraud and corruption 
prevention module), irregularity management, 
presentation of ARACHNE, professional ethics, integrity, 
prevention of corruption. Introduction to ARACHNE, 
development of risk scoring function in own IT system. 
Organisational restructuring, increase of the number of 
on-the-spot checks.Drafting of Act CXLIII of 2015 on public procurement. The purpose 
of the new Act is to transpose the new public procurement 
directives adopted by the EU legislature into Hungarian law. 
Anti-fraud cycleFraud investigation and prosecution Prevention Prevention; Detection Prevention; Detection Prevention
 Measures UpdateNew legislation and amendment; update of administrative measure ; 
up-dated organisational measureNew New New
Scope of legislationIncreasing the transparency of public procurement procedures and 
public access to data concerning those procedures.Act CXLIII of 2015 on public procurement is a framework law containing 
the basic rules on public procurement procedures and legal remedies.
 Reasons for 
legislative measureTo clarify or consolidate existing rules; To remedy flawsTo enforce the rules in line with developments in EU law; On 26 
February 2014, the EU legislature adopted the new directives on public 
procurement, which the Member States are, in principle, to transpose 
into their national legislation by 18 April 2016.
Breif description of 
the legislative 
measureAct CXLIII of 2015 on public procurement seeks to achieve the 
greatest possible transparency, fairness of competition and regularity 
of procurement procedures by ensuring more public visibility and 
greater transparency in the performance of contracts and traceability 
of payments. This is also in line with the objectives of the National 
Anti-Corruption Programme. The new directives on public procurement provide for considerably 
more flexible arrangements for public procurement procedures than the 
previous EU legislation. Therefore, rather than making comprehensive 
amendments to the existing legislation, the Hungarian legislature 
decided to enact a new Public Procurement Act.
Legislation - Type 
of ActLaw/Act Law/Act
Legislative Act - 
numberAct of 2015 on public procurementAct CXLIII of 2015 on public procurement (hereinafter: Public 
Procurement Act), effective from 1 November 2015.
Legislative Act - 
date02/11/2015 01/11/2015
Scope of 
administrative 
measureManagement of funds; Monitoring/desk checks; Irregularities 
reportingAction plan for the ESIF anti-fraud strategy for the 2014-2020 
programming period,
fraud risk analysis and management
Scope of 
operational 
measureStructured coperation with law enforcement IT tools; Risk indicators; Increased number of checks
Type of act  within 
administrative 
measureAction plan Action planHUNGARY    (HU)
MEASURES
 
43 
 
Liaison and information exchange 
with a view to more effective 
cooperation with bodies and 
authorities involved in auditing EU 
support, and improvement of 
“operational” cooperation (in 
individual cases)Liaison and 
information. In May 2015 the Hungarian Government adopted the 
National Anti-Corruption Programme, which constitutes its 
anti-corruption strategy for a four-year period. The anti-
corruption strategy was drawn up by the National Protective 
Service, the Hungarian police department dealing with crime 
prevention and detection, and submitted to Hungary's 
Minister for the Interior for approval. The specific measures 
implementing the programme are set out in Government 
Decision No 1336/2015 published on 27 May 2015.Measures by the Agricultural and Rural Development Agency:
Entry into force of Presidential Directive No 18/2015 of 21 May 2015 laying down the 
detailed rules governing the acceptance and examination/investigation of reports on 
abuses, irregularities and integrity and corruption risks within the organisation, 
integrity consultancy activities and the procedure for dealing with lobbyists;
Follow-up training to DG AGRI's seminar on "Fraud in the Common Agricultural 
Policy" to be held at the Agency. The training material is to be made available to all 
Agency staff.
Measures by the Agricultural and Rural Development Agency:
Entry into force of Presidential Directive No 18/2015 of 21 May 2015 laying down the 
detailed rules governing the acceptance and examination/investigation of reports on 
abuses, irregularities and integrity and corruption risks within the organisation, 
integrity consultancy activities and the procedure for dealing with lobbyists;
Follow-up training to DG AGRI's seminar on "Fraud in the Common Agricultural Adoption of an anti-fraud strategy for the 2014-2020 
programming period for the European Structural and 
Investment Funds (ESIF). Fraud risk assessment, 
management, and relevant procedures. Training in 
fraud prevention, with a view to knowledge-sharing. 
Themes: Introduction to the ESIF system (fraud and 
corruption prevention module), irregularity 
management, presentation of ARACHNE, professional 
ethics, integrity, prevention of corruption. 
Introduction to ARACHNE, development of risk 
scoring function in own IT system. Organisational 
restructuring, increase of the number of on-the-spot 
checks.Drafting of Act CXLIII of 2015 on public procurement. The 
purpose of the new Act is to transpose the new public 
procurement directives adopted by the EU legislature into 
Hungarian law. 
    Reasons for 
administrative 
measureTo clarify or consolidate existing rules; To enhance existing 
measures; Cross cutting measure, multi-agency 
measure/measure with impact on various bodies: (The 
National Anti-Corruption Programme states that in order to 
raise awareness of proper conduct as regards corruption, 
citizens need to be given a greater sense of ownership. 
Appropriate information of the target groups concerned by 
the measure is essential to shaping attitudes and ensuring 
that all measures implemented under the programme are 
effective in practice.)To enhance existing measures
Scope of 
organisational 
measure Scope of organisational measure: Inter- agency 
cooperation ; Fraud awareness trainings ; Other : ‘Under the 
National Anti-Corruption Programme, the bodies with special 
responsibilities in combating corruption are to be given 
more human and material resources .’Fraud awareness trainings; Internal procedures for the acceptance and 
examination/investigation of reports on abuses, irregularities and integrity and 
corruption risks in connection with the operation of the Agency, and for dealing with 
lobbyists.Reorganisation of existing bodies; General trainings; 
Fraud awareness trainings
Organisational 
measure - 
expected results 
in terms of 
resources      increased resources Neutral on resourcesThe purpose of training on combating fraud, 
professional ethics, integrity and prevention of 
corruption is to guard against and increase awareness 
of fraud and corruption. The organisational 
restructuring will make for more effective action to 
counter irregularities and fraud. 
Date of 
organisational 
measure31/12/2015 21/05/2015 15/06/2015
Expected result 
of operational 
measureEnhanced cooperationTargeting of checks; Targeting of investigations; 
Enhanced ex-ante controls
Operational 
measure - date01/01/2015
Sectoral or 
HorizontalHorizontal Sectoral operational; horizontal organisation Sectoral Sectoral Horizontal
Sectors 
concernedRevenue - Tax Fraud; Expenditure - Agriculture; 
Expenditure - Fisheries; Expenditure - Cohesion policyExpenditure - Agriculture; Expenditure - FisheriesExpenditure - Agriculture;  Expenditure - Cohesion 
policy,  Expenditure - Fisheries
Sectors 
addressed by 
measure against 
corruption in 
public 
procurementPublic and Private sector Public sector (including political sphere)
Other measures 
preventing 
corruption in 
public 
procurementmeasures addressing transparency in pubilc procurement; 
Measures to improve the effectiveness of management of 
public procurement; measures addressing transparency of 
companies participating in public procurementMeasures addressing transparency in public procurement; 
Measures to improve the effectiveness of management of 
pubic procurement; measures addressing transparency of 
companies participating in public procurement; The Public 
Procurement Act gives the Minister with responsibility for 
public procurement the possibility of notifying the Competition 
Authority of any infringements of competition law detected 
during the Minister's legal scrutiny of public procurement 
procedures, and sending the Competition Authority data 
arising from such scrutiny (with the exception of classified 
information). 
CommentIn order to promote the widest possible competition and 
ensure non-discrimination in procurement procedures, the 
Public Procurement Act contains strict rules on the definition 
of eligibility criteria and references, and introduces technical 
equivalence requirements for reference certificates.
As well as extending the grounds for exclusion, the Act seeks 
to achieve the greatest possible transparency, fairness of 
competition and regularity of procurement procedures by 
ensuring more public visibility and greater transparency in the 
performance of contracts and traceability of payments.HUNGARY(HU) (continue)
MEASURES
 
44 
    
To  raise Anti-Fraud  and Corruption  awareness amongst students  in Maltese schools
Anti-fraud cyclePrevention
 Measures New
Scope of operational measureAFCOS Malta with the  cooperation  of the  Ministry for  Education and 
Employment
(MEDE)   launched  an Anti-Fraud  Awareness Quiz in all Schools in Malta,
targeting students aged between 14   and 16   years  studying  Accounts and 
Business Studies. The   competition consisted  of 12   multiple  choice questions  
and MEDE sponsored the prizes  of the three  winners.
Date of operational measure 22/10/2015
Expected result of operational 
measureEnhanced information flow;To  Raise  Anti-Fraud  and Corruption  awareness 
amongst students in Maltese schools. This  campaign formed an integral  part of 
the Communication Strategy which is  part  of Malta's National Anti-Fraud and 
Corruption Strategy,  adopted in  November 2008. Overall,  the number  of 
participants  was   encouraging.
Horizontal or Sectoral HorizontalMALTA (MT)
Measure
 
45 
  
Creation of a coordinating group on anti-dumping duty on 
solar panels, charged with preventing and investigating 
fraud involving anti-dumping dutyIntroduction of a new declaration system (AGS). The 
introduction of this system will enable more automated 
checks to be carried out and more combined profiles will 
be createdManagement priority relating to Payment of 
dutiesTesting of ARACHNE has started. A test set has been 
sent to the ARACHNE administrator. The first test 
results were discussed with the MAs from all over the 
country on 25 November 2015. The aim is to follow this 
up in 2016. The NL also plans to bring ARACHNE into 
operation for the 2014-2020 programming periodAdditional checks on incidence of double 
declaration of costs by the same and 
different applicants
Anti-fraud cyclePrevention  and Recovery and sanction Prevention Prevention Prevention Prevention
 Measures Update Update New New New
Package of measuresOperational Operational Organisational Operational Operational
Scope of operational 
measureRisk indicators and Increased number of checksIT tools (“IT data  feeding” , “Other IT” )                                                
OTHER:With the new import declaration 
system there are more built-in system checks 
and more checks are carried out automatically. 
This is related to the IT tools, but also has 
implications for the organisation of the 
declaration processIT tools (“IT data  feeding” , “Other IT” )IT tools (“IT data  feeding” , “Other 
IT”) and Increased number of 
checks
Expected result of 
operational measureEnhanced coordination; Enhanced cooperation; 
Enhanced information flow; Targeting of checks; 
Targeting of investigations; Enhanced ex-post 
controlsEnhanced coordination;Enhanced ex-ante 
controls  and Enhanced ex-post controlsTargeting of checks and Enhanced ex-ante 
controlsEnhanced ex-ante controls
Date 01/01/2015 01/01/2015 01/01/2015 25/11/2015 01/07/2015
Nature of the measure Sectoral Sectoral Sectoral Sectoral Sectoral
Sectors concerned Revenue- Customs Revenue- Customs Revenue- Customs Expenditure - Cohesion policyExpenditure - Agriculture and 
Expenditure - Cohesion PolicyExpected result of 
organisational 
measure: resourcesOTHER: More FTEs have been 
assigned to the process, resulting in a 
noticeable increase in the number of 
checks on goods imported. The checks 
are focused on the accuracy of the 
declarations for the payment of dutiesNETHERLANDS(NL)
MEASURES
Scope of 
organisational 
measure OTHER: As a result of a readjustment 
of priorities, the allocation of FTEs has 
changed and the declaration and 
monitoring process relating to payment 
has been reinforced.
 
46 
 
Administrative measures/procedures: A high density of verifications pursuant to Article 13 of Regulation 
1828/2006 for the 2007-2013 programming period and pursuant to Article 125(4) of Regulation 1303/2013 
for the 2014-2020 programming period serves to prevent irregularities.  The verification procedure allows 
the administrative bodies to check all the expenditure submitted by the beneficiary. A delegated act 
supplementing Regulation 1303/2013 was adopted by the Commission on 8 July 2015 with regard to the 
procedure for the notification of irregularities.Legislative  measure: Art.  99   para. 5  Fiscal  Penal Act, as of 1  Jan  2016 Customs  
authorities  are allowed to fingerprint  suspected persons (under certain conditions).Organisational amendments and improvements in  the  EAGF/EAFRD  paying Agency   AT01
Anti-fraud cyclePrevention; Detection and Recovery and sanction Detection, investigation and prosecution Prevention;  Recovery and sanction
 Measures Update Amendment New and Update Organisational  
Package of measures AdministrativeLegislative Organisational
 Cross-cutting measure, multi-agency measure/ measure with impact on various bodies                                                                                                                  
OTHER: Monitoring and ensuring the proper use of funds and the notification of 
irregularities identified
*Cross-cutting measure: Formal requirements in the national rules on eligibility and in 
the management and control system should increase efficiency. Standardised forms 
(check-lists) improve the quality of the accounts submitted. Standardised forms have 
also been developed for the calculation of personnel costs in order to increase 
transparency and clarity
Expected result of 
organisational  
measure: resourcesNeutral on resources
Type of act within 
administrative 
measureDecision, Resolution
Brief description of the 
legislative measureIn  case  of  a Customs offence involving  a damage of  more than  
EUR 15.000, the  Customs office  as Fiscal Penal Authority is  allowed 
to fingerprint suspected persons,  if due to certain  facts  there is  
reason to assume
that  they have left marks. This investigative  measure may  only  be 
enforced  with coercive  means if proportionate  and the integrity  of the 
person(s)  concerned is  not unduly violated
Legislative Act - 
numberSteuerreformgesetz (Tax Reform Act) 2015/2016 - StRefG, BGBl I 
118/2015, Art. 9 11c
Legislative Act - date 14/08/2015
Date
Legislation - type of 
ActLaw/Act
Nature of the measure Sectoral Sectoral Sectoral
Sectors concerned Expenditure - Cohesion policy Revenue - Customs Expenditure - Agriculture; Expenditure - FisheriesScope of 
administrative 
measure Management of funds; On the spot checks; Irregularities reporting and RecoveryAUSTRIA (AU)
MEASURES
Scope of legislative 
measure Powers
Reasons of 
administrative 
measureScope of 
organisational 
measure Reorganisation of existing bodies and Competence
 Reasons for 
legislative measureTo enforce the rules in line with developments in EU law
 
47 
  
The creation of information points within the 
Managing Authorities (MAs), the police and the public 
prosecutor’s office , specifically the appointment of 
'contact officers' in order to improve the exchange of 
information between the MAs and law enforcement 
agencies (the Regional and Appellate Prosecutor's 
Offices, the Provincial Police Headquarters, the 
Warsaw Police Headquarters and the National Police 
Headquarters)Order on anti-corruption policies in the Agency for 
Restructuring and Modernisation of Agriculture (No 
26/2015). This measure was introduced to make the 
prevention and elimination of corrupt behaviour more 
effective.Act of 24 July 2015 amending the 
Excise Duty Act and certain other Acts - 
Journal of Laws 2015, item 1479The decision of the Chair of the Interdepartmental 
Group on Combating Financial Irregularities against 
the Republic of Poland or the European Union 
dated 16 September 2015 on the appointment of 
the Warmińsko -Mazurskie working group for 
combating irregularities and offences against the 
financial interests of the European Union.
Anti-fraud cyclePrevention; Detection and Investigation and 
prosecution Prevention PreventionPrevention; Detection and Investigation 
and prosecution 
 Measures New New New New
Package of measuresOperational Operational Legislative Admnistrative
Scope of operational 
measureStructured cooperation with law 
enforcement; Structured cooperation with 
judicial authorities                                                                                        
OTHER:Exchange of information regarding 
projects implemented using EU funds, and 
beneficiaries: the detection by law-
enforcement agencies of infringements that 
involve irregularities or fraud is a source of 
information for the MAs, but on the other 
hand, information from the MAs may be 
used by law enforcement agencies for the 
purpose of proceedings.  Exchange of 
knowledge and experience in relation to the 
detection of irregularities and fraud in the 
use of EU fundsOTHER: Operational activities of Agency staff 
in the area of anti-corruption
To remedy flaws
OTHER: Limiting irregularities in 
the activities of tobacco 
intermediariesManagement of funds and Investigation
 Reasons for 
legislative measurePOLAND (PL)
MEASURES
Scope of legislative 
measure Definition of a specific topic
Scope of 
administrative 
measure 
 
48 
 
The creation of information points within the 
Managing Authorities (MAs), the police and the public 
prosecutor’s office , specifically the appointment of 
'contact officers' in order to improve the exchange of 
information between the MAs and law enforcement 
agencies (the Regional and Appellate Prosecutor's 
Offices, the Provincial Police Headquarters, the 
Warsaw Police Headquarters and the National Police 
Headquarters)Order on anti-corruption policies in the Agency for 
Restructuring and Modernisation of Agriculture (No 
26/2015). This measure was introduced to make the 
prevention and elimination of corrupt behaviour more 
effective.Act of 24 July 2015 amending the 
Excise Duty Act and certain other Acts - 
Journal of Laws 2015, item 1479The decision of the Chair of the Interdepartmental 
Group on Combating Financial Irregularities against 
the Republic of Poland or the European Union 
dated 16 September 2015 on the appointment of 
the Warmińsko -Mazurskie working group for 
combating irregularities and offences against the 
financial interests of the European Union.
To enhance existing measure; Cross-
cutting measure, multi-agency measure/ 
measure with impact on various  bodies
OTHER:The objective of the group is to 
exchange information and experience 
regarding irregularities and offences 
committed against the financial interests of 
the European Union in Warmińsko -
Mazurskie province.  The members of the 
group will aim to have rules drawn up for 
the efficient exchange of information 
between the institutions implementing EU 
funds and the investigative bodies on 
suspected fraud, as well as rules for 
mutual cooperation in case of fraud and 
rules for consultation on fraud prevention 
mechanisms
*Cross-cutting:Action taken to enhance co-
operation between the institutions 
implementing EU funds and the 
investigative authorities. The extent of the 
group's action is limited to the area of the 
provincial (i.e. regional scope)
Expected result of 
operational measureEnhanced coordination; Enhanced 
cooperation; Enhanced information flow; 
Targeting of checks and Targeting of 
investigations OTHER:Making the prevention and elimination 
of corrupt behaviour more effective
Expected result of 
organisational  
measure: resources
Type of act within 
administrative 
measureDecision, Resolution 
Brief description of the 
legislative measureThe introduction of rules 
regulating the registration and 
conducting of economic activities 
by tobacco intermediaries
Legislative Act - 
numberJournal of Laws 2015, item 
1479.
Legislative Act - date 24/07/2015
Date 16/10/2015 14/04/2015
Legislation - type of 
ActLaw/Act
Nature of the measure Sectoral Sectoral Sectoral Sectoral
Sectors concerned Expenditure -Cohesion policy Expenditure - Agriculture Revenue - CustomsExpenditure -Agriculture and Expenditure - 
Cohesion policyReasons of 
administrative 
measurePOLAND (PL) (continued)
MEASURES
 
49 
  
   
Measure to enhance coordination between the Agriculture 
and Fisheries Financing Institute (IFAP) and the Central 
Department for Criminal Investigation and Prosecution 
(DCIAP)Penalty framework as set out in the specific rules 
for the Programme for Rural Development on the 
Portuguese Mainland (PDR 2020).Approval of the 2015-2017 Strategic Plan 
to combat tax and customs fraud and 
evasion.Further to the publication of Standard 04/ADC - Anti-
fraud strategy and risk assessment - 23 April 2015 by 
the Agency for Development and Cohesion (ADC), anti-
fraud strategies were approved by the Managing 
Authorities and Intermediate Bodies of Operational 
Programmes in the 2020 Cohesion Policy 
programming period. The objective is to enhance 
execution of the tasks assigned to these bodies in 
relation to fraud prevention, detection and correction, 
with a view to ensuring that anti-fraud measures are 
put in place for the management and use of ESIF 
funds.Approval by the ADC of the suitability, reliability and debt 
information system, as part of the ESIF information system, which 
identifies entities that present an increased risk and therefore 
require specific monitoring. The entities were categorised using 
four suitability and reliability codes (suitable, under investigation, 
subject to conditions, banned) and two debt codes (eligible and 
non-eligible) using information gathered either during the current 
programming period or in previous programming periods, so as to 
maintain the records from previous programming periods.
Anti-fraud cycleDetection;  Investigation and prosecution Prevention Prevention; DetectionPrevention;Detection and Recovery and 
sanctionPrevention;Detection and Recovery and sanction
 Measures Updated New Updated New New
Package of measuresOperational Legislative Operational Operational Operational
Scope of operational 
measureStructured cooperation with judicial authoritiesFlagging practice; Risk indicators 
and Increased number of checksFlagging practice; Risk indicators and 
Increased number of checks; Stryctured 
cooperation with judicial authorities                              
OTHER:An anti-fraud strategy is defined for 
every management and control system with 
the aim of ensuring that effective and 
proportionate anti-fraud measures are put in 
place, taking into account the risks identified 
in the course of its work. The procedures to 
be followed in relation to fraud prevention, 
detection and correction are set out, as are 
the procedures for reporting any situations 
identified to the relevant authorities, namely 
to either the AFCOS service or to the 
authorities responsible for conducting a 
criminal investigation.Flagging practice and Risk indicators PORTUGAL(PT) 
MEASURES
Scope of legislative 
measure Financial Penalties and Other 
administrative penalties
 
50 
 
Measure to enhance coordination between the Agriculture 
and Fisheries Financing Institute (IFAP) and the Central 
Department for Criminal Investigation and Prosecution 
(DCIAP)Penalty framework as set out in the specific rules 
for the Programme for Rural Development on the 
Portuguese Mainland (PDR 2020).Approval of the 2015-2017 Strategic Plan 
to combat tax and customs fraud and 
evasion.Further to the publication of Standard 04/ADC - Anti-
fraud strategy and risk assessment - 23 April 2015 by 
the Agency for Development and Cohesion (ADC), anti-
fraud strategies were approved by the Managing 
Authorities and Intermediate Bodies of Operational 
Programmes in the 2020 Cohesion Policy 
programming period. The objective is to enhance 
execution of the tasks assigned to these bodies in 
relation to fraud prevention, detection and correction, 
with a view to ensuring that anti-fraud measures are 
put in place for the management and use of ESIF 
funds.Approval by the ADC of the suitability, reliability and debt 
information system, as part of the ESIF information system, which 
identifies entities that present an increased risk and therefore 
require specific monitoring. The entities were categorised using 
four suitability and reliability codes (suitable, under investigation, 
subject to conditions, banned) and two debt codes (eligible and 
non-eligible) using information gathered either during the current 
programming period or in previous programming periods, so as to 
maintain the records from previous programming periods.
Expected result of 
operational measureEnhanced cooperation and Enhanced 
information flowEnhanced coordination; 
Enhanced information flow; 
Targeting of checks and 
Targeting of investigationsEnhanced cooperation; Enhanced 
information flow; Targeting of checks and 
Enhanced ex-ante controlsEnhanced cooperation; Enhanced information flow; 
Targeting of checks and Enhanced ex-ante controls
Brief description of the 
legislative measureThis is a package of Implementing Orders 
for the PDR 2020 laying down the rules for 
applying the measures in the PDR, 
specifying which situations constitute non-
compliance and establishing the 
corresponding penalties. Penalties have 
been defined and tightened so as to deter 
any irregular or fraudulent behaviour
Legislative Act - 
numberPlease refer, for example, to Implementing 
Order No 31/2015, bearing in mind that 
this is a legislative package comprising a 
number of measures.
Legislative Act - date 12/02/2015
Date 30/06/2015 30/01/2015 30/06/2015 16/10/2015
Legislation - type of 
ActDecreee
Nature of the measure Sectoral Sectoral Sectoral Sectoral Sectoral
Sectors concerned Expenditure - Agriculture Expenditure - Agriculture Revenue -Customs and Revenue - 
Tax fraudExpenditure- Cohesion policy Expenditure- Cohesion policyTo enforce the rules in line with 
developments in EU law Reasons for 
legislative measurePORTUGAL(PT) (continued)
MEASURES
 
51 
   
Public procurement: the public procurement arrangements will be reformed 
by transposing the new European Directive on this matter; adopting the 
national public procurement strategy; ensuring the global coherence and 
efficiency of institutional arrangements by setting up a National Public 
Procurement Agency; and strengthening national cooperation between the 
institutions involved in the management and monitoring of European funds in 
order to identify risks arising from public procurement.A strategy for integrity 2015-2020 was adopted by the Ministry of 
Regional Development and Public Administration (MDRAP). This 
document introduces measures which aim to tackle certain problems 
and vulnerabilities that are specific to MDRAP’s areas of activity and 
competences, and offer solutions that provide a real and effective 
response. This strategy supports and supplements the National Anti-
Corruption Strategy 2012-2015, promotes the same values and 
principles and aims to reduce and prevent corruption through three 
lines of action: prevention, education and combating corruption.Checks on direct procurement and conflicts of interest in the case of 
private beneficiaries, in accordance with Instructions No 126/2015 of 
the Ministry of Regional Development and Public Administration.Checks on direct procurement and conflicts of interest in the case of 
private beneficiaries, in accordance with Instructions No 126/2015 of 
the Ministry of Regional Development and Public Administration.Organised crime: adoption of Law No 318/2015 on the establishment, 
organisation and functioning of the National Agency for the 
administration of seized goods, which under the authority of the Ministry 
of Justice.
Anti-fraud cyclePrevention; Detection Prevention; Detection Prevention; Detection Prevention Recovery and sanction
 Measures New legislation; New organisational measure;new administrative ; New operational New legislation; new administrative, new organisational, new operational New  operational New legislation and amendment; new operational measure New legislation; New organisational measure; new operational measure
Scope of 
legislationCompetences; Powers Ethics, integrity and prevention of corruption.Competences, Powers; In the event that a potential conflict of interest 
regarding a public procurement contract is identified during ex-ante checks, 
the National Integrity Agency (Agentia Nationala de Integritate - ANI) 
issues an integrity warning which is forwarded to the head of the entity 
concerned in order to remedy the situation.Competences, Powers; Financial penalties; Other administrative penalties
 Reasons for 
legislative 
measureTo clarify or consolidate existing rules; to enforce rules in line with developments in 
EU lawTo clarify or consolidate existing rulesThe legislative package initiated by the Ministry of Justice in consultation 
with the National Integrity Agency (the Agency cannot initiate legislation) 
will play a role in supporting the objective of preventing conflicts of interest 
in public procurement. The legislative proposal was launched following the 
Government Memorandum of 30 January 2013. It is currently being 
debated in the Romanian Senate.To remedy flaws; To enforce the rules in line with developments in EU law
Breif description 
of the legislative 
measureBringing national legislation into line with the new European Directive. The drawing 
up of the strategy is a crucial stage in reforming the Romanian public procurement 
arrangements because it outlines a shared vision at a key moment in which the new 
directives in this area are proposing that Member States move towards a new 
paradigm, in a context in which public procurement is becoming the main 
instrument for unlocking economic growth at European level. Efforts to promote 
legislation which will contain provisions to combat favouritism, conflicts of interest 
and corruption.The strategy is geared to preventing corruption at the Ministry of Regional 
Development and Public Administration (MDRAP), increasing anti-
corruption awareness, consolidating auditing mechanisms and inter-
institutional cooperation on auditing and checks. It is also intended to 
increase the implementation and monitoring of action plans relating to the 
strategy, and develop communication and cooperation to ensure integrity 
at intra- and inter-institutional level and with civil society, the media and 
citizens, supporting local public authorities with a view to capacity-building 
in order to prevent corruption.The purpose of this law is to prevent conflicts of interest in the procedures 
for the granting of European funds and awarding of public procurement 
contracts, public works concessions and services contracts through the 
introduction of a process to investigate potential conflicts of interest shortly 
after the launching of the above procedures in order to avoid such conflicts 
without affecting the procedures.The Law supplements the institutional and legislative framework in the area of 
combating organised crime, serious crimes such as human trafficking and 
money-laundering. The Law transposes fully Article 10 of the EU Directive on 
confiscation, providing for the possibility of use of confiscated goods for social 
purposes.
Legislation - 
Type of ActDecision Regional law/decree/order Law/Act Law/Act
Legislative Act - 
numberGovernment Decision No 901/2015Order No 728/2015 approving the Integrity Strategy adopted by the 
Ministry for Regional Development and Public Administration 2015-2020 
and action plans for implementing this Strategy adopted by the same 
Ministry for 2015-2020.ongoing procedureLaw No 318/2015 on the establishment, organisation and operation of the 
National Agency for the administration of seized goods.
Legislative Act - 
date25/11/2015 08/04/2015 30/01/2013
Scope of 
administrative 
measureHaving regard to the Romanian Government’s obligation to comply with ex -ante 
horizontal conditions relating to the reform of public procurement under Romania’s 
partnership agreement for the 2014-2020 programming period, approved by 
Commission Decision No C (2014) 5515 of 6 August 2014, the National Public 
Procurement Agency (ANAP) was set up to act as the main institution responsible 
for managing public investment and ensuring quality of public spending.Management of funds; Penalty; The action plan for implementing the 
Integrity Strategy adopted by the Ministry for Regional Development and 
Public Administration 2015-2020 sets out measures aimed at reducing 
risks and vulnerability to corruption, particularly in the following areas: 
public procurement, public works, human resources management and 
management of European funds.Reorganisation of existing bodies; Inter-agency cooperation; General 
trainingsInter- agency cooperation
Scope of 
operational 
measureIT tools; Flagging practice; Risk indicators; Increased number of checks; Structured 
cooperation with law enforcement; structured cooperation with judicial authoritiesIT tools, Risk indicators, Increased number of checks, Structured 
cooperation wth law enforcementIT tools; Web reporting/Hotline; Risk indicators; Increased number of checks IT tools; Structural cooperation with law enforcementROMANIA    (RO)
MEASURES
 
52 
 
Public procurement: the public procurement arrangements will be reformed 
by transposing the new European Directive on this matter; adopting the 
national public procurement strategy; ensuring the global coherence and 
efficiency of institutional arrangements by setting up a National Public 
Procurement Agency; and strengthening national cooperation between the 
institutions involved in the management and monitoring of European funds in 
order to identify risks arising from public procurement.A strategy for integrity 2015-2020 was adopted by the Ministry of 
Regional Development and Public Administration (MDRAP). This 
document introduces measures which aim to tackle certain problems 
and vulnerabilities that are specific to MDRAP’s areas of activity and 
competences, and offer solutions that provide a real and effective 
response. This strategy supports and supplements the National Anti-
Corruption Strategy 2012-2015, promotes the same values and 
principles and aims to reduce and prevent corruption through three 
lines of action: prevention, education and combating corruption.Checks on direct procurement and conflicts of interest in the case of 
private beneficiaries, in accordance with Instructions No 126/2015 of 
the Ministry of Regional Development and Public Administration.Checks on direct procurement and conflicts of interest in the case of 
private beneficiaries, in accordance with Instructions No 126/2015 of 
the Ministry of Regional Development and Public Administration.Organised crime: adoption of Law No 318/2015 on the establishment, 
organisation and functioning of the National Agency for the 
administration of seized goods, which under the authority of the Ministry 
of Justice.
Type of act  
within 
administrative 
measureEmergency Order No 13/2015 concerning the establishment, organisation and 
operation of the National Public Procurement Agency and Decision No 634/2015 on 
the organisation and operation of the National Public Procurement Agency.Action plan
    Reasons for 
administrative 
measureTo enhance existing measure; Cross-cutting measure, multi-agency 
measure/measure with impact on various bodiesThe National Public Procurement 
Agency has been set up as a public institution with legal personality under the 
authority of the Ministry of Public Finance. It has taken on the duties, activities, 
posts and staff of the National Authority for Public Procurement Regulation and 
Monitoring (ANRMAP), the Ministry of Public Finance's Unit for coordination and 
verification of public procurement (UCVAP) and public procurement verification 
departments within the regional directorates-general for public finance.To clarify or consolidate existing rules; To enhance existing measure
Scope of 
organisational 
measureReorganisation of existing bodies; Competence; Inter-agency cooperation; General 
trainings; Simplification of proceduresChecks on direct procurement and conflicts of interest in the case of 
private beneficiaries, in accordance with Instructions No 126/2015 of the 
Ministry of Regional Development and Public Administration.
Scope of 
operational 
measureStructured cooperation with law enforcement; Structured cooperation with 
judicial authorities; The tasks of the Agency: to facilitate the prosecution and 
identification of goods acquired through criminal activities and other goods 
associated with crime; ensure basic administration of movable goods seized in 
the context of criminal proceedings; manage the integrated national IT system 
recording proceeds of crime; support the judicial bodies, in accordance with the 
law; coordinate, assess and monitor application of and compliance with the law 
at national level.
Organisational 
measure - 
expected results 
in terms of 
resources      Increased resources Neutral on resources Neutral Increased resources
Date of 
organisational 
measure28/07/2015 03/02/2015 30/01/2013 24/12/2015
Expected result 
of operational 
measureEnhanced coordination;Enhanced cooperation; Enhanced information flow; 
Enhanced ex-ante controls; enhanced ex-post controlsEnhanced coordination; Enhanced cooperation, Enhanced information 
flow, Enhanced ex-post controlsTargeting of checks, targeting of investigations, Enhanced ex-ante controls, 
Enhanced ex-post controlsEnhanced coordination;Enhanced cooperation; Enhanced ex-ante controls Enhanced cooperation; Enhanced coordination
Operational 
measure - date25/11/2015 03/02/2015 01/07/2015 30/01/2013 24/12/2015
Sectoral or 
HorizontalHorizontal Sectoral Horizontal Horizontal Horizontal
Sectors 
concerned Expenditure - Cohesion policy
Sectors 
addressed by 
measure against 
corruption in 
public 
procurementPublic sector (including political sphere) Public sector (including political sphere) Public sector (including political sphere)
Other measures 
preventing 
corruption in 
public 
procurementMeasures addressing transparency in public procurement, measures to improve the 
effectiveness of management of the public procurement, measures to prevent 
corruption amongst personnel, including management; Measures to improve the 
effectiveness of control and audit. Measures to improve the effectiveness or managemnt of public 
procurement; measures to prevent corruption amongst personnel, 
including management; measures to improve the effectiveness of control 
and audit.  measures to prevent corruption amongst personnel, including 
management;measures to improve the effectiveness of control and audit. ROMANIA    (RO) (continued)
MEASURES
 
53 
 
ARSKTRP – administrative and organisational 
measures: In 2015 the Agency of the Republic of 
Slovenia for Agricultural Markets and Rural 
Development (ARSKTRP) organised courses for all its 
staff on combating fraud. Agency representatives also 
attended a training event as part of the Hercules 
project in Padua, Italy. On the basis of training courses 
and past experience, a manual on fraud indicators was 
produced, which forms the cornerstone of a more 
effective and systematic fight against fraud related to 
disbursements from the agricultural funds.Ministry of the Interior (Police and the Police and Security 
Directorate): Annual guidelines for police work: The Minister 
for the Interior has issued the guidelines and instructions 
for drawing up the Police work plan for 2015. Point 1.1 of 
the guidelines says that the Police is to continue to identify 
and investigate economic crime and organised forms of 
corruption — with particular emphasis on cases that hurt 
the budget and those that result in large-scale material gain 
— and strengthen cooperation between specialised 
investigation task forces. The THEMIS project on 
investigation of corruption and fraud against the EU was 
carried out in 2015.The Government Office for Development and European 
Cohesion Policy (SVRK) is drawing up a new strategy for 
fighting fraud against the EU, which will lay down the 
scope of work and make provisions for the use of EU 
funds. The procedure is under way.
Title/description of the measure reported by SVRK: 
Obligatory elements of the 2014-2020 co-financing 
contract facilitating recovery. We add the reply from the 
Ministry of Finance - Department for Management of EU 
Funds/CA under the 3rd Measure. (1) 1.a Certifying 
Authority (MF-CA): In cases where EU assets have been 
used unjustly, a claim is immediately opened against the 
Intermediate Body (IB).Public procurement and the remit of the 
Commission for the Prevention of Corruption 
(KPK): 1. The IT tools have been upgraded in 
the interest of the public authorities, the general 
public and the media, now allowing access to 
data on spending by public institutions (through 
contracts for work and material or copyright 
contracts) on goods and services provided by 
public sector employees;
2. Local authorities have produced integrity 
plans and identified risks (KPK presented its 
findings at a round-table entitled Municipal 
assets – a focal point for corruption risk .Financial Administration of 
Slovenia (FURS): The Rules on 
the exercise of public powers by 
FURS officials adopted. The 
2014 Financial Administration 
Act redefines the powers of 
officials of the joint customs 
and tax authority. The manner 
in which public officials may 
exercise their powers had to be 
laid down.
Date of 
organisational 
measure09/12/2015
Expected result of 
operational 
measureTargeting of investigations, Enhanced ex-ante 
controlsEnhanced coordination; Enhanced cooperation; 
Enhanced information flow; Targeting of checks; 
Targeting of investigations
Operational 
measure - date12/10/2015 29/09/2014
Sectoral or 
HorizontalHorizontal Sectoral Horizontal Sectoral
Sectors concerned Expenditure - Agriculture Expenditure - Cohesion policyRevenues - Customs; 
Revenue - Tax fraud
Sectors addressed 
by measure 
against corruption 
in public 
procurementPublic sector (including political sphere) Public and Private sector  Public sector (including political sphere)
Other measures 
preventing 
corruption in 
public 
procurementMeasures addressing transparency in public 
procurementMeasures addressing transparency in public 
procurement; Measures to imporve the 
effectiveness of management of public 
procurement; Measures to prevent corruption 
amonst personnel, including management, 
Measures to improve the effectiveness of 
control and audit
CommentConcerning the remit of KPK: (3.a) Single 
measure adopted, (d) OPERATIONAL, 7.b 
Update; (7.1) Scope of operational measure: 
Points selected: (a), (c), (d), (e) = IT tools (IT 
data feeding, Other IT), Flagging practice, 
Risk indicators, Increased number of checks; 
(7.2) Points selected: (b), (d), (e), (f), (g) = 
Enhanced cooperation, Targeting of checks, 
Targeting of investigations, Enhanced ex-ante 
controls, Enhanced ex-post controls. (7.3) 
Operational measure adopted on 1 March 
2015.SLOVENIA    (SI) (continued)
MEASURES
 
54 
 
ARSKTRP – administrative and organisational 
measures: In 2015 the Agency of the Republic of 
Slovenia for Agricultural Markets and Rural 
Development (ARSKTRP) organised courses for all its 
staff on combating fraud. Agency representatives also 
attended a training event as part of the Hercules 
project in Padua, Italy. On the basis of training courses 
and past experience, a manual on fraud indicators was 
produced, which forms the cornerstone of a more 
effective and systematic fight against fraud related to 
disbursements from the agricultural funds.Ministry of the Interior (Police and the Police and Security 
Directorate): Annual guidelines for police work: The Minister 
for the Interior has issued the guidelines and instructions 
for drawing up the Police work plan for 2015. Point 1.1 of 
the guidelines says that the Police is to continue to identify 
and investigate economic crime and organised forms of 
corruption — with particular emphasis on cases that hurt 
the budget and those that result in large-scale material gain 
— and strengthen cooperation between specialised 
investigation task forces. The THEMIS project on 
investigation of corruption and fraud against the EU was 
carried out in 2015.The Government Office for Development and European 
Cohesion Policy (SVRK) is drawing up a new strategy for 
fighting fraud against the EU, which will lay down the 
scope of work and make provisions for the use of EU 
funds. The procedure is under way.
Title/description of the measure reported by SVRK: 
Obligatory elements of the 2014-2020 co-financing 
contract facilitating recovery. We add the reply from the 
Ministry of Finance - Department for Management of EU 
Funds/CA under the 3rd Measure. (1) 1.a Certifying 
Authority (MF-CA): In cases where EU assets have been 
used unjustly, a claim is immediately opened against the 
Intermediate Body (IB).Public procurement and the remit of the 
Commission for the Prevention of Corruption 
(KPK): 1. The IT tools have been upgraded in 
the interest of the public authorities, the general 
public and the media, now allowing access to 
data on spending by public institutions (through 
contracts for work and material or copyright 
contracts) on goods and services provided by 
public sector employees;
2. Local authorities have produced integrity 
plans and identified risks (KPK presented its 
findings at a round-table entitled Municipal 
assets – a focal point for corruption risk .Financial Administration of 
Slovenia (FURS): The Rules on 
the exercise of public powers by 
FURS officials adopted. The 
2014 Financial Administration 
Act redefines the powers of 
officials of the joint customs 
and tax authority. The manner 
in which public officials may 
exercise their powers had to be 
laid down.
Date of 
organisational 
measure09/12/2015
Expected result of 
operational 
measureTargeting of investigations, Enhanced ex-ante 
controlsEnhanced coordination; Enhanced cooperation; 
Enhanced information flow; Targeting of checks; 
Targeting of investigations
Operational 
measure - date12/10/2015 29/09/2014
Sectoral or 
HorizontalHorizontal Sectoral Horizontal Sectoral
Sectors concerned Expenditure - Agriculture Expenditure - Cohesion policyRevenues - Customs; 
Revenue - Tax fraud
Sectors addressed 
by measure 
against corruption 
in public 
procurementPublic sector (including political sphere) Public and Private sector  Public sector (including political sphere)
Other measures 
preventing 
corruption in 
public 
procurementMeasures addressing transparency in public 
procurementMeasures addressing transparency in public 
procurement; Measures to imporve the 
effectiveness of management of public 
procurement; Measures to prevent corruption 
amonst personnel, including management, 
Measures to improve the effectiveness of 
control and audit
CommentConcerning the remit of KPK: (3.a) Single 
measure adopted, (d) OPERATIONAL, 7.b 
Update; (7.1) Scope of operational measure: 
Points selected: (a), (c), (d), (e) = IT tools (IT 
data feeding, Other IT), Flagging practice, 
Risk indicators, Increased number of checks; 
(7.2) Points selected: (b), (d), (e), (f), (g) = 
Enhanced cooperation, Targeting of checks, 
Targeting of investigations, Enhanced ex-ante 
controls, Enhanced ex-post controls. (7.3) 
Operational measure adopted on 1 March 
2015.SLOVENIA    (SI) (continued)
MEASURES
 
55 
 
Act No  357/2015 Coll  on   financial  control and 
audit and on   the  amendments of certain acts.
The   system of the public internal  control will be 
streamlined  and more efficient by   this  act,  with 
the special emphasis on   the verification  and 
evaluation of the management  processes  and all  
activities  of the public authorities.This Act puts  
emphasis not  only on   the implementation of the 
programmes  co-financed  from the  EU  budget in  
2014-2020, but also  on   fulfilling of the goals of 
ESO  programme and of  the  Government 
ManifestoNational Strategy for the Protection of the 
European Union´s  Financial
Interests  in the Slovak RepublicCentral Coordination Authority’s Guidelines no . 13   for the assessment 
of the conflict of interest  in the public procurement procedure The   
goal of the guidance is  to define the term “conflict of interests”  in the 
course of the public  procurement and to  set  basic  rules  binding for  
the MAs, responsible  for  the implementation of OP  in PP  2014-2020, 
by   the identification and assessment of the  conflict of interest  during 
PP.Central Coordination Authority’s Guidelines no . 5  for determining 
financial corrections,  to be made   by   MA   for  non-compliance with 
the rules on   public procurementAct No  343/2015 Coll  on   public  procurement and on   the  
amendments of certain acts
Interpretative Opinion of the  Office for  Public Procurement no   
3/2015 of 06.05.2015 on   the assessment of potential conflict of 
interests  between the public contracting authority,  the contracting 
authority,  entity  pursuant to Article 7  of the  Act on   public  
procurement and the bidder Form   for the assessment of conflict of 
interest  during a control  conducted bythe   Office,  which shall  be 
part  of each control  file from 01.  09.  2015The   development phase of the  
implementation of IS AGIS  (Module 
Financial
Management)
Anti-fraud cycle Prevention; Detection and Recovery and sanctionPrevention; Detection and Recovery and 
sanctionPrevention; Detection; Investigation and prosecution and Recovery and 
sanctionPrevention and Detection Recovery and sanction
 Measures New  New and Update Administrative, New and 
Updated OperationalNew Admninistrative, New Organisational and New Operational New Legislation and New AdministrativeNew Admnistrative, New Organisational, 
New Operational 
Package of 
measuresLegislative Administrative and Operational Administrative, Organisational and Operational Legislative and AdministrativeAdministrative, Organisational and 
Operational
Scope of 
operational 
measureWeb reporting/Hotline; Flagging  practice; 
Risk indicators and Structured cooperation 
with law enforcement Flagging  practice; Risk indicators and Structured cooperation with law 
enforcement IT tools (“IT data  feeding” , “Other IT” )
Reasons of 
administrative 
measureOTHER: The   absence of rules  for assessing conflicts of interest  in the 
procurement procedures at the national level, the absence of definition  
of an official body  assessing the existence of a conflict of interest  in the 
procurement processesTo clarify or consolidate existing rules and To enhance existing 
measureTo clarify or consolidate existing rules and To 
enhance existing measureTo clarify or consolidate existing rules; To 
enhanced existing measure; Cross-cutting 
measure, multi-agency measure/measure 
with impact on various bodies 
 Reasons for 
legislative 
measureTo clarify or consolidate existing  rules and To 
remedy flawsTo enforce the rules in line with developments in EU lawScope of 
organisational 
measure Competence and Inter-agency cooperationRecovery                                      
OTHER:Development of  the  IS for  the  new   
processes of irregularities  recovery SLOVAKIA(SK)
MEASURES
Scope of 
legislative 
measure Comptences; Powers; Definition of a specific topic; 
Recovery and Financial penaltiesDefinition of a specific topic and Other admnistrative penalties
Scope of 
administrative 
measure OTHER:Anti-fraud strategy Management of funds; Investigation; PenaltyOTHER:Interpretative Opinion of the  Office for  Public Procurement 
No  3/2015 of 06.05.2015 on   the assessment of potential conflict of 
interests  between the public contracting authority,  the contracting 
authority,  entity  pursuant to Article 7  of the  Act on   public  
procurement and the bidder,  published on   web side of the Office. 
A  form for  the assessment of conflict of interest  during a control  
conducted by  the office,  which shall  be part  of each control  file 
from 01.  09.  2015
 
56 
 
Act No  357/2015 Coll  on   financial  control and 
audit and on   the  amendments of certain acts.
The   system of the public internal  control will be 
streamlined  and more efficient by   this  act,  with 
the special emphasis on   the verification  and 
evaluation of the management  processes  and all  
activities  of the public authorities.This Act puts  
emphasis not  only on   the implementation of the 
programmes  co-financed  from the  EU  budget in  
2014-2020, but also  on   fulfilling of the goals of 
ESO  programme and of  the  Government 
ManifestoNational Strategy for the Protection of the 
European Union´s  Financial
Interests  in the Slovak RepublicCentral Coordination Authority’s Guidelines no . 13   for the assessment 
of the conflict of interest  in the public procurement procedure The   
goal of the guidance is  to define the term “conflict of interests”  in the 
course of the public  procurement and to  set  basic  rules  binding for  
the MAs, responsible  for  the implementation of OP  in PP  2014-2020, 
by   the identification and assessment of the  conflict of interest  during 
PP.Central Coordination Authority’s Guidelines no . 5  for determining 
financial corrections,  to be made   by   MA   for  non-compliance with 
the rules on   public procurementAct No  343/2015 Coll  on   public  procurement and on   the  
amendments of certain acts
Interpretative Opinion of the  Office for  Public Procurement no   
3/2015 of 06.05.2015 on   the assessment of potential conflict of 
interests  between the public contracting authority,  the contracting 
authority,  entity  pursuant to Article 7  of the  Act on   public  
procurement and the bidder Form   for the assessment of conflict of 
interest  during a control  conducted bythe   Office,  which shall  be 
part  of each control  file from 01.  09.  2015The   development phase of the  
implementation of IS AGIS  (Module 
Financial
Management)
Expected result of 
operational 
measureEnhanced coordination; Enhanced 
cooperation
and Enhanced information flow  Enhanced cooperation; Targeting of checks; Enhanced ex-ante 
controls and Enhanced ex-post controls Enhanced information flow                               
OTHER: strengthening of the comprehensive 
solution for irregularities  area at all levels
Expected result of 
organisational  
measure: 
resourcesNeutral on resources Neutral on resources
Type of act within 
administrative 
measureDecision, Resolution Circulaire/circular, Instructions, Guidelines, Manuals Circulaire/circular, Instructions, Guidelines, Manuals OTHER:Development of  the  IS for  the  new   
processes of irregularities  recovery.
Brief description 
of the legislative 
measureThe   new   Act on   financial  control and audit 
creates  such an environment  of the public internal  
control and audit that  will provide the assurance of 
effectiveness, efficiency and  sound  management of 
public  expenses.  Proper and effective  setting  of 
the public internal  control and audit system is  one 
of the important tools  of the Government  to detect  
hidden system risk  and the prevention of fraud and 
other criminal offencesAct No  343/2015 Coll  on   public  procurement and on   the  
amendments of certain acts,
This Act shall  enter into  force on   18.04.2016  and it transposes 
the relevant
public  procurement directives into the Slovak legal  system
Legislative Act - 
numberAct No  357/2015 Coll Act No  343/2015 Coll
Legislative Act - 
date10/11/2015 18/11/2015
Date 07/01/2016 18/03/2015 04/08/2015
Legislation - type 
of ActLaw/Act Law/Act
Nature of the 
measureHorizontal Horizontal Horizontal Horizontal Sectoral
Sectors concerned Expenditure - Agriculture
Corruption within 
PPPublic  sector (including political sphere)
Mesures taken in 
the fight against 
corruption in PPMeasures addresing transparency in public  procurement; Measures 
to improve the effectiveness of management of the public  
procurement; Measures addressing transparency of companies 
participating in public   SLOVAKIA(SK) (continued)
MEASURES
 
57 
 
Drawing up a Fraud Prevention 
Action Plan and organising anti-
fraud training for entities carrying 
out paying agency tasks.A comprehensive reform of public 
procurement legislation on the basis of EU 
Directives 2014/23/EU, 2014/24/EU and
2014/25/EU on public procurement.Data system link 
from the Structural 
Fund's data system 
to the Finnish Tax 
Administration for 
use in checking 
applicants' tax 
liabilities.A campaign against the hidden economy.  The 
previous campaign against the hidden economy, 
which ended in 2015, involved the reform of the 
Procurement Act, the tax number register for the 
construction sector, the reform of the 
Contractor's Liability Act, streamlining the 
international exchange of tax data and stepping 
up the penalties for financial crime. A campaign against financial crime and aiming to reduce the 
size of the hidden economy has operated continuously since 
1996. Includes coordination of a wide range of duties 
relating to various administrative areas, ministries and 
agencies, and deciding on actions to take and resources.
Anti-fraud cycle DetectionPrevention; Detection; Investigation and 
prosecution; Recovery and Sanction PreventionPrevention; Detection; Investigations and 
prosecution; Recovery and sanctionPrevention; Detection; Investigations and prosecution; 
Recovery and sanction
 MeasuresAdministrative update; Operational 
updateNew legislation NewNew legislation and amendment; Operational 
updateNew legislation, Amendment and Update Operational
Scope of 
legislationOther admnistrative penalties   
OTHER:Regulation of general government 
procurement procedures.Competences; Powers; Definition of a specific 
topic; Financial penalties; Other administrative 
penalties;Criminal sanctionsCompetences; Powers; definition of a specific topic; Financial 
penalties; Other administrative penalties; (more) Criminal 
sanctions
 Reasons for 
legislative 
measureTo enforce the rules in line with 
developments in EU lawTo remedy flaws To remedy flaws
Breif description 
of the legislative 
measureReview of all national legislation concerning 
public procurement on the basis of the EU 
Directives on procurement.  The provisions 
of the Directive that will be implemented 
include several anti-corruption measures.Reform of the Contractor's Liability Act to extend 
its scope of application and the reporting 
obligation.  In the construction sector, tax 
numbers will be on picture ID. Tax Administration 
register of tax numbers.
Legislation - Type 
of ActLaw/Act Law/Act Law/Act
Legislative Act - 
numberThe legislation has not yet been submitted 
to Parliament. The aim is that the new 
provisions will enter into force in 2016. The 
deadline laid down in the EU Directives on 
procurement for national implementation of 
the provisions is April
2016. The exact date of entry into force is 
not known.For example, the reform of legislation, such as 
Act 22.12.2006/1233.
-> 22.5.2015 /678 Act on the Contractor’s 
Obligations and Liability when Work is Contracted 
OutFor example, the reform of legislation, such as Act 
22.12.2006/1233.
-> 22.5.2015 /678 Act on the Contractor’s Obligations and 
Liability when Work is Contracted Out
Legislative Act - 
date18/04/2016 22/05/2015 22/05/2015
Scope of 
administrative 
measureEligibility criteria; Monitoring/desk 
checks;On the spot checks; Audit 
checklist and Irregularities 
reportingFINLAND    (FI)
MEASURES
 
58 
 
Drawing up a Fraud Prevention 
Action Plan and organising anti-
fraud training for entities carrying 
out paying agency tasks.A comprehensive reform of public 
procurement legislation on the basis of EU 
Directives 2014/23/EU, 2014/24/EU and
2014/25/EU on public procurement.Data system link 
from the Structural 
Fund's data system 
to the Finnish Tax 
Administration for 
use in checking 
applicants' tax 
liabilities.A campaign against the hidden economy.  The 
previous campaign against the hidden economy, 
which ended in 2015, involved the reform of the 
Procurement Act, the tax number register for the 
construction sector, the reform of the 
Contractor's Liability Act, streamlining the 
international exchange of tax data and stepping 
up the penalties for financial crime. A campaign against financial crime and aiming to reduce the 
size of the hidden economy has operated continuously since 
1996. Includes coordination of a wide range of duties 
relating to various administrative areas, ministries and 
agencies, and deciding on actions to take and resources.
Scope of 
operational 
measureRisk indicators IT tools Structured cooperation with law enforcement Structured cooperation with law enforcement
Type of act  within 
administrative 
measureAction plan
    Reasons for 
administrative 
measureTo enhance existing measure
Date of 
organisational 
measure01/01/2015
Expected result of 
operational 
measure Enhanced ex-post controls; 
Enhanced ex-ante controlsEnhanced 
information flowEnhanced coordination; Enhanced cooperation; 
Enhanced information flow; Targeting of checks; 
Targeting of investigationsEnhanced coordination; Enhanced cooperation; Enhanced 
information flow; Targeting of checks; Targeting of 
investigations
Operational 
measure - date31/12/2015 01/01/2015 22/05/2015 22/05/2015
Sectoral or 
HorizontalSectoral Horizontal Sectoral Sectoral Sectoral
Sectors concerned Expenditure - AgricultureExpenditure - 
Cohesion policyRevenue - Customs; Revenue - Tax Fraud Revenue - Customs; Revenue - Tax fraud
Sectors addressed 
by measure 
against corruption 
in public 
procurementPublic sector (including political sphere) Public sector (including political sphere)
Other measures 
preventing 
corruption in 
public 
procurementMeasures addressing transparency in public 
procurement; Measures to improve the 
effectiveness of management of public 
procurementMeasures addressing transparency in public procurement; 
Measures to improve the effectiveness of management of 
public procurement
CommentBy international standards, Finland has taken few 
anti-corruption measures, and it may be that most 
corruption offences go undetected, particularly 
corruption involving public procurement. 
According to the memorandum of the working 
group, the reform of the national Procurement 
Act, based on the EU Procurement Directive, 
does
not focus enough on anti-corruption measures.  
More attention should be paid to fighting 
corruption in municipal public procurement; 
municipalities account for most of the public 
procurement in Finland.In 2015, the police administration introduced guidelines on 
the prevention, detection and investigation of bribes and 
other corruption offences. The guidelines are intended to 
increase police expertise in tackling corruption.  The primary 
aim of the guidelines is to increase police officers' capacity to 
detect bribery and other corruption offences, particularly in 
sectors, such as public procurement, where there is a special 
risk of corruption. The anti-corruption cooperation network set 
up a working group in 2015 to draw up Finland's first national 
anti-corruption strategy.FINLAND    (FI) (continued)
MEASURES
 
59 
  
In March 2015, the Swedish Ministry of Finance initiated 
an inquiry tasked with reviewing the legal situation 
regarding OLAF’s on -the-spot checks in Sweden , inter 
alia in order to bring it up-to-date with the present 
Multiannual Financial Perspective 2014-2020. The inquiry 
proposes some legal changes that would enter into force 
in January 2017. These proposals are currently subject to 
referral to authorities and other actors concerned in 
Sweden until April 2016.The Swedish Council for the protection of the European 
Union's financial interests (the SEFI Council) has been 
working on its triannual report to the Government for the 
years 2013-2015. The report sets out which measures have 
been undertaken during this period to promote efficient and 
correct management of EU-related funds. It also contains a 
description of the coordination of the relevant authorities' work 
to combat fraud, other irregularities and inefficient 
management concerning EU funds. (The Council was created 
by the Government to promote the efficient and correct use of 
EU-related funds in Sweden.)On 6 March, the Financial Management Authority 
arranged a seminar for officials from MAs and AAs for the 
EU funds. Its aim was to boost knowledge of the risks of 
error in the new programme period. One session was 
spent on procurement and state aid, which are specific 
risks for fraud and error. The aim of that session was to 
help the authorities become better at checking compliance 
with the rules and at informing beneficiaries of the public 
procurement rules. In 2015, as one of the first two MS, Sweden had a model for 
standard scales of unit costs within the Social Fund approved 
(Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/2195). The 
model covers most of the expenditure in the national Social 
Fund programme for 2014 –2020 and entails major 
simplification for project managers and a reduction of the risk 
of irregularities. 
Anti-fraud cycle Detection  fraud prevention fraud prevention Prevention; Detection
 Measures New legislation and amendment Update New Administrative New
Scope of legislation Competences; Powers
 Reasons for 
legislative measureTo clarify or consolidate existing rules; To 
remedy flaws; To enforce the rules in line with 
developments in EU law
Breif description of the 
legislative measureThe proposals from the inquiry cover on- the-
spot checks and the role of competent 
authorities and the AFCOS. However, the 
proposals are still subject to referral.
Legislation - Type of 
ActDecree
Legislative Act - 
numberThe inquiry covers both laws/acts and decrees. 
A tentative date of entry into force is indicated 
below.
Legislative Act - date 01/01/2017SWEDEN    (SE)
MEASURES
 
60 
  
In March 2015, the Swedish Ministry of Finance initiated 
an inquiry tasked with reviewing the legal situation 
regarding OLAF’s on -the-spot checks in Sweden , inter 
alia in order to bring it up-to-date with the present 
Multiannual Financial Perspective 2014-2020. The inquiry 
proposes some legal changes that would enter into force 
in January 2017. These proposals are currently subject to 
referral to authorities and other actors concerned in 
Sweden until April 2016.The Swedish Council for the protection of the European 
Union's financial interests (the SEFI Council) has been 
working on its triannual report to the Government for the 
years 2013-2015. The report sets out which measures have 
been undertaken during this period to promote efficient and 
correct management of EU-related funds. It also contains a 
description of the coordination of the relevant authorities' work 
to combat fraud, other irregularities and inefficient 
management concerning EU funds. (The Council was created 
by the Government to promote the efficient and correct use of 
EU-related funds in Sweden.)On 6 March, the Financial Management Authority 
arranged a seminar for officials from MAs and AAs for the 
EU funds. Its aim was to boost knowledge of the risks of 
error in the new programme period. One session was 
spent on procurement and state aid, which are specific 
risks for fraud and error. The aim of that session was to 
help the authorities become better at checking compliance 
with the rules and at informing beneficiaries of the public 
procurement rules. In 2015, as one of the first two MS, Sweden had a model for 
standard scales of unit costs within the Social Fund approved 
(Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/2195). The 
model covers most of the expenditure in the national Social 
Fund programme for 2014 –2020 and entails major 
simplification for project managers and a reduction of the risk 
of irregularities. 
Scope of 
administrative 
measureThe report sets out which measures have been 
undertaken during this period to promote efficient 
and correct management of EU-related funds. It 
also contains a description of the coordination of 
the relevant authorities' work to combat fraud, 
abuse and other improper use of EU funds. A 
description of how the Council's work has 
developed, and its plans for how it will operate in 
the next three years, are also included. Management of fundsEligibility criteria; Monitoring of funds; 
Monitoring/desk checks; On the spot checks; 
Irregularities reporting
Type of act  within 
administrative 
measureAction plan The seminar did not result in a legal act. Decision, Resolution
    Reasons for 
administrative 
measureTo enhance existing measure; Cross-cutting 
measure: The SEFI Council consists of the National 
Economic Crime Authority, the Board of Agriculture, 
the Västerbotten County Council , the Migration 
Agency, the Police Authority, the EFS Council, the 
Agency for Economic and Regional Growth and the 
Financial Management Authority. The Council is as 
a forum for cooperation in which exchanges of 
experience can take place between authorities 
which, in various ways, are involved in the 
management and protection of the EU's financial 
interests in Sweden. During this period the Council 
has held three meetings a year, which were 
followed by thematic afternoon sessions with 
various speakers.To clarify or consolidate existing  rulesTo make use of the possibilities of simplification 
afforded by the EU rules, thus achieving 
simplification and reduced risk of error and 
irregularities.
Sectoral or Horizontal Horizontal Horizontal Sectoral Sectoral
Sectors concernedExpenditure - Agriculture; Expenditure - 
Fisheries; Expenditure - Cohesion policy; 
Expenditure - Migration and asylum Expenditure - Cohesion policySWEDEN    (SE) (continued)
MEASURES
 
61 
   
Anti-fraud strategy.  Given that  UK authorities managing EU  funds  have
differing governance arrangements,  it is not the  case nor would it be suitable to have a single national anti 
fraud strategy.  However, entities such as HMRC and the Scottish  Government  authorities  have in place or 
are developing
anti-fraud strategies in relations to customs duty under-evaluation  and  ESIF administration respectively.  All 
UK Managing  Authorities  for  the 2014-20 operational programmes are  developing  appropriate anti-fraud  
measures as
required by   Article  125.4 c) of the Common  Provisions Regulation, CPR.Adoption of Arachne (data based IT mining Tool for ESIF funds in Wales
Anti-fraud cycleFraud prevention; Fraud detection; Fraud investigation and prosecution; Recovery and 
SanctionPrevention; Detection; Investigation and prosecution
 Measures New and update New
Scope of 
administrative 
measureEligibility criteria; Management of funds; Monitoring/desk checks; On the spot checks; Audit 
checklist; Investigation; Irregularities reporting; Penalty; Recovery
Scope of operational 
measureIT tools; Flagging practice; Increased number of checks
Type of act  within 
administrative 
measureAction plan
    Reasons for 
administrative 
measureTo clarify or consolidate existing rules and To enhance existing measure
Expected result of 
operational measureEnhanced co-ordination; Enhanced cooperation; Enhanced information flow; Targeting of 
checks; Enhanced ex-ante controls; Enhanced ex-post controls
Sectoral or 
HorizontalSectoral Sectoral
Sectors concerned Revenue - Customs; Expenditure - Cohesion policy  Expenditure - Cohesion policy
Sectors addressed 
by measure against 
corruption in public 
procurementPublic and Private sectorUNITED KINGDOM    (UK)
MEASURES
 
62 
  
Anti-fraud strategy.  Given that  UK authorities managing EU  funds  have
differing governance arrangements,  it is not the  case nor would it be suitable to have a single national anti 
fraud strategy.  However, entities such as HMRC and the Scottish  Government  authorities  have in place or 
are developing
anti-fraud strategies in relations to customs duty under-evaluation  and  ESIF administration respectively.  All 
UK Managing  Authorities  for  the 2014-20 operational programmes are  developing  appropriate anti-fraud  
measures as
required by   Article  125.4 c) of the Common  Provisions Regulation, CPR.Adoption of Arachne (data based IT mining Tool for ESIF funds in Wales
Further details on 
HMRC's new 
strategy on 
customs under-
evaluationThe   strategy is specific to HM   Revenue  &   Customs, the  Home  Office,  Trading Standards and other delivery partners.  It 
has  been approved and signed  off at Director for all  participating lines of business.The   strategy was   created  in  June 
2015 and approved/signed off  in  September. It has been shared with the  Home  Office  and Trading  Standards  and has 
been more  widely publicised  through the UK Fulfilment House  Working  Group  (led  by Business Innovation  &   Skills  
(BIS), and communicated to  the  EU  Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF)  who  have an interest in customs duty  undervaluation.
2015  after which it has been under perpetual  review as the nature of the fraud activity  has been better  understood.Measures addressing trasparency in public procurement; Measures to prevent coruption amon personnel; Measures addressing transparency of 
companies paritcipating in public procurement; Measures to improve control and audit.
Additional measuresUNITED KINGDOM    (UK) (continued)
MEASURES
Further details  of HMRC's   new   strategy on   customs under-evaluation:1. Anti-fraud strategy:(a)  Does your organisation have an anti-fraud  strategy  to safeguard EU funds/revenue?  Yes(b) Is the strategy specific to your organisation or is  it a general strategy for HM   Government and  the devolved 
administrations  covering all EU funding/revenues?  Please specify the level at  which the strategy is  signed off e.g.  Director level?The   strategy is specific to HM   Revenue &   Customs, the  Home  Office,  Trading Standards and other delivery partners.  It has been approved and signed off at Director for all 
participating lines of business.(c) When was the anti-fraud strategy last reviewed and updated? How often is it reviewed? The   strategy was   created in June 2015 and approved/signed off  in  September 2015  after which it has been under perpetual  Annex to United Kingdom Questionnaire review as the 
nature of the fraud activity  has been better  understood..(d) Has   the anti-fraud strategy been  communicated outside  your organisation (is  it shared  with other  government bodies  and/or  in the public domain)? It has been shared with the  Home  Office  and Trading  Standards  and has been more  
widely publicised  through the UK Fulfilment House  Working  Group  (led  by Business Innovation  &   Skills  (BIS) and communicated to  the  EU  Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF)  who  have an interest in customs duty  undervaluation.
 
63 
 3. CASE STUDIES AND BEST PRACTICES BY MEMBER STATES  
In the framework of the preparation of the Annual Report for the Protection of the EU 
financial interests and the fight against fraud – 2015, Member States were also requested 
to submit case studies and best practices which would help to contextualise the 
information and analysis provided in the Report an d its accompanying documents.  
The present section presents the summaries of the contributions provided by the Member 
States. The cases are presented per budget sector.  
3.1. Revenue  
3.1.1.  Tobacco  
For several years, OLAF investigated suspicious activities that led to the discovery of a 
major cross -Europe cigarette smuggling network. Due to OLAF's cooperation with the 
Bulgarian  authorities, there was successful fraud prevention, detection and recover y of 
national and European budget in a case relating to an organized trafficking ring involving 
persons from other countries as well as government officials supporting the offenders. In 
March 2015, seven offenders were arrested at a warehouse in Bulgaria w hile unloading 
significant amounts of cigarettes bearing no excise labels. A total of 28.7 million pieces 
of cigarettes without excise labels were seized totalling to 8 million Euros. Charges were 
brought against 32 people.  
There is a high -level of communi cation between European countries and an eagerness to 
be involved in the process of protecting the EU budget. Both Bulgaria  and Italy  have 
cooperated with other countries to combat the smuggling of tobacco products. In 2015, in 
relation to investigations led by the Bulgarian Directorate General for 'Combating 
Organized Crime' and the law enforcement authorities in the United  Kingdom , Spain, 
Romania  and Moldova , an enhanced exchange of information on the channels of 
Europol was performed aimed at investigating an organized crime group involved with 
illegal production of cigarettes on the territory of different countries. This resulted in a 
coordination meeting held at the Hague between the police authorities from the countries 
concerned including police officers from Romania, Moldova and Lithuania. The joint 
investigative activities on the case resulted in the disclosure of four illegal fa ctories 
producing cigarettes –one in Hungary, one in Belgium and two in Poland. Similarly, in 
2015, the Guardia di Finanza (Financial Police) in cooperation with the corresponding 
German , French , Polish , Hungarian  and Greek  bodies, managed to identify an 
extensive organisation importing large shipments of smuggled cigarettes of Eastern 
European origin into Italy. 16.5 tonnes of smuggled cigarettes were seized, together with 
the 60 vehicles used by the traffickers totalling to 21 million Euros.  
Furthermore, significant efforts were made by both France  and Greece  to tackle the 
smuggling of tobacco. On two occasions in 2015, the Hellenic Coast Guard identified 
vessels which were in the process of unloading smuggled cigarettes when acting on 
information regardin g the tackling of organised forms of crime and countering the 
 
64 
 smuggling of tobacco products. With regards to the first case (Rosetta), a total of 11 799 
420 packages were discovered amounting to 2 359 624.014 Euro of duties evaded and, in 
relation to secon d case (Zahra), a total of 33 260 000 cigarettes were found which evaded 
duties amounting to 6 086 007.87 Euro. The French customs authorities intercepted two 
containers at the port of Le Havre and identified 1 400 boxes of 50 cartons of smuggled 
cigarette s which were not authorised to be sold in the EU and were clearly intended to 
exclusively supply the parallel and illegal market.  
 
Greece : Rosetta Case  

 
65 
  
Greece : Rosetta Case  
 
Greece : Rosetta Case  

 
66 
  
Greece : Rosetta Case  
 
Greece : Rosetta Case  

 
67 
  
Gree ce: Zahra Case  
 
Greece: Zahra Case  
 
Greece: Zahra Case  

 
68 
  
Greece: Zahra Case  
3.1.2.  Customs  
During 2015, the Bulgarian  customs authorities detected and took measures against 
fraudulent and criminal methods and practices of some traders who violate of national 
and supranational law by declaring a very low value of the goods in their importation and 
customs clearance, there by causing enormous damage to the national and European 
budget. Thanks to close cooperation with OLAF and the customs administrations of 
other Member States, including through participation in joint customs operation 
"SNAKE", appointed experts from the Bul garian National Customs Agency have 
developed a ‘Guide on prevention and detection and clearance of low prices’ using 
relevant methodologies developed by OLAF and different Member states customs 
authorities. The result of operation "SNAKE" was to decrease the circle of economic 
operators representing textiles and shoes from China at low prices from 51 to just 16 
operators.  
In relation to Greece , in 2015, the Attica branch of the ELYT (Customs Auditing 
Department) carried out 11 investigations relating to th e protection of the financial 
interests of the EU against fraud, and more specifically, the evasion of import duties and 
anti-dumping duties by means of false declarations of origin or misdescription of the 
tariff classification. Of the above investigation s, one has been completed, while the 
others are still on -going. In the same year, 13 investigations were also completed from 
the previous year (2014), resulting in 12 infringements (simple customs infringements 
and smuggling).  
More specifically, one of th ese Greek  cases mentioned above involved a company under 
investigation which started importing photovoltaics into Greece from the People’s 
Republic of China (PRC) in July 2012. From June 2013 to April 2014 the company 

 
69 
 imported photovoltaics from Malaysia a nd from May 2014 to January 2015 from 
Taiwan. It should be noted that imports of photovoltaics into the EU from these countries 
are not liable to import duties. An investigation was carried out by OLAF 
representatives, who in cooperation with the customs a uthorities in Taiwan, found out 
that the goods in question (photovoltaics) arrived in containers from the PRC in the Free 
Trade Zone of Taiwan (FTZ) and were then transferred directly (usually the same day or 
the following day) to other containers destined  for the EU. Therefore, the company 
devised a way of providing the Greek customs authorities with documents accompanying 
the customs clearance of goods, such as invoices, certificates of origin, bills of lading, 
etc., issued by companies in Taiwan to make it appear that the imported photovoltaics 
originated in that country (Taiwan), thereby avoiding liability for paying the duties. The 
evaded duties, establishing duties and taxes of the Elefsina Customs Office and the Fifth 
Customs Office of Piraeus, amount  to EUR 2 582 720.28. This amount comprises: anti -
dumping duties: EUR 2 114 718.75, countervailing duties: EUR 455 416.98 and VAT: 
EUR 12 584.55.  
3.2. Expenditure  
3.2.1.  Structural funds  
In Estonia , an undertaking used aid to purchase a unique technological solution for 
recycling plastic waste into building materials at a cost of EUR 475 000. In the course of 
the investigation it was found that the actual purchase price of the equipment was EUR 
55 0 00 and that the second -level implementing body had been shown bogus (fake) 
transactions with a higher value for the purpose of obtaining more aid. In order to avoid 
similar occurrences in future, clearer provisions will be drawn up on verification of the 
procurement process and the equal treatment of tenderers, including on the transparency 
of the procurement process, and the provision of detailed information on equipment in 
tenders will be made obligatory.  
Furthermore, another Estonian  case involved the u se of aid by an undertaking to acquire 
a plastic waste cleaning line at a cost of EUR 959 952. An investigation revealed that the 
components of the equipment were already in the possession of the beneficiary or its 
associated undertaking prior to acquisiti on. The documents presented to the second -level 
intermediate body were fictitious, as the transactions had been performed with an 
undertaking not engaged in supply of the equipment concerned. In actual fact, the 
undertaking had bought the equipment from it self at a price several times higher, with 
the aim of obtaining more aid funding. The aid was not paid out, so the case was one of 
attempted fraud. In order to avoid similar occurrences in the future, clear provisions on 
verification of the procurement pro cess, the equal treatment of tenderers, and the 
transparency of the procurement process will be drawn up, and the provision of detailed 
information on the equipment in the tenders will be made obligatory.  
There have been several operations on behalf of Italy to combat fraud in connection with 
payments made from the EU Budget. The first example concerns Structural Funds, and 
 
70 
 in particular, the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF). The operation carried 
out by the Guardia di Finanza (Financial Police) i n Trapani was prompted by tax 
inspections of a group of businesses operating in the tourism and hotel sector, all 
connected to a single family. Further inquiries into the tax aspects shed light on a string 
of false invoices used by the hotel businesses, to  both unduly reduce their tax burden and 
to support applications for funding from the Structural Funds for a project to upgrade and 
expand hotel accommodation. Among other things, the investigations established a range 
of fraudulent behaviour on the part o f the leading partner in the criminal organisation. 
This behaviour was intended to divert from the assets of the companies corporate assets 
that might be subject to seizure in order to satisfy claims brought by the tax authorities.  
The operation identifie d income of around EUR 40 million on which tax had not been 
paid, invoices for non -existent transactions of EUR 20.6 million, and VAT infringements 
worth a further EUR 16 million.  Overall, 14 individuals were reported to the ordinary 
judicial authority fo r tax offences, serious fraud and misappropriation at the expense of 
the state, and four legal persons were reported for their administrative liability in the 
matter. On another occasion, an investigation identified that a criminal organisation was, 
produc ing and using various forged documents, in order to enable a group of companies 
to collude and unduly benefit from EUR 1 million from the European Social Fund. The 
investigation resulted in 26 natural persons being reported to the judicial authority for 
conspiracy and serious fraud with intent to obtain public funds, together with nine legal 
persons for their administrative liability in the matter.  
Again, in Italy , the Guardia di Finanza in Ancona carried out a criminal investigation 
into the awarding of an  international works contract in Côte d'Ivoire, directly funded by 
the European Commission through the European Development Fund. In -depth 
investigation revealed a complex fraud mechanism put in place by an Italian company in 
which false documentation was submitted to the contracting authority when the contract 
was being awarded, attesting to the fulfilment of the technical and professional 
requirements needed to participate in the tender procedure. Subsequently, once the 
contract had been awarded, supplier s' invoices were submitted for amounts that had been 
inflated, or were made out in the name of unsuspecting suppliers, in order to document 
the progress of the works. The investigation resulted in five individuals being reported to 
the judicial authority f or tax offences and serious fraud against the State and the 
European Commission, in relation to the improper request and receipt of Community 
resources of EUR 4.8 million, of which 15 % (EUR 800 000) was blocked before 
payment. In order to recover the amou nts unduly received, a preventative seizure was 
carried out of goods, resources and securities of EUR 3.2 million.  
Latvia  reported a case where a legal person sent the Investment and Development 
Agency of Latvia (LIAA) a letter with an attached notice fro m the GE Money Bank 
stating that the enterprise has received a 310 000 euro loan from the bank. Through the 
communication with the bank’s employees it was confirmed that the bank never issued 
such notice to the legal person. In August 2011 LIAA sent a requ est to the Latvian State 
Police to start a criminal investigation. In May 2015 the City of Riga Vidzeme District 
 
71 
 Court found that the five defendants involved were guilty. Furthermore, on a second 
occasion and regarding another case, during the evaluation of a legal person’s submitted 
final payment request, LIAA found contradicting information relating to the costs of the 
purchased equipment. LIAA and the State Revenue Service’s crosschecks provided no 
way of establishing the purchased equipment’s origins, since it was in the possession of 
at least four different owners after the manufacturer initially sold it. The legal person 
purchased the equipment through several intermediaries after arranging three 
procurements.  In December 2011 LIAA sent a request to the Latvian State Police to start 
a criminal investigation. In May 2015 the Court found a natural person guilty and 
sentenced to 3 years prison time, while two natural persons were found guilty and were 
both sentenced to 2 years in prison.  
Moreover, in th e third case reported by Latvia , a legal person, following a procurement 
procedure, claimed that some corrections were necessary in the technical specification 
for the equipment they were willing to purchase. Because of that another procurement 
procedure h ad to be held. In both procurements the contract was awarded to the same 
supplier, but the price of the equipment in the offer in the second procurement exceeded 
the price that was offered during the first one by 442 000 euro. The Investment and 
Developmen t Agency of Latvia (LIAA) suspected that the legal person had mistakenly 
set the price in euro instead of lats in the initial procurement and decided to arrange a 
new procedure to fix the mistake. LIAA found out both that there was no established 
connectio n between the awarded supplier and the equipment’s manufacturer, and that the 
supplier was removed from the VAT payer register in Poland, and its officials were 
Latvian citizens. LIAA suspected a fraudulent collusion between the beneficiary and the 
supplie r and in December 2011 sent a request to the Latvian State Police to start a 
criminal investigation. In 2015 the Latvian Court found the defendants guilty and 
imposed financial penalties. The case was also reported to the European Commission and 
updated vi a IMS.  
Furthermore, two Slovenian  cases concerned companies performing tourist and 
hospitality services entered into agreements with the Ministry of the Economy on the co -
funding of their planned investments in the construction of new facilities or the 
renovation of old facilities using funds from the European Regional Development Fund. 
Together with the company contracted to carry out the construction work, they 
developed a scheme that enabled them, by stating fraudulent data, to justify claims for an 
unjustified payment of funds as per the aforementioned agreements.  Pursuant to the co -
funding agreement, the tourist companies then requested the Ministry to reimburse the 
portion of the costs that they had allegedly incurred due to payments for construction 
services. As evidence, they submitted false interim invoices and summary payment slips 
concerning the works performed, thus deceiving the Ministry into paying €3.7 million to 
the first company and €1.8 million to the second. After three charges by the Spec ialised 
Office of the State Prosecutor of the Republic of Slovenia from 2012 and 2013, 
judgements were issued in the matters "Rimske terme" and "Betnava". These are final 
 
72 
 against a total of 5 natural entities and 1 legal entity, while a conviction against 1 natural 
person is not yet final .  
Slovakia  has reported two cases both concerning the Intermediate Body under Managing 
Authority (hereafter IBMA); the first involving the reconstruction of heat distribution 
pipes and the second involving a hotel's compe titiveness. With regards to the first, a 
complaint was lodged to the staff of the Central Contact Point for OLAF (i.e. Slovakian 
AFCOS) against a potential misconduct of the IBMA within the approval procedure 
regarding the application for non -repayable con tribution (hereafter “NRC”). That 
complaint had also pointed to an unlawfully granted contribution for the project 
“Reconstruction of heat distribution pipes" and also indicated a suspected serious 
offence. The Slovak Government Office’s group of inspector s (hereinafter “group of 
inspectors”) established that IBMA failed to proceed in compliance with the System for 
managing the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund; IBMA’s Manual; the Call; and 
the Handbook for the Applicants. It was found out that the che ck on the formal 
correctness of the application for NRC carried out by the IBMA was insufficient. Despite 
this inadequate check, the IBMA accepted the applicant’s statement and did not again 
request the applicant to provide the particulars missing in the N RC. The group of 
inspectors informed both the IBMA and the Managing Authority (hereafter “MA”) on 
this situation and requested the MA for providing its opinion on the facts concerned. The 
MA subsequently requested the IBMA to provide information on a follo w-up action and 
to submit a proposal for a revised measure to remedy the deficiencies. As the Contract on 
granting the NRC had been breached, the IBMA withdrew from the Contract on granting 
the NRC. The group of inspectors found out that the funds had not been paid out to the 
beneficiary.  
With regards to the second Slovakian  case, OLAF played a major part as it was an 
anonymous complaint lodged to OLAF alleging that there was a risk of infringement of 
the conditions for granting assistance to the hotel that  led to an investigation by the 
Slovakian Central Contact Point for OLAF (hereafter “CCP”). On the basis of that 
complaint, the CCP’s staff carried out a check on how the IBMA proceeded within the 
application procedure regarding the NRC. The documentation submitted to the 
inspection group showed that it had not been possible to unequivocally determine the 
exact figure regarding the hotel’s accommodation capacities at the time before the 
signature of the Contract on granting the NRC. The IBMA carried out an on-the-spot-
check (hereafter “OTSC”), on the basis of expert assessors’ recommendation, after the 
Contract on granting the NRC had been signed, i.e. at the time when it was no longer 
possible for the IBMA to objectively check the situation in the accommoda tion capacities 
of the hotel before the reconstruction. The group of inspectors established that, at the 
date of the completion of the control focused on the project titled “Improving the 
competitiveness of the hotel”, no application for payment was submit ted and no funds 
were paid out.  
 
73 
 3.2.2.  Agriculture and Fisheries  
A German  rural tourism case in which a claimant applied to the granting authority for 
payment disbursement for a swimming pool project, which had not been put into effect 
by the end of the implement ation period, has also been reported. The amount wrongly 
applied for was so great that the granting authority, after applying the ensuing reduction 
penalty, rejected the payment application in its entirety. The claimant then instituted 
proceedings at the a dministrative court for the disbursement of EUR 50 000.00 in funds. 
The case presented suspicion about the source of the money with which the claimant had 
paid the assigned swimming -pool technology company and also about the lawful 
taxation of the payments  made by the claimant to the swimming pool technology 
company. The granting authority therefore additionally informed the central tax 
investigation authorities of Thuringia at the relevant tax office, by way of a control report 
on the operation. It can the refore be deduced that the funding management control 
system in place (in payment procedures), as well as the granting authority's own -
initiative investigation (Section 24 of Thuringian Administrative Procedures Act) have 
prevented fraud in this case.  
OLAF  was notified of a French  case regarding payment of aid to promote wine on the 
markets of third countries, as provided for under the CMO. In particular, the irregularity 
concerned invoices that were forged in order to collect more than EUR 600,000 of 
subsi dies from FranceAgriMer, the paying agency, for promoting wine outside the 
European Union. During the ex -post inspection of the first payment of around EUR 
350,000, the inspection body of the Mission COSA (inspection of operations in the 
agricultural secto r) revealed that fake invoices were produced through a financial partner 
in China who knew that they did not correspond to the services provided. This case was 
the subject of an accusation made to the Public Prosecutor by the MCOSA inspection 
body in 2013.  The operator was given a suspended prison sentence of 12 months and 
fined EUR 30,000 for fraud by the Bordeaux criminal court.  
The Italian  Guardia di Finanza in Caltagirone (Financial Police) identified a criminal 
organisation that prepared bogus documen tation attesting to the fulfilment of the 
requirements needed to access contributions for supporting production under the 
Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). The fraud was essentially based on false 
certification that the holder was working farm land, allowi ng entitlements to be obtained 
with a view to aid. Furthermore, fraudulent forms were discovered for the transfer of 
entitlements through the use of fictitious companies specially set up for this purpose. The 
investigation led to 57 persons being reported to the judicial authority for conspiracy and 
serious fraud with intent to obtain public funds. Nine of these persons were placed under 
arrest by order of the judiciary. Money, goods and other assets of EUR 2.7 million, as 
well as CAP entitlements used by t hose under investigation for a total of around EUR 
650,000, were also seized.  
Moreover, the Italian  Carabinieri of the Siracusa Provincial Unit and the Anti -Fraud 
Unit of the Carabinieri in Rome, following a long and complex investigation in 2015, 
 
74 
 carried out 14 precautionary measures in Sicily and Lazio ordered by the Siracusa 
investigating judge for conspiracy, serious fraud, corruption and forgery. The 
investigation revealed that the defendants, through deception and in some cases violence, 
had appropria ted over 2000 hectares of agricultural land with the aim of improperly 
receiving substantial Community payments by using forged certificates concealing their 
real use.  
Portugal  has reported several cases concerning the European Fisheries Fund (EFF) 
which e mphasize the methodology of control and the cooperation between the national 
entities. An anonymous complaint was addressed to the Tax and Customs Authority 
(AT) - Ministry of Finance involving a shipbuilding company, providing services to 
several vessel o wners. The AT examined the cash flows of the company providing 
services (the supplier) and ascertained that the company accounts showed no direct link 
between the amounts received from customers and those paid into the bank accounts. 
Additional documents r equested from the company were analysed, confirming that the 
following practice occurred repeatedly with payments received from customers (vessel 
owners): on the same date that sums were credited to the bank account, the company 
withdrew the same amount; t his was sometimes deposited into the customer's account 
and in other cases was transferred to the managing partner's personal account or to an 
unknown beneficiary. As such, the AT informed the Directorate -General for Maritime 
Policy (DGPM) in the Ministry of the Sea and the DGPM sent the case to the 
Directorate -General for Natural Resources, Safety and Maritime Services (DGRM), also 
in the Ministry of the Sea, which referred the case to the PROMAR Managing Authority. 
The Managing Authority informed the Pros ecutor's Office of the facts of the case and the 
EFF Certifying Authority (IFAP) sent the details of the irregularities to the Inspectorate -
General of Finance (IGF), which is the AA and the AFCOS. The IGF entered the 
communications in the IMS system and se nt them to OLAF in the third quarter of 2015.  
3.3. Best practices  
3.3.1.  Corruption and conflict of interest  
In the United Kingdom , there are four independent paying agencies for the CAP 
representing England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland respectively. Each paying 
agency is responsible for its own anti -fraud policies and operations. These are supported 
by national rules, legis lation and policies issued centrally.  
a. Policy  
All government employees are obliged to follow the Civil Service Employee Policy 
(issued nationally) covering professional conduct which includes detailed guidance on 
the conflict of interests and the accept ing or giving of gifts and hospitality.  
The policy is supported by national legislation and guidance. For example, the Bribery 
Act 2010, makes it a criminal offence to offer, promise or give a bribe to a government 
official or a person acting on behalf of a government body. It is also an offence to 
 
75 
 request, agree to receive, or accept a bribe.  Failure to comply with the policy could lead 
to disciplinary action, including dismissal or legal (i.e. criminal) proceedings. 
Furthermore, under the Freedom of Info rmation Act 2001, any member of the public has 
the right to request information on any gifts or hospitality that government employees 
have provided or accepted.  
b. How are people made aware of the rules regarding the possible conflict of interests 
and how are changes or updates communicated?  
Induction packs are issued at training courses for newcomers and guidance is re -issued 
when there are any updates or amendments. Regular email bulletins and news items are 
posted on internal departmental websites which  serve to keep all government employees 
updated on changes to the rules and procedures, and remind them of their legal and 
contractual obligations.  
c. Who is responsible for ensuring the policy is adhered to?  
Senior managers with the support of the human  resources departments and internal audit 
services are responsible for ensuring there is compliance with the rules.  
d. Scope  
The Cabinet Office is the lead government department for all government departments 
and agencies in the UK. It has provided a mandatory Civil Service Learning package 
which is an on -line module for all Civil Servants to complete. The module helps 
employees to avoid being in breach of the Gifts and Hospitality Policy and Procedures.  
In addition, the Counter Fraud and Corruption co urse aims to raise awareness and 
promote knowledge and understanding among every government employee of the 
importance of tackling fraud as well as the risks and issues relating to bribery and 
corruption. This is also a mandatory on -line course and line ma nagers are sent email 
notifications alerting them if their staff have not completed the course.  
e. Additional Guidance  
Individual government departments have introduced additional policies and guidance for 
employees to ensure that Cabinet Office policies  are adapted to meet particular 
departmental requirements. For example, a key document issued by the human resources 
department clearly explains the rules that all employees must adhere to including 
sections on the conflict of interests. The policy is revi ewed and re -issued annually to all 
employees.  
f. Does the policy contain a definition of a conflict of interests?  
As each paying agency is responsible for implementing, managing and updating policy 
there are different approaches taken in the UK.  
g. Outs ide employment  
 
76 
 The policy reminds employees that it is important that:  
• there is no suspicion that an employee or former employee might be influenced by the 
hope of future employment with another organisation;  
• an organisation does not gain an imprope r advantage over its competitors by 
employing a former employee of the paying agency who has had access to information in 
the course of their official duties that may affect that firm or its competitors.  
h. Outside occupations or activities whether paid o r voluntary  
The policy states that employees must not do the following:  
• do anything which might conflict with the interests of the paying agency or with a 
person's position as a public servant;  
• engage in outside activities involving the use of offici al experience, without first 
obtaining the consent at Director level.  
• hold directorships in, or undertake work in public or private companies, firms or other 
organisations without first obtaining the consent at Director level.  
• when accepting appointm ents in a personal capacity, employees need to convince 
their Director that there is no conflict of interests. There should be no question of 
financial exposure for the paying agency or government body. Employees may not 
engage in consultancy work on behal f of any company with which the paying 
agency/government department has a contractual relationship.  
i. Business Interests Register  
Each year agencies/government departments are required to undertake an exercise to 
establish whether agency employees (perm anent employees and contingent workers) or 
their close family have business interests, shareholdings or any other personal interests 
that could lead to a potential conflict with their duties as government employees.  
j. Sanctions  
If a person fails to decla re a business interest and is subsequently involved in an incident 
which uncovers such an interest, then the failure to declare may be interpreted as an 
attempt to deliberately mislead or defraud the agency.  
k. Does the policy and guidance cover the entir e procurement process and the 
management of subsequent contracts?  
Guidance explains that all members of staff must register any potential conflict of 
interest in the staff register of interests and register any interests as they arise. On an 
annual basis, an exercise is undertaken to ensure the register is complete.  
 
77 
 With regard to procurement, before the evaluation exercise commences, each member of 
the tender evaluation panel must declare any interests relating to the bids that have been 
received. This in cludes any previous and current connections with any of the companies 
that have submitted a bid. The chairperson of the Evaluation Panel in consultation with 
the Commercial Team of the paying agency/government body will decide whether the 
panel member shou ld be removed from the panel. All declarations of interests are 
formally recorded in the tender evaluation report for audit purposes.  
All procurements are carried out in a fair and transparent way to ensure that a clear audit 
trail of documentation exists . All purchases over a certain financial amount within the 
government department/agency are managed by a dedicated commercial unit to ensure 
purchasing is carried out within procurement guidelines set out by the European Union 
and the UK Government. Major purchasing and contract management is overseen by a 
senior manager. There is segregation of duties throughout the buying process which 
includes strict demarcation between the business area, the budget holder and the those 
responsible for commercial approva l. 
For the evaluation of procurement, the terms of reference are on a specific part of the 
government departments' intranets. Before commencement of an evaluation, the conflict 
of interests and the declaration of an interest is looked at. Each member of th e tender 
evaluation panel will be asked to declare whether they have any declaration of interests 
related to any of the bids received. This may include past or current financial connections 
with any of the companies that have submitted a bid. The chairpers on of the Evaluation 
Panel, in consultation with the Commercial Team will decide if the panel member should 
be removed from the panel. All declarations of interests will be recorded formally in the 
tender evaluation report for audit purposes.  
Contract management on a day -to-day basis is carried out by service managers within the 
business area. Any contract changes or escalations for the contract are directed via the 
senior manager from the service manager. These will require further internal ap proval 
before sign off.  
All employees are required to make an electronic declaration each year as to whether 
they or close family or friends have business interests. If an interest is declared the 
employee is required to provide full written details on a standard form which is then sent 
to their managers to ensure controls are put in place to mitigate potential risks. The form 
is then submitted to the Human Resources department where a central register is 
maintained.  
The Human Resources department will keep under review the management of controls in 
place to ensure consistency and as part of the assurance programme. All declarations are 
risk assessed and a risk rating derived by using the dedicated risk profiling for b usiness 
interests in addition to a comparison across sensitive posts and security registers to 
provide an overall view of the potential risk of that individual based on their official role 
and the business interests declared.  
 
78 
 Individual case files are hel d by the Human Resources Department. Files that relate to 
fraud, irregularities and cases relevant to the Civil Service Code are also held by the 
Head of Internal Audit.  
l. What guidance has been issued to implement and support the policy on conflicts of 
interest?  
Paying agencies review guidance annually. It is re -issued to all staff on the intranet at the 
start of the financial year. There is standing guidance on the electronic recording system 
that all employees are required to read before they are allow ed to make their 
declarations. A case study which discusses various issues that can arise due to a non -
registration of an interest has been used to raise awareness. New staff are given a 
welcome pack which includes sections on conduct and discipline. Staff  are required to 
read the conduct and security sections of the staff handbook when they join the paying 
agency.  
m. Does the guidance cover how to "deal" with anyone who fails to disclose a conflict of 
interests or makes a false declaration?  
The guidance d oes not specifically cover this, as cases are referred to an independent 
caseworker or internal fraud investigators depending on the severity of the alleged breach 
of the policy. Each department or agency then follows its own specific procedures for 
dealin g with breaches of the policy. Case officers are specifically trained to deal with 
such cases and are supported by experienced colleagues to ensure all cases are 
effectively investigated and concluded.  
3.3.2.  Managing Authority's kick -off meeting with contract ma nager  
Denmark  chose to refer to the reply to recommendation 3 in the 2014 Annual Report on 
the Protection of the European Union’s financial interests.15 The reply contains several 
practical examples of preventive measures to combat fraud. One example is the  anti-
fraud policy. This involves, among other things, contact details in the Managing 
Authority, to be used in the event of a specific suspicion of fraud. The anti -fraud policy 
document will be issued at the kick -off meeting with the contract manager, whe n the 
contract for EU co -funding is also handed out. The purpose of the kick -off meeting is to 
identify and draw attention to particular risk areas in the project process and 
administration, where experience suggests that irregularities can occur. The most  
important documents and declarations used for implementing the project will be 
distributed and reviewed at the meeting. Some of the content of the kick -off meeting is 
tailored to the specific projects, based on an assessment of the particular error risks in the 
project in question.  
The agenda may include the following topics:  
                                                            
15  See Commission Staff Working Document Follow -up of recommendations to the Commission report on 
the protection of the EU’s financial interests – fight against fraud, 2 014. 
 
79 
  State aid  
 Bidding process  
 Timesheets  
 Salary calculations  
 Contract staff  
 Start and end dates for social fund projects  
 Parties with common interests  
 
In addition, the participants will go through the entire project process, from application 
to final accounts and reporting, audit and disbursement (see figure below).  
All project managers who sign a contract for EU co -funding will also attend a course at 
the centrally appointed auditor, Deloitte. The course is paid for by the Managing 
Authority. Course participants receive training in areas which often prove to be a source 
of errors in the proj ect accounts. They are also taken through the various administrative 
challenges. The course provides knowledge and inspiration for the practical project work 
and the organisation of internal controls and procedures that will help to prevent 
irregularities.
 
80