COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Implementation of Article 325 TFEU by the Member States in 2019 Accompanying the document REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL 31st Annual Report on the protection of the European Union's financial interests - Fight against fraud - 2019
Date: 2020-09-03
Institutions: European Anti-Fraud Office, European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, EU budget, EU strategy, activity report, corruption, crime, fight against crime, financial control, fraud, fraud against the EU

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 3.9.2020  SWD(2020) 159 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Implementation of Article 325 TFEU by the Member States in 2019 Accompanying the document REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL 31st Annual Report on the protection of the European Union's financial interests - Fight against fraud - 2019 {COM(2020) 363 final} - {SWD(2020) 156 final} - {SWD(2020) 157 final} - {SWD(2020) 158 final} - {SWD(2020) 160 final}  
 
 
Implementation of Article 325 TFUE by the Member States 

Contents 
Protecting the EU’s financial interests .................................................................................................... 7 

OVERVIEW OF MEASURES TAKEN BY MEMBER STATES IN 2019 ............................................................ 7 

Anti-fraud measures taken by the Member States and the anti-fraud cycle ..................................... 8 

Progress on national anti-fraud strategies (NAFS) ................................................................................ 13 

Cross-cutting anti-fraud measures ........................................................................................................ 15 

Improving transparency, combating corruption and preventing conflicts of interest in public 
procurement...................................................................................................................................... 15 

Czech Republic: Cross-cutting: Evaluation of the ‘Strategy to combat fraud and corruption in the 
use of funds from the ESI Funds during the period 2014-2020’ ................................................... 15 

Croatia: Cross-cutting: Workshop on bid rigging in public procurement...................................... 16 

Cyprus: Cross-cutting: Fraud awareness workshop on irregularities and fraud ........................... 16 

Cyprus: Cross-cutting: AFCOS Bulgaria study visit to Cyprus on the topic ‘Errors, irregularities and 
fraud in ESIF projects and programmes’ ....................................................................................... 17 

France: Cross-cutting: Training and awareness-raising on the fight against fraud ....................... 17 

Latvia: Cross-cutting: Approval of the Corruption Prevention and Combating Bureau Strategy 
2020-2022...................................................................................................................................... 17 

Romania: Cross-cutting: Legislative measures aimed at the field of public procurement and 
control of EU funds ........................................................................................................................ 18 

Slovakia: Cross-cutting: Methodological guidance on financial control and audit issued by the 
Ministry of Finance ........................................................................................................................ 18 

Slovenia: Cross-cutting: Several legislative measures concerning the Government Office for 
Development and European Cohesion Policy ............................................................................... 19 

Slovenia: Cross-cutting: Several legislative measures concerning the Financial Administration . 19 

Combating financial and organized crime ......................................................................................... 20 

Italy: Cross-cutting: Adoption of Arachne system ......................................................................... 20 

Lithuania: Cross-cutting: Annual expert level meetings of Baltic States Tax and Customs Crimes 
Investigation Services. ................................................................................................................... 21 

Malta: Cross-cutting: Project to enhance capacities of the Maltese Police Force ........................ 21 

Spain: Cross-cutting: Creation of the Advisory Council for prevention and fight against fraud 
affecting the financial interests of the European Union ............................................................... 22 

Spain: Cross-cutting: National Strategy against Organized Crime and Serious Criminal Offences 22 

Sweden: Cross-cutting: Annual Work of the Swedish Council for the Protection of the European 
Union’s Financial Interests ............................................................................................................ 23 

Transposing EU law into national law ............................................................................................... 23 

1 

 
 
Austria: Cross-cutting: Legislative measures for fighting fraud affecting the financial interests of 
the Union by means of criminal law .............................................................................................. 24 

Czech Republic: Cross-cutting: Amendment of Czech legislation to enable the European Public 
Prosecutor’s Office to begin its work ............................................................................................ 24 

Estonia: Cross-cutting: Adoption of the PIF Directive ................................................................... 24 

Finland: Cross-cutting: Finnish Customs Account Register Project ............................................... 25 

France: Cross-cutting: Transposition of the EU Directive 2017/1371(PIF Directive) .................... 25 

Greece: Cross-cutting: Transposition into Greek law of Council Regulation on the establishment 
of the EPPO .................................................................................................................................... 26 

Ireland: Cross-cutting: Publication of Criminal Justice Bill ............................................................ 26 

Latvia: Cross-cutting: Transposition of the Directive (EU) on the fight against fraud to the Union's 
financial interests by means of criminal law ................................................................................. 27 

Romania: Cross-cutting: Legislative measures in the area of financial crime and money 
laundering ...................................................................................................................................... 27 

Spain: Cross-cutting: Legislative measures for fighting fraud affecting the financial interests of 
the Union by means of criminal law .............................................................................................. 28 

Legal measures to enhance cooperation between OLAF and national authorities .......................... 28 

Belgium: Cross-cutting: Legislative Act by the Flemish Parliament to enhance cooperation with 
OLAF .............................................................................................................................................. 29 

Latvia: Cross-cutting: Draft of OLAF assistance law ...................................................................... 29 

Slovakia: Cross-cutting: Introduction of legislation to improve cooperation with OLAF .............. 30 

Anti-fraud measures in Revenue ........................................................................................................... 30 

Customs Fraud ................................................................................................................................... 30 

Belgium: Revenue – Customs: Circular ‘OLAF files on traditional own resources (TOR) – CD 
810.2/207’ ..................................................................................................................................... 30 

Croatia: Revenue – Customs: Detection of falsely declared goods ............................................... 31 

Czech Republic: Revenue – Customs: Sharing best practices in the field of post-clearance checks 
between the V4 countries ............................................................................................................. 31 

Estonia: Revenue – Customs: Introduction of individual-based and commodity-based risk 
management ................................................................................................................................. 32 

Greece: Revenue - Customs: Establishment of an operational planning and coordination 
directorate ..................................................................................................................................... 32 

Portugal: Revenue – Customs: Measures in the field of tax revenue ........................................... 33 

Portugal: Revenue – Customs: System for the profiling and segmentation of economic operators
 ....................................................................................................................................................... 33 

Romania: Revenue – Customs: Administrative, organisational and operational measures in the 
field of tobacco and tobacco products smuggling ........................................................................ 33 

2 

 
 
Tax fraud ............................................................................................................................................ 34 

Croatia: Revenue – Tax fraud: Technical training on tools for monitoring and auditing of e-
commerce and acquisition of tools ............................................................................................... 34 

Estonia: Revenue – Tax fraud: Inspection of sub-contractors in the construction sector ............ 35 

Italy: Revenue – Tax Fraud: IT applications to combat VAT fraud ................................................ 35 

Poland: Revenue – Tax Fraud: Act of 12 April 2019 amending the VAT act and certain other acts
 ....................................................................................................................................................... 35 

Poland: Revenue – Tax fraud: Act of 9 August 2019 amending the VAT act and certain other acts
 ....................................................................................................................................................... 36 

Customs and tax fraud ...................................................................................................................... 36 

Bulgaria: Revenue – Customs and Tax fraud: New provisions of the Value Added Tax Act ......... 37 

Bulgaria: Revenue -  Customs and Tax fraud: Amendment to the Customs Act ........................... 37 

Hungary: Revenue – Customs and Tax Fraud: Measures taken by the customs and risk 
management departments of the National Tax and Customs Administration ............................. 38 

Anti-fraud measures in Expenditure ..................................................................................................... 38 

Multiple areas of shared management ............................................................................................. 38 

Bulgaria: all areas of Expenditure: Amendment of the Regulation on indicating irregularities ... 39 

Greece: All areas of Expenditure: Establishment of the National Transparency Authority .......... 39 

Hungary: Expenditure – Cohesion policy and Fund for the most deprived: Further development 
of beneficiary data link system ...................................................................................................... 40 

Hungary: Expenditure – Agriculture, Cohesion policy and Fund for the most deprived: Several 
trainings within the network of institutions dealing with EU funds ............................................. 40 

Agriculture ......................................................................................................................................... 41 

Austria: Expenditure – Agriculture: Transfer of the overall implementation of measures in the 
wine sector to the paying agency AMA ......................................................................................... 41 

Denmark: Expenditure - Agriculture: Action plan to prevent fraud with resources from 
agriculture funds ........................................................................................................................... 41 

Italy: Expenditure – Agriculture: Cooperation project between the National Agency for the 
Administration and Divestment of Assets Seized and Confiscated from Organised Crime, the 
Agricultural Payments Agency and the judicial authorities .......................................................... 42 

Lithuania: Expenditure – Agriculture: Approval of the Methodology of Sanctions for Violation of 
Legal Acts in the Implementation of the Lithuanian Rural Development Programme 2014-2020 
Measures ....................................................................................................................................... 42 

Fisheries ............................................................................................................................................. 43 

Denmark: Expenditure - Fisheries: Arm length’s principle ............................................................ 43 

Agriculture and Fisheries ................................................................................................................... 43 

3 

 
 
Germany: Expenditure – Agriculture and Fisheries: Raising awareness on conflicts of interest 
among the competent authorities in the agriculture and fisheries sector ................................... 44 

Slovenia: Expenditure – Agriculture and Fisheries: Training for employees of the Agency for 
Agricultural Markets and Rural Development on fraud prevention and detection ...................... 44 

Cohesion policy ................................................................................................................................. 44 

Austria: Expenditure – Cohesion policy: Administrative measures/procedures: High density of 
verifications ................................................................................................................................... 45 

Belgium: Expenditure – Cohesion policy: Participation in training courses .................................. 45 

Denmark: Expenditure – Cohesion policy: Whistle-blower scheme ............................................. 45 

Finland: Expenditure – Cohesion policy: Establishment of a fraud-reporting channel for the 
Structural Funds ............................................................................................................................ 46 

Germany: Expenditure – Cohesion policy: Updating of ERDF-related procedures within the 
authorities of Schleswig-Holstein .................................................................................................. 46 

Germany: Expenditure – Cohesion policy: Self-assessment of the fraud risk as regards the ESF  47 

Lithuania: Expenditure – Cohesion policy: Project ‘Strengthening law enforcement analytical 
capacity in preventing and detecting corruption crimes against EU financial interests’ .............. 47 

Poland: Expenditure – Cohesion policy: ‘Cross Checks’ IT application ......................................... 48 

Portugal: Expenditure – Cohesion policy: Strengthening cooperation between administration 
and judicial authorities .................................................................................................................. 48 

Slovakia: Expenditure – Cohesion policy: Project in cooperation with the OECD tackling fraud 
and corruption within the ESIF implementation ........................................................................... 48 

Additional measures reported by the Member States ......................................................................... 49 

Bulgaria .............................................................................................................................................. 49 

Creation of the unit ‘Crimes against the financial system and the financial interests of the EU and 
against the creditors’ at the Prosecutor’s Office .......................................................................... 49 

Denmark ............................................................................................................................................ 49 

Expenditure – Cohesion policy: OBS lists ...................................................................................... 49 

Germany ............................................................................................................................................ 49 

Legislative measures to combat fraud affecting the financial interests of the Union .................. 49 

Estonia ............................................................................................................................................... 49 

Specific cooperation with different authorities ............................................................................ 49 

Greece ............................................................................................................................................... 50 

Measures concerning expenditure ................................................................................................ 50 

Measures concerning revenue ...................................................................................................... 50 

Latvia ................................................................................................................................................. 50 

Measures in the area of procurement .......................................................................................... 50 

4 

 
 
Administration of the FEAD ........................................................................................................... 51 

Action plan concerning the ESIF funds .......................................................................................... 51 

Prevention of tax fraud ................................................................................................................. 51 

Organisational measures taken by the General prosecutor’s office ............................................. 51 

Informative campaign #FraudOff! ................................................................................................. 51 

Trainings for beneficiaries and investigative bodies ..................................................................... 51 

Romania ............................................................................................................................................. 51 

Code of Ethics adopted by the National Agency for Public Procurement..................................... 51 

Organisation of vocational traineeships by Federal Authorities and Agencies............................. 51 

Internal audits conducted at public authorities ............................................................................ 52 

Implementation of the anti-bribery standard ............................................................................... 52 

Slovenia ............................................................................................................................................. 52 

Implementation of FRC Decision into the Slovenian risk analysis system .................................... 52 

Spain .................................................................................................................................................. 52 

Measure to avoid false declaration of land implemented by Regional Paying Agencies ............. 52 

Training on the Irregularity Management System organised by the Member States .......................... 54 

Case Studies reported by Member States ............................................................................................. 55 

Bulgaria .............................................................................................................................................. 55 

Misuse of EAFRD funds in connection with the construction of a guesthouse ............................ 55 

Uncovered illegal factory for tobacco products not paying excise tax ......................................... 55 

Croatia ............................................................................................................................................... 55 

Customs case – irregularity and illegal treatment of tobacco precursors .................................... 55 

Estonia ............................................................................................................................................... 56 

Eradication of an International group of perpetrators specialized on excise fraud ..................... 56 

Counterfeit goods detected in cooperation with German Customs authorities .......................... 56 

Bunkering fraud ............................................................................................................................. 56 

Greece ............................................................................................................................................... 57 

Special management service for the 2014-2020 Greek rural development programme ............. 57 

Italy .................................................................................................................................................... 57 

Traditional own resources - Activities to combat the smuggling of foreign manufactured tobacco 
products ......................................................................................................................................... 57 

Latvia ................................................................................................................................................. 58 

Public procurements ..................................................................................................................... 58 

Lithuania ............................................................................................................................................ 58 

5 

 
 
"Smart" purchase of equipment ................................................................................................... 58 

Romania ............................................................................................................................................. 59 

SOPHRD (Sectoral Operational Programme ‘Human Resource Development’) - 2007-2013- Social 
Economy - Use or presentation in bad faith of false, inaccurate or incomplete documents or 
declarations, if the act results in EU funds being unduly obtained ............................................... 59 

Slovakia .............................................................................................................................................. 59 

Collusive behaviour of the tenderers ............................................................................................ 59 

6 

 
 
 
 
 
Implementation of Article 325 TFUE by the Member States 

Protecting the EU’s financial interests 
The  responsibility  of  protecting  the  EU’s  financial  interests  is  shared  between  the  European 
institutions and the Member States. The EU countries contribute the lion’s share of the EU budget, 
collect traditional own resources on behalf of the EU, and also directly manage about two thirds of 
EU expenditure. 

Article 325(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) states: ‘Member States 
shall take the same measures to counter fraud affecting the financial interests of the Union as they 
take to counter fraud affecting their own financial interests’.  

According  to  Article  325(5),  the  ‘Commission,  in  cooperation  with  Member  States,  shall  each  year 
submit  to  the  European  Parliament  and  to  the  Council  a  report  on  the  measures  taken  for  the 
implementation of this Article’.  

To compile this document and gather the information required for the above-mentioned report, the 
Commission has asked Member States to report up to three measures, the ones they consider most 
important for the protection of the EU’s financial interests. The annex to this document contains the 
model survey used to collect these contributions, using the ‘EU Survey’ web platform. 

OVERVIEW OF MEASURES TAKEN BY MEMBER STATES IN 2019 
Member  States  reported  66  measures  taken  in  2019  to  protect  the  EU’s  financial  interests  and 
combat fraud. As they had been asked to report up to three anti-fraud measures (the most important 
ones),  this  document,  though  not  exhaustive,  provides  a  good  overview  of  trends  and  priorities  in 
national  anti-fraud  measures.  Since  Member  States  may  report  'single'  or  'package'  measures,  the 
total number of individual measures is actually higher than the figure cited. This is because ‘package 
measures’ usually comprise several instruments adopted at the same time and for the same purpose. 
Of all the measures reported, 20 (30%) are 'packages'. 

Nine countries also reported additional measures (31 in total), which ae set out in chapter 6 of this 
document. 

Eight  countries  also  reported  case  studies  from  different  areas  of  protection  for  EU  financial 
interests. These are detailed in chapter 7. 

Four  types  of measures  were  reported  and  analysed:  legislative,  administrative,  organisational  and 
operational.  

A legislative measure is an act adopted by a legislative body or having the same legal weight. 

An  administrative  measure  is  a  legal  act  adopted  by  an  administrative  body  to  implement  actions 
provided for by legislative acts.  

An  organisational  measure  is  a  decision  or  any  other  non-legislative  act  taken  to  change  the 
organisational structure of an administration or body whose tasks and activities are relevant to the 
protection of the EU’s financial interests. 

7 

 
 
An operational measure is any action taken by an administration or body whose tasks and activities 
relate to the  protection of the EU’s financial interests that has a direct impact on the operation of 
that administration or body.  

In  2019,  the  Member  States  reported  mainly  legislative  measures  and  measures  focusing  on 
operational aspects, as shown in Figure 1. Together, they account for about 60% of the total. 

Figure 1: Distribution of reported measures by type 

Anti-fraud measures taken by the Member States and the anti-fraud cycle 
The  Commission  is  convinced  that  to  be  genuinely  effective,  the  fight  against  fraud  must  take  a 
holistic and comprehensive approach and include all the steps in the anti-fraud cycle. This approach 
is based on the observation that protecting the EU’s financial interests involves many players and a 
multiplicity  of  processes  and  stages  which  are  closely  interconnected  and  which  influence  one 
another.  

Figure 2, the anti-fraud cycle, depicts this model. 

8 

 
 
 
Figure 2: the anti-fraud cycle 

The PIF questionnaire asks Member States to state which steps in the anti-fraud cycle are targeted by 
the measures they report.  

The measures taken in 2019 covered the entire anti-fraud cycle. Similarly to those reported in 2017 
and  2018,  they  focused  on  fraud  detection  and  prevention  (73%).  Fewer  measures  targeted 
investigation, while even fewer targeted reparation (sanctions and recovery), as Figure 3 shows. 

Figure 3: reported measures and steps in the anti-fraud cycle 

9 

 
 
 
 
This distribution is very similar to that  observed over the last  three years. In this respect, Member 
States show a high degree of consistency and continuity. It is worth bearing in mind here that several 
of  these  measures  flow  directly  from  rules  and  guidelines  developed  at  EU  level  to  set  up 
‘investigation  and  prosecution’  and 
management  and  control  systems  (MCS).  Conversely, 
‘reparation’, as fields closely associated with the sovereign sphere of the state (law enforcement and 
justice), are less affected by these initiatives.  

When reporting the measures they have taken, Member States also indicate the specific areas they 
cover. 

Figure 4 shows how the various measures are distributed by area and by stage in the anti-fraud cycle. 

Figure 4: Measures shown by area addressed and stage/s in the anti-fraud cycle 

Figure  5  further  breaks  down  the  same 

information  by  Member  State  and  by  area.

10 

PreventionDetectionInvestigationRecovery Total N° of measuresPublic procurement15137516Financial crime (incl. money laundering)101213417Organised crime55337Corruption65628Conflict of interest12124313Fraud definition11118415AFCOS797210Whistleblower34325Customs / TOR / illicit trade11138516Shared management and control of EU funds201913826Antifraud or anticorruption strategy11128214Other873511TOTAL4848301766%73%73%45%26%100% 
 
 
Figure 5: Number of measures reported by area 

It is worth bearing in mind that each measure can target more than one area. 

11 

Member StateNo of measuresPublic procurementFinancial crime (incl. money laundering)Organised crimeCorruptionConflict of interestFraud definitionAFCOSWhistleblowerCustoms / TOR / illicit tradeShared management and control of EU fundsAntifraud or anticorruption strategyOtherBE31112BG31111121CZ3112DK31121DE3112212EE321111IE1111GR31122111221ES321211111FR2112112HR3111111IT3112CY21222LV312111111LT3121111112LUHU31121MT11NLAT31121PL3112PT3121RO31111SI311121SK32121231FI2111SE111111TOTAL66161778131510516261411% of total100%24%26%11%12%20%23%15%8%24%39%21%17% 
 
 
The majority of measures relate to a single sector (60%), while the remaining 40% cover more than 
one, as shown in Figure 6.  

Figure 6: Cross-cutting v sectoral 

Figure 7 breaks down this information by Member State. 

Figure 7: Cross-cutting vs sectoral, by Member State 

12 

Member StateCross-cuttingSectoralTotalAT123BE123BG33HR123CY22CZ213DK33EE123FI112FR22DE33GR123HU33IE11IT123LV33LT123LU0MT11NL0PL33PT33RO213SK213SI123ES33SE11TOTAL283866 
 
 
 
Among the sectoral measures reported, 17 relate to various expenditure sectors and 14 to revenue. 
One addresses both sides of the budget. Figure 8 shows that cohesion policy accounts for the largest 
single group of measures in expenditure sectors, followed by agriculture and fisheries. 

Figure 8: Sectoral measures: expenditure 

Progress on national anti-fraud strategies (NAFS) 
By the end of 2019, 10 Member States had adopted a national anti-fraud strategy and notified the 
Commission accordingly. One  country’s anti-fraud strategy became  outdated and has not  yet been 
updated. Two countries say they have adopted a national strategy, but they have not sent it to the 
Commission.  Another  six  countries  say  that  a  procedure  to  adopt  such  a  strategy  is  under  way,  as 
shown in Figure 9. 

The  Commission  calls  on  all  other  Member  States  to  follow  these  examples  and  establish  national 
anti-fraud  strategies  based  on  the  guidelines  drawn  up  by  the  Commission  in  cooperation  with 
experts from the Member States.  

13 

 
 
 
Figure 9: NAFS - state of play 

A  national  anti-fraud  strategy  (NAFS)  helps  structure  measures  to  combat  fraud  affecting  EU  and 
national budgets. It helps with: 

identifying instances of vulnerability to fraud in the managing and control systems, 
 assessing the main fraud risks,  

o 
o 
o  establishing and implementing appropriate responses,  
o  evaluating any progress made,  
o  adapting responses to fraud trends and the resources available, and 
o 

involving all relevant stakeholders through enhanced cooperative and coordinated measures.  

A NAFS also helps standardise the response to fraud risks throughout the country, especially in those 
with a decentralised management structure. 

The benefits of a national anti-fraud strategy include: 

  Ensuring the effective and efficient protection of the EU’s financial interests (i.e. improving 
the  prevention,  detection  and  combating  of  corruption  and  any  other  illegal  activities 
affecting the EU’s financial interests); 

14 

 
 
 
  Setting  out  a  better  working  framework  within  which  the 

in  
implementing  and  monitoring  EU  funds  can  work  together  to  improve  administrative 
capacity  and  determine  more  precisely  the  roles  and  responsibilities  of  the  institutions 
legislative, 
involved.  This  would  ensure  effective  coordination  of  the 
administrative and operational activities; 

institutions’ 

institutions 

involved 

  Recovering  more  improperly  spent  funds  from  the  EU  budget  and  contributing  to 

proportionate and deterrent penalties, in accordance with the applicable law. 

Cross-cutting anti-fraud measures 
The Member States have reported a total of 27 cross-cutting measures. These have been divided into 
four subgroups, depending on the area in which they are implemented.  

Improving transparency, combating corruption and preventing conflicts of 
interest in public procurement 
The Member States have reported eight measures in this field.  

These measures are quite wide-ranging. They include: 

 

legislative  measures  to  make  administration  more  efficient  and  effective  (Slovenia)  or 
improve financial management in public procurement (Romania); 

  organisational  measures,  such  as  a  workshop  on  bid  rigging  (Croatia)  or  training  and 

awareness-raising on combating fraud and irregularities (Cyprus, France); and 

  administrative  measures,  such  as  methodological  guidance  on  financial  control  and  audit 
(Slovakia)  or  a  study  visit  (Cyprus)  for  the  anti-fraud  coordination  service  (AFCOS)  from 
another  Member  State  (Bulgaria)  on  ‘errors,  irregularities  and  fraud  in  ESIF  projects  and 
programmes’. 

Two  countries  (Czech  Republic  and  Latvia)  reported  strategies  to  combat  corruption  at  different 
levels.  One  strategy  consists  of  operational  measures,  while  the  other  is  a  combination  of 
operational, organisational and administrative measures.  

‘Strategy  to  combat  fraud  and 

Czech  Republic:  Cross-cutting:  Evaluation  of  the 
corruption in the use of funds from the ESI Funds during the period 2014-2020’ 
The  Czech  Ministry of Regional Development decided to draw up an evaluation of the ‘Strategy to 
combat  fraud  and  corruption  in  the  use  of  funds  from  the  ESI  Funds  over  2014-2020’  (hereinafter 
‘the  Strategy’).    This  evaluation  and  the  associated  analysis  entitled  ‘Evaluation  of  the  perceived 
functioning and effectiveness of selected JMP tools from the point of view of increasing transparency 
within the ESI Funds’ were carried out by external suppliers. 

The Strategy is a basic document which ensures that anti-corruption measures are incorporated into 
the methodological environment establishing the rules for implementing programmes in the Czech 
Republic. 

15 

 
 
Croatia: Cross-cutting: Workshop on bid rigging in public procurement  
Croatia  reported  about  the  meeting  of  the  Network  for  the  Management  of  Irregularities  held  in 
December 2019, where a workshop on bid rigging in public procurement took place.  

With  the  aim  of  preventing  irregularities  and  exchanging  good  and  bad  practices  in  handling, 
reporting and follow-up of irregularities, the Managing Authority (MA) for OP under the 'Investment 
for growth and jobs' goal has established the  Network  for the  Management of Irregularities at the 
level of the OP. In addition, for the purpose of prevention of irregularities and providing support in 
the field of public procurement, the MA has established operational network of public procurement 
experts and coordinators, and operational network of state aid experts and coordinators. 

Cyprus: Cross-cutting: Fraud awareness workshop on irregularities and fraud 
In  2019,  Cyprus  organized  a  workshop  to  intermediate  bodies  and  beneficiaries  in  relation  to 
prevention,  detection,  correction  and  reporting  of  irregularities,  including  fraud.  The  aim  of  the 
workshop  was  to  inform  participants  about  the  provisions  of  the  EC  regulations  on  co-financed 
programs  and  the  management  and  control  systems  established  in  the  implementation  of  such 
programs. 

The  main  speakers  of  the  workshop  were  representatives  of  the  Verification  and  Certification 
Directorate,  the  Management  Authority,  the  Audit  Authority,  the  Audit  Office,  the  Public 
Procurement Directorate, the Cypriot Police and OLAF. The workshop covered several areas, such as 
management and control systems in Cyprus; administrative and criminal investigations in EU funded 
projects; Commission guidance and main lessons learned from the study on anti-fraud measures; risk 
analysis  and  practical  cases,  red  flags  and  risk  indicators;  conflicts  of  interest;  tools,  training  and 
guidance from Commission services and reporting irregularities and fraud in the IMS database.  

16 

Anti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionAntifraud or anticorruption strategy SingleOperationalAThe evaluations reveal that in the context of the current programming period, the Strategy does not need to be updatedto confirm how well anti-corruption measures have been put togetherHAnti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionPublic procurement, corruption, control of EU fundsSingleOrganisationalAInter-agency cooperations, general trainingsRaising awareness and sharing informationH 
 
 
 
Cyprus:  Cross-cutting:  AFCOS  Bulgaria  study  visit  to  Cyprus  on  the  topic  ‘Errors, 
irregularities and fraud in ESIF projects and programmes’ 
In 2019, Cyprus reported about the study visit that was organized between AFCOS Cyprus and AFCOS 
Bulgaria, aimed at exchanging best practices in the project implementation, knowledge transfers and 
experience  in the  fields of errors, irregularities and fraud in ESIF projects. The main topics covered 
were  management  verification  as  measures  to  prevent  irregularities;  how  to  proceed  in  case  of 
irregularities and financial corrections; irregularities reporting; case studies in corruption within the 
procurement  cycle;  how  to  conduct  fraud  risk  assessment  and  analysis;  investigation  of  fraud  and 
corruption; administrative and criminal investigations.  

France: Cross-cutting: Training and awareness-raising on the fight against fraud 
In  2019,  France  reported  that  they  organised  a  training  on  raising  awareness  on  the  fight  against 
fraud  for  auditors  of  the  Interministerial  Commission  for  the  Coordination  of  Inspections  (CICC; 
national audit authority) and for public accountants.  

Latvia:  Cross-cutting:  Approval  of  the  Corruption  Prevention  and  Combating  Bureau 
Strategy 2020-2022  
In 2019, Latvia approved the Corruption Prevention and Combating Bureau Strategy 2020–2022 by 
order  of  the  prime  minister.  The  Strategy  names  priority  tasks  for  the  Corruption  Prevention  and 
Combatting  Bureau  (KNAB)  in  the  coming  years.  KNAB  will  pay  special  attention  to  the  public 

17 

Anti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionFraud definition, AFCOS, shared management and control of EU fundsSingleAdministrativeAManagement of funds, monitoring/desk checks, on the spot checks, Irregularities reporting, trainingsto clarify or consolidate existing rules, to enhance existing measuresHAnti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionInvestigation and prosecutionto clarify or consolidate existing rules, to enhance existing measuresHConflict of interest, fraud definition, AFCOS, shared management and control of EU fundsSingleAdministrativeAEligibility criteria, management of funds, on the spot checks, investigation, irregularities reporting, trainingAnti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionFraud definition, AFCOS, shared management and control of EU fundsSingleOrganisationalNGeneral trainingsNeutral on resourcesH 
 
 
 
 
procurements  within  the  projects  co-funded  by  the  European  Union,  procurements  in  the 
construction sector, the largest municipalities of Latvia and the Rail Baltica project. 

Romania: Cross-cutting: Legislative  measures  aimed at the  field of public  procurement 
and control of EU funds 
On  24  December  2019,  the  Romanian  government  passed  Government  Emergency  Order  No 
80/2019 that gives a Definition of types of infringements of public procurement rules for expenditure 
financed by the European Union. It also transpositions those rules into national legislation following 
the adoption of new guidelines approved by Commission Decision No (2019) 3452, in order to bring 
about good alignment and standardization of control measures carried out by European and national 
bodies. 

The Act adopts measures to ensure better financial management of European funds and creates the 
conditions  for  improving  the  degree  of  absorption  of  European  funds,  in  line  with  European 
developments. 

Slovakia:  Cross-cutting:  Methodological  guidance  on  financial  control  and  audit  issued 
by the Ministry of Finance 
In  2019,  the  Slovak  Ministry  of  Finance  issued  new  methodological  guidelines  on  financial  control 
and  audit.  These  guidelines  describe  in  detail  the  specific  procedures  and  principles  of  financial 
control and audit that are defined by law (the Act Nr. 357/2015 Col. on financial control and audit, 
amended on 01. 01.2019). Financial control legislation stipulates  the  obligation to create, maintain 
and develop financial management within public administration bodies. It is the basis for successful 
prevention of fraud and irregularities. 

18 

Anti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionInvestigation and prosecutionOrganisationalAd) General trainings;g) Other (Trainings on corruption prevention and combatting measures)c) Neutral on resourcesOperationalAe) Increased number of checks;f) Structured cooperation with law enforcement;g) Structured cooperation with judicial authoritiesa) Enhanced coordination;b) Enhanced cooperation;c) Enhanced information flow;d) Targeting of checks;e) Targeting of investigations;f) Enhanced ex-ante controls;g) Enhanced ex-post controlsa) Public procurement;b) Financial crime (including money laundering);d) Corruption;e) Conflict of interest;k) Antifraud or anticorruption strategyPackageAdministrativeAc) Monitoring/desk checks;f) Investigatione) Other (Operational Strategy - The previous operational strategy of KNAB covered period 2018-2019)HAnti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionInvestigation and prosecutionRecovery and sanctiona) Public procurement;j) shared management and control of EU fundsSingleLegislativeAc) Definition of a specific topic;i) Otherc) To enforce the rules in line with developments in EU lawH 
 
 
 
Slovenia: Cross-cutting: Several legislative measures concerning the Government Office 
for Development and European Cohesion Policy 
In 2019, Slovenia implemented several legislature measures that concern the Government Office for 
Development  and  European  Cohesion  Policy.  Firstly,  they  implemented  stronger  Cooperation 
between the State  Attorney’s Office and MA in order to improve the flow of information, increase 
efficiency of the  ECP  system,  improve  supervision, ensure  uniform  practise  and  raise  awareness  of 
the  State  Attorney’s  Office,  the  Public  Prosecutor’s  Office  and  the  MA.  Secondly,  they  started 
unifying the procedures for allocating all funds in the RS. This initiative and process is managed by 
Government Office for Legislation. A more transparent and uniform allocation of resources shall help 
facilitate controls  and  prevent  double  funding,  as  well  as  contribute to  a  more  equal  treatment of 
applicants. Thirdly, they adopted the ECP implementation law that provides the frame for a uniform 
allocation process, better controls and legal basis for making financial corrections.  

the  Financial 

legislative  measures  concerning 

Slovenia:  Cross-cutting:  Several 
Administration 
In  2019,  Slovenia  adopted  several  legislative  measures  that  concern  the  Financial  Administration. 
Firstly, they implemented the FRC Decision in their risk analysis system by adding 14 FRC risk profiles 
to the system. Local Customs Depts were informed about this by an official letter. The FRC decision 
lays down ‘the common financial risk criteria and standards. Secondly, Slovenia transposed Council 
Directive (EU) 2017/952 amending Directive 2016/1164 as regards to hybrid mismatches with third 
countries in order to restore confidence in the tax system and ensure that profits are taxed where 
economic  activities  take  place  and  value  is  created.  Thirdly,  the  transposed  Council  Directive  (EU) 
2016/1164 to lay down rules against erosion of tax bases in the internal market and the shifting of 
profits.  

19 

Anti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionHa) Public procurement;b) Financial crime (including money laundering);e) Conflict of interest;j) Shared management and control of EU fundsPackageAdministrativeN / Ab) Management of funds;c) Monitoring/desk checks;d) On the spot checks;e) Audit checklista) To clarify or consolidate existing rulesAnti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionInvestigation and prosecutionRecovery and sanctiona) Public procurement;j) Shared management and control of EU fundsSingleLegislativeNa) Competences;c) Definition of a specific topic;g) Criminal sanctions;h) Time barringNew sanctions, decreased time barring; a) To clarify or consolidate existing rules;b) To remedy flaws;c) To enforce the rules in line with developments in EU law;d) OtherH 
 
 
 
Combating financial and organized crime 
The Member States reported six measures in this field.  

Also here, their nature is quite diverse. They include: 

  operational measures, such as the implementation of the Arachne system (Italy) or a project 

to enhance capacities of the National Police force (Malta);  

  a package of organisational and operational measures implemented by coordinative groups, 

such as the annual expert level meetings of Baltic States Tax and Customs Crimes 
Investigation Services (Lithuania) or the annual work of the Swedish Council for the 
protection of the European Union’s financial interests (Sweden); and, similary to that, 
  an organisational measure creating an Advisory Council for prevention and fight against 

fraud affecting the financial interests of the European Union (Spain).  

Additionally, Spain also took an administrative measure through adopting a national strategy against 
organized crime and serious criminal offences.  

Italy: Cross-cutting: Adoption of Arachne system 
In  the  2014-2020  programming  period,  in  order  to  meet  specific  EU  legislation  requirements, 
including the establishment of appropriate anti-fraud measures, the Italian Inspectorate-General for 
Financial Relations with the EU (IGRUE) has launched a collaboration with the EC to promote the use 
of the Anti-Fraud Information System, Arachne. Its use results in an effective and proportionate anti-
fraud  measure  (Article  125  of  Regulation  (EU)  No 1303/2013).  The  internal  working  group, 
established at the Agency for Territorial Cohesion, is working on the functionalities of Arachne and is 
responsible for training around 150 users on how to use the system.  

The Arachne risk scoring tool represents the most advanced technology in terms of data mining and 
enrichment. Firstly, this tool can help supporting improvements to the effectiveness and efficiency of 
management  verifications,  thereby  contributing  to  desk  review  and  on-the-spot  verifications. 
Secondly, it can provide the managing authority the ability to document increased effectiveness and 
efficiency  of  management  verifications  over  time  and  thirdly,  prevent  potential  irregularities  and 
therefore lead to a reduction in error rates. 

20 

Anti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionSb) Financial crime (including money laundering);l) Other (Anti tax avoidance practice)SingleLegislativeAc) Definition of a specific topicc) To enforce the rules in line with developments in EU law 
 
 
Lithuania: Cross-cutting: Annual expert level meetings of Baltic States Tax and Customs 
Crimes Investigation Services. 
In 2019, Lithuania reported about the Annual Expert level meetings of Baltic States Tax and Customs 
crimes investigation Services. This measure is partially based on the Action Plan of the Baltic States 
customs  cooperation  for  2017-2019  and  Europol  EMPACT  Excise  Operational  Action  Plan.  These 
meetings  focus  on  cooperation  between  investigation  units  on  sharing  and  exchange  of  best 
practices  and  on  specific  information  on  the  latest  trend  based  initiated  criminal  investigations.  In 
the  framework  of  this  measure  Joint  Action  Days  (JAD)  "Arktos"  were  coordinated  by  FRONTEX  in 
May 2019 across Northern-Eastern EU border. 

Customs investigations services of three  Baltic States (Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania) is operating at 
the  external  EU  border  where  they  face  challenges  in  fighting  excise  fraud  due  to  extreme  price 
difference 
law 
enforcement  services  are  crucial  in  order  to  implement  protection  of  EU  financial  interests  and 
better prevention of economic fraud. 

in  neighbouring  countries.  Therefore,  better  cooperation  among  respective 

Malta: Cross-cutting: Project to enhance capacities of the Maltese Police Force 
The Malta Police Force (MPF) enhanced their capabilities through I2 MPF Project, adopted in 2019. 
This  Project  connects  the  internal  data  gathered  from  the  National  Police  System  as  well  as  from 
individual databases used by different units within the Force. By means of this software, MPF is in a 
better position to uncover and prosecute illegal activities. The software also enhances the exchange 
of information related to such activities, which include fraud, smuggling and economic crimes, with 
other law enforcement authorities (both at national and transnational level). 

The I2 MPF Project helped MPF to strengthen Malta's fight against fraud and corruption in order to 
protect  the  financial  interests  of  the  country  and  the  European  Union  (EU).  Furthermore,  MPF 
officers are now better equipped to forward the relevant data gathered through the I2 MPF Project, 
including  when  the  Force  is  required  to  cooperate  with  law  enforcement  authorities  in  other 
countries, in line with its duties under the Prum Decision. 

21 

Anti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionPublic procurement, antifraud or anticorruption strategySingleOperationalN IT tools ('IT data feeding', 'Other IT'), risk indicatorsEnhanced information flow and ex-ante controls; to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of management verifications in order to prevent potential irregularitiesHAnti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReason for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionInvestigation and prosecutiona) Increased resourcesHOperationalAc) Flagging practice;d) Risk indicators;e) Increased number of checks;f) Structured cooperation with law enforcementb) Enhanced cooperation;c) Enhanced information flow;d) Targeting of checks;e) Targeting of investigationsb) Financial crime (including money laundering);c) Organised crime;i) Customs/ToR/illicit trade;l) OtherPackageOrganisationalAb) Competence;c) Inter- agency cooperation 
 
 
 
Spain:  Cross-cutting:  Creation  of  the  Advisory  Council  for  prevention  and  fight  against 
fraud affecting the financial interests of the European Union 
In  2019,  Spain  created  the  Advisory  Council  for  Prevention  and  Fight  against  Fraud  affecting  the 
financial Interests of the European Union by Royal Decree 91/2019 of 1 March. This Advisory Council 
is composed by AFCOS (which holds its Secretariat), General Public Prosecutor Office, National Police 
and Guardia Civil, all the Managing Authorities for structural funds, Central Paying and Coordination 
Agency for agricultural funds, Audit Authority, Tax Agency, Office for Asset Recovery, State treasury 
(Anti-money  Laundering  authority)  and  a  representation  of  Regional  and  Local  entities,  among 
others.  

This  measure  aims  to  formalise  the  AFCOS  Network  and  shall  improve  the  coordination  among 
authorities over the entire anti-fraud cycle, which is one of the shortcomings which was highlighted 
by the European Court  of Auditors in its audit over MS’ antifraud measures  in the Cohesion Policy 
(Special Report 6/2019). It will also improve the cooperation between law enforcement authorities 
(police forces and Anticorruption Prosecutor’s Office) and administrative authorities (MA, AA, AFCOS 
etc.), as both types of authorities will be represented in the Advisory Council.  

Spain:  Cross-cutting:  National  Strategy  against  Organized  Crime  and  Serious  Criminal 
Offences 
On  21  January  2019,  the  Spanish  National  Security  Council  adopted  a  National  Strategy  against 
Organized  Crime  and  Serious  Criminal  Offences  2019-2023  (Resolution  of  the  National  Security 
Council of 21 January 2019, published by Orden PCI/161/2019, of 21 February 2019). 

This strategy lays down the  strategic framework for the actions to be  taken in the fight  against  all 
forms of  serious  criminal offences  and organized  crime.  It  is  important  because  every  action  to  be 
taken by national authorities in the field of fight against fraud affecting the financial interest of the 
EU  (e.g.  a  national  anti-fraud  strategy)  should  be  aligned  with  the  parts  of  this  strategy  which  are 

22 

Anti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralInvestigation and prosecutionHb) Financial crime (including money laundering)SingleOperationalNa) IT tools ("IT data feeding", "Other IT")c) Enhanced information flow;e) Targeting of investigationsAnti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionInvestigation and prosecutionRecovery and sanctionAFCOS, antifraud or anticorruption strategy, interinstitutional coordination SingleOrganisationalNInter-agency cooperationNeutral on resourcesH 
 
 
 
referred to criminal offences which could affect such field (. e.g. corruption and fraud against public 
budget).  

Sweden:  Cross-cutting:  Annual  Work  of  the  Swedish  Council  for  the  Protection  of  the 
European Union’s Financial Interests 
The  annual  work  of  the  Swedish  Council  for  the  Protection  of  the  European  Union’s  Financial 
Interests  is  an  ongoing  measure  to  protect  the  EU’s  financial  interests  in  Sweden.  The  Swedish 
Council  for  the  Protection  of  the  European  Union’s  Financial  Interests,  i.e.  the  SEFI  Council,  is 
responsible for coordinating initiatives in Sweden against fraud and other abuse of EU-related funds. 
The Swedish Economic Crime Authority is responsible for the Council’s offices. The Council enhances 
the cooperation between the eight agencies that are implementing EU-programmes in Sweden. The 
Council  has  also  organized  seminars  on  a  number  of  anti-fraud  issues  to  increase  awareness  and 
knowledge in the agencies. 

Transposing EU law into national law  
The Member States have reported 10 legislative measures in this field.  

Most measures concern the EU directive 2017/1371 (so-called ‘PIF directive’) that is about the 
protection of the Union’s financial interests. Six countries (Austria, Estonia, France, Ireland, Latvia, 
Spain) have reported about transposing this directive in 2019.  

Other measures concern Council regulation (EU) 2017/1939 that is about the establishment of the 
European Public Prosecutor’s Office (‘EPPO’). Two countries (Czech Republic and Greece) have 
reported about taking national legislative measures related to abovementioned regulation.  

One country (Finland) has reported measures related to transposing the fifth anti-money laundering 
EU directive 2018/843, whilst another (Romania) transposed EU Directive 2015/849 on the 

23 

Anti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionInvestigation and prosecutionRecovery and sanctionHFinancial crime (including money laundering), organised crime, corruption, customs / TOR / illicit tradeSingleAdministrativeNmeasures of all kinds regarding all forms of serious criminal offences and organised crime, including certrain measures in the field of corruption and fraud against public budgetCross-cutting measure, multi-agency measure; to structure and give coherence to the actions which must be taken by all the public authorities when combating serious criminal offences and organised crimeAnti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReason for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionInvestigation and prosecutionRecovery and sanctionAf) Structured cooperation with law enforcementa) Enhanced coordination;b) Enhanced cooperation;c) Enhanced information flowg) AFCOS;h) Whistleblower;i) Customs/ToR/illicit trade;j) Shared management and control of EU funds;k) Antifraud or anticorruption strategyPackageOrganisationalAc) Inter- agency cooperation;d) General trainings;e) Fraud awareness trainingsa) Increased resourcesHOperational  
 
 
 
prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist 
financing.  

Austria:  Cross-cutting:  Legislative  measures  for  fighting  fraud  affecting  the  financial 
interests of the Union by means of criminal law  
On 22 July 2019, the Austrian legislator announced Federal Law No 62/2019 in the Federal Law 
Gazette of the Republic of Austria (BGBl). This legislative act transposed the EU directive 2017/1371 
on the fight against fraud to the Union’s financial interests in respect of revenue other than revenue 
arising from VAT own resources and in respect of revenue arising from VAT own resources by means 
of national fiscal criminal law.  

On 27 December  2019, the  Austrian legislator announced Federal Law  No 111/2019 in the  Federal 
Law  Gazette  of  the  Republic  of  Austria  (BGBl).  This  legislative  act  transposed  the  EU  directive 
2017/1371 on the fight against fraud to the Union’s financial interests by means of national criminal 
law.  

Czech Republic: Cross-cutting: Amendment of Czech legislation to enable the European 
Public Prosecutor’s Office to begin its work 
The  Czech  Republic  implemented  this  legislative  measure  to  ensure  that  the  European  Public 
Prosecutor’s Office can in future discharge its responsibilities in the Member State. 

The  adoption  of  Act  No  315/2019  ensures  that  the  Office  can  discharge  its  responsibilities  and 
European  prosecutors  are  put  in  place  by  amending  the  Code  of  Criminal  Procedure,  the  Criminal 
Code, the Act on the Public Prosecutor's Office, employment provisions and other acts.  

Estonia: Cross-cutting: Adoption of the PIF Directive 
On 13 January 2020, Estonian legislators adopted an amendment that transposed into Estonian law 
the Directive on the protection of the Union’s financial interests (Directive (EU) 2017/1371). A new 
description of the necessary  elements  of procurement  fraud affecting the financial interests of the 
European  Union  was  established  (Section  209 1  of  the  Penal  Code)  and  the  necessary  elements  of 
illicit traffic were expanded (Sections 391 and 393 of the Penal Code) for cases in which a customs 
debt  of  10  000  euros  or  more  was  incurred  through  fraudulent  acts  or  by  carrying  out  illegal 

24 

Anti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralInvestigation and prosecutionOther: transposition of EU Directive (PIF)SingleLegislativeNg) Criminal sanctionsc) To enforce the rules in line with developments in EU lawHAnti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralDetectionInvestigation and prosecutionHAntifraud or anticorruption strategySingleLegislativeACompetences, PowersTo enforce the rules in line with developments in EU law 
 
 
 
operations or transactions. In accordance with the Directive, personal jurisdiction was also expanded, 
and the definition of an official of a foreign state was clarified. 

Although the amendment was adopted in 2020, it is included in the 2019 report since this is when all 
the preliminary legislative work was done. 

Finland: Cross-cutting: Finnish Customs Account Register Project  
On 26 April 2019, Finland adopted the Act on the Bank and Payment Account Monitoring System (the 
AMS  Act  571/2019).  Pursuant  to  the  Act,  the  Bank  and  Payment  Account  Monitoring  System  is 
composed  of  (1)  the  Bank  and  Payment  Account  Register  and  (2)  the  decentralized  Data  Retrieval 
System.  

Finnish  Customs  runs  the  Account  Register  Project,  which  will  include  the  creation  of  a  bank  and 
payment account register and related Web Service interfaces, and issuing regulation for defining the 
interfaces of the Data Retrieval Systems. 

This  measure  is  linked  to  the  implementation  of  the  fifth  Anti-Money  Laundering  Directive  (EU) 
2018/843 that must be transposed by the Member States by 10 January 2020.  

France: Cross-cutting: Transposition of the EU Directive 2017/1371(PIF Directive) 
France transposed the Directive EU 2017/1371 by Order No 2019-963 of 18 September 2019; this 
measure concerns the area of financial crime, organized crime and smuggling. The amendment to the 
legislation extends the territorial jurisdiction of French courts by removing the condition of 
reciprocity of the infringement, the subordination of the prosecution to a prior complaint by the 
victim or an official denunciation of the State in which the facts of the respective case took place as 
well as the condition that the infringement has to be established by a final decision of a foreign court 
that has so far been necessary.  In addition, criminal liability for certain crimes affecting the financial 
interests of the European Union has been increased and a criminal offence concerning intentional 
customs crimes was created.  

25 

Anti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionInvestigation and prosecutionRecovery and sanctionPublic procurement, Financial crimes (including money laundering), Fraud definition, Shared management and control of EU fundsSingleLegislativeADefinition of a specific topic, more criminal sanctionsto enforce the rules in line with developments in EU lawHAnti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralDetectionInvestigation and prosecutionFinancial crime (including money laundering)SingleLegislativeNImplementation of the 5th Money Laundering DirectiveTo enforce the rules in line with developments in EU lawH 
 
 
 
Greece: Cross-cutting: Transposition into Greek law of Council Regulation on the 
establishment of the EPPO 
In 2019, Greece reported the transposition into national law of Council regulation (EU) 2017/1939 of 
12 October 2017 implementing enhanced cooperation on the establishment of the European Public 
Prosecutor’s Office. Greece’s participation in the new institution of the European Public Prosecutor’s 
Office, which will be fully operational in 2020 and brings together 22 countries, represents a 
significant institutional development in the fight against fraud affecting the financial interests of the 
European Union and is an important step towards the creation of a unified criminal justice system, 
covering the EU as a whole. 

Ireland: Cross-cutting: Publication of Criminal Justice Bill  
On 1 January 2020, Ireland published the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) (Amendment) 
Bill which when enacted will give full effect to Directive (EU) 2017/1371 of the European Parliament 
and of the Council of 5 July 2017 on the fight against fraud to the Union's financial interests by means 
of  criminal  law.  The  offences of money  laundering  and  corruption  are  provided  for  in the  Criminal 
Justice  (Money  Laundering  and  Terrorist  Financing)  Act  2010  and  Criminal  Justice  (Corruption 
Offences) Act 2018. 

Directive  2017/1371  replaces  the  Convention  on  the  protection  of  the  European  Communities' 
financial interests of 26 July 1995, including the Protocols of 27 September 1996, 29 November 1996 
and 19 June 1997 which are currently provided for in Part 6 of the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud 
Offences)  Act  2001.  This  includes  an  expanded  definition  of  fraud  affecting  the  Union's  financial 
interests and a new offence of misappropriation. The maximum penalties provided for do not require 
amendment.  This  Bill  updates  the  provisions,  when  it  completes  its  passage  through  the  Irish 
Parliament and is enacted it will amend Part 6 of the 2001 Act to give full effect to the Directive. The 
Bill also amends the Criminal Justice Act 1994. 

While the Bill was published on 1/1/2020 all the preparatory work was completed in 2019, therefore 
it is included in this report.  

26 

Anti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralInvestigation and prosecutionRecovery and sanctionto enforce the rules in line with developments in EU law,  to adress issues which where not clearHFinancial crime (inclluding money laundering), organized crime, Fraud definition, smuggling / illicit trade,  control of EU fundsSingleLegislativeN/ACompetences, criminal sanctions, extension of the territorial jurisdictionAnti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralInvestigation and prosecutionFinancial crime (including money laundering), organised crime, corruption, smuggling / Illicit trade, control of EU fundsSingleLegislativeNCompetences, powersto enforce the rules in line with developments in EU lawH  
 
 
 
Latvia:  Cross-cutting:  Transposition  of  the  Directive  (EU)  on  the  fight  against  fraud  to 
the Union's financial interests by means of criminal law  
In  2019,  Latvia  has  taken  all  necessary  measures  to  implement  in  national  law  Directive  (EU) 
2017/1371 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2017 on the fight against fraud to 
the  Union's  financial  interests  by  means  of  criminal  law  (“the  Directive”).  The  Directive  lays  down 
minimum  rules  on  the  definition  of  criminal  offences  and  sanctions  in  the  fight  against  fraud  and 
other  illegal  activities  affecting  the  European  Union's  financial  interests  in  order  to  strengthen 
protection against criminal offences affecting those financial interests. In order to comply fully with 
the requirements of the Directive, the Criminal Law was amended. Amendments entered into force 
on 3 July 2019. 

Romania: Cross-cutting: Legislative  measures  in  the  area  of financial crime  and money 
laundering 
On  11  July  2019,  Romania  adopted  law  129/2019  that  transposes  into  national  law  Directive  (EU) 
2015/849 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering 
or  terrorist  financing,  the  transposition  deadline  for  which  was  26  June  2017.  The  legislative  act 
enshrines in law the existence of a national mechanism (put in place by all competent institutions in 
the field) for preventing and combating money laundering and terrorist financing. That mechanism 
represents  an  international  requirement  contained  in  the  FATF  Standards  and  Directive  849/2015. 
The  act  consolidates  the  concept  of  a  risk-based  approach.  It  establishes  registers  of  beneficial 
owners  of  legal  persons  that  can  be  used  by  State  authorities,  but  also  by  obliged  entities,  when 
applying customer identification. 

27 

Anti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionInvestigation and prosecutionPublic procurement, financial crime (including money laundering), fraud definitionSingleLegislativeAMore criminal sanctionsto enforce the rules in line with developments in EU lawHAnti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionInvestigation and prosecutionRecovery and sanctionHf) Fraud definition;l) Other (Transposition of EU directive - PIF)SingleLegislativeAc) Definition of a specific topic;g) Criminal sanctions;h) Time barringIncreased sanctions; increased time barring period; c) To enforce the rules in line with developments in EU law 
 
 
 
Spain: Cross-cutting: Legislative measures for fighting fraud affecting the financial 
interests of the Union by means of criminal law 
On  20  February  2019,  the  Spanish  legislator  transposed  the  Directive  (EU)  2017/1371,  of  the 
European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  5  July  2017  on  the  fight  against  fraud  to  the  Union's 
financial  interests  by  means  of  criminal  law  (PIF  Directive).  This  measure  was  an  obligation  for  all 
Member States and introduced Criminal liability of legal persons regarding offences against financial 
interests  of  the  EU  by  adopting  Organic  Law  1/2019,  of  20  February,  amending  Criminal  Code 
(Organic Law 10/1995).  

In addition to the  transposition, the  legislator has addressed two issues  which were not  clear. The 
first one is that the threshold for criminal liability affecting the Spanish national budget and the EU 
budget was not the same – in fact, it was 120.000 € when it comes to the Spanish national budget 
and 4.000 € when it comes to the EU budget. This difference was problematic in case of grants which 
were co-financed, where it was not clear how those thresholds should be applied. The Organic Law 
1/2019 has solved this problem by establishing the same threshold (10.000 €) for fraud affecting any 
kind of grants, irrespective of their source of funding.  

The  second  issue  refers  to  the  right  of  the  Administration  to  start  or  continue  and  finalise  the 
recovery  procedure  when  it  has  detected  an  irregularity  and  has  transmitted  the  file  to  the 
prosecutor considering the irregularity could be fraudulent, so that the administrative procedure for 
recovery does not have to top due to the sole existence of a criminal procedure. This possibility was 
introduced in 2013, but it was not clear if it was applicable also to fraud affecting grants financed by 
EU budget. Organic Law 1/2019 has expressively included this possibility with regard to EU grants.  

Legal measures to enhance cooperation between OLAF and national authorities 
The Member States have reported three legislative measures in this field.  

28 

Anti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionInvestigation and prosecutionHb) Financial crime (including money laundering)SingleLegislativeNa) Competences;b) Powers;c) Definition of a specific topic;e) Financial penalties;f) Other administrative penalties;g) Criminal sanctionsIncreased sanctions; c) To enforce the rules in line with developments in EU lawAnti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralRecovery and sanctionFinancial crime (including money laundering), corruption, fraud definitionSingleLegislativeADefinition of a specific topic, more criminal sanctions, criminal liability of legal persons regarding offences against financial interests of the EUto enforce the rules in line with developments in EU law,  to adress issues which where not clearH 
 
 
 
In one country (Belgium), a regional Parliament (Flemish) has adopted an according legislative act 
and in a second country (Slovakia), an according amendment to existing legislation was made on the 
federal level.  In another country (Latvia), an according draft legislation was submitted for 
Consultation.  

Belgium:  Cross-cutting:  Legislative  Act  by  the  Flemish  Parliament  to  enhance 
cooperation with OLAF 
On 22 March 2019, the  Flemish Parliament adopted Decree No. 1825  –  Decree  of 22 March 2019, 
Parliamentary Documents of the Flemish Parliament 2018-2019 in order to enhance cooperation of 
the judicial police within the Flemish Inspectorate with OLAF.  

From 23 May 2019, the supervisory authorities, administrative investigation officers and agents and 
officers  of  the  judicial  police  within  the  Flemish  Inspectorates  have  the  authority  to  use  the 
supervisory and enforcement rights granted to them under the Framework Decree on administrative 
enforcement  (KBH),  as  well  as  the  supervisory  rights  granted  to  them  under  sectorial  regulations, 
including  in  relation  to  assistance  provided  to  OLAF.  The  KBH  provides  legal  clarity,  ensuring  the 
streamlining  of  supervisory  and  assistance  rights  across  sectors  and  aligning  them  with  OLAF’s 
investigative powers. 

Latvia: Cross-cutting: Draft of OLAF assistance law 
In  2019,  Latvia  drafted  a  new  law  in  order  to  ensure  effective  cooperation  with  OLAF.  In  the 
beginning of 2020, a draft was submitted to the Government (Cabinet of Ministers) for Consultation. 
The law shall ensure Latvia’s ability to assist OLAF effectively during OTSC and to answer requests for 
information. The OLAF assistance Law will stipulate competence and powers of Ministry of Finance in 
order to ensure effective cooperation with OLAF. The Ministry of Finance will not have investigative 
powers, but it will have the clear right to assist OLAF during OTSC, to take administrative measures if 
an  economic  operator  resists  to  OTSC,  as  well  as  it  stipulates  the  Ministry  of  Finance’s  right  to 
request bank account information due to a request from OLAF. 

29 

Anti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralDetectionInvestigation and prosecutionHAFCOS, Customs / TOR / Illicit tradeSingleLegislativeN, APowersTo clarify or consolidate existing rules, to remedy flawsAnti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralDetectionInvestigation and prosecutionb) Financial crime (including money laundering);g) AFCOSSingleLegislativeProposala) Competences;b) Powersc) To enforce the rules in line with developments in EU lawH 
 
 
 
Slovakia: Cross-cutting: Introduction of legislation to improve cooperation with OLAF 
In 2019, Slovakia amended the Act No. 10/1996 on control in the State administration. This was done 
to introduce provisions relating to controls performed in order to protect the EU’s financial interests 
and enhance cooperation between AFCOS in Slovakia and relevant national authorities.  

The amendment of the Act introduces a new provision that includes the right of access to criminal 
files for the Slovak AFCOS. This will enhance the exchange of information with OLAF.  Furthermore, 
the amendment opens new opportunities that can help to improve the quality of controls performed 
by the Slovak AFCOS. 

Anti-fraud measures in Revenue 
The Member States have reported a total of 16 measures in Revenue. These have been divided into 
three subgroups, depending on the area(s) in which they are implemented.  

Customs Fraud 
The Member States have reported eight measures in this field. They include: 

  Three operational measures, such as sharing best practices in the field of post-clearance 

checks between the V4 countries (Czech Republic), the introduction of individual-based and 
commodity-based risk management (Estonia) and the introduction of system for the profiling 
and segmentation of economic operators (Portugal).  

  Two organisational measures, such as the Circular ‘OLAF files on traditional own resources 
(Belgium) or the establishment of an operational planning and coordination directorate 
(Greece).  

Another two countries have reported administrative measures, namely detection of falsely declared 
goods (Croatia) and measures in the field of tax revenue (Portugal). One country (Romania) has 
reported about implementing a package of administrative, organisational and operational measures 
in the field of tobacco and tobacco products smuggling.  

Belgium: Revenue – Customs: Circular ‘OLAF files on traditional own resources (TOR) – 
CD 810.2/207’ 
Belgium reported about the circular ‘OLAF files on traditional own resources (TOR) — CD 810.2/207’ 
that  aims  to  improve  the  management  and  monitoring  by  the  General  Administration  of  Customs 
and  Excise  of  the  AM  messages  issued  by  OLAF  on  the  basis  of  Regulation  (EC)  No  515/97.  The 
circular  provides  for  operational  coordination  between  the  departments  of  the  General 
Administration  of  Customs  and  Excise  in  charge  of,  respectively,  risk  management,  criminal 

30 

Anti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralDetectionInvestigation and prosecutiong) AFCOS;j) shared management and control of EU fundsPackageLegislativeAa) Competences;b) Powersa) To clarify or consolidate existing rules;b) To remedy flaws;c) To enforce the rules in line with developments in EU lawH 
 
 
investigations,  criminal  prosecution  and  recovery  in  cases  of  fraud  covered  by  AM  messages  and 
involving TOR. 

The  purpose  of  the  measure  is  to  facilitate  the  conduct  of  investigations  and  national  criminal 
prosecutions initiated on the basis of information provided by OLAF in the context of administrative 
assistance. The measure also aims to facilitate the correct and timely collection of the customs debt 
generated by criminal customs offences linked to AM messages. 

Croatia: Revenue – Customs: Detection of falsely declared goods 
Croatia  reported  an  administrative  and  operational  measure  that  was  implemented  in  2019:  By 
established contacts between OLAF and Member States, Croatia was informed of several containers 
dispatched from the USA for which the route was changed from Netherlands to the Port of Rijeka, 
Croatia, with final destination in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The goods were declared as used kitchen 
oil.  However,  it  was  suspected  that  when  entering  the  EU,  the  description  of  these  goods  was 
changed  from  biodiesel-energy  to  used  oil  with  the  intention  to  avoid  payment  of  ADD  and 
countervailing fees. An analysis of these goods has shown that it was indeed biodiesel. 

For shipments for which it was asked for transit customs procedure and to leave the Port of Rijeka, 
taking into account the results from analyses from Customs laboratory, from customs debtor it was 
asked  to  pay  import  customs  debt  in  amount  of  205.755,94  HRK  (around  27.653,93  EUR).  Such 
measure  had  also  a  preventive  purpose.  At the same  time,  in Port of Rijeka  there  were  also  many 
containers  with  the  same  goods,  and  after  this  measure,  it  was  asked  for  all  containers  to  be 
returned to consignor. 

Czech Republic: Revenue – Customs: Sharing best practices in the field of post-clearance 
checks between the V4 countries  
The  post-clearance  checks  carried  out  by  the  customs  authorities  include  an  extensive  additional 
assessment  of  traditional  own  resources.  For  the  purpose  of  effectively  carrying  out  checks  and 
sharing  best  practice,  the  Czech  Republic  reported  about  regularly  holding  a  ‘V4  expert  group 

31 

Anti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralInvestigation and prosecutionRecovery and sanctionCustoms / TOR / Illicit trade, OtherSingleOrganisationalAInter - agency cooperationto facilitate the conduct of investigations on the basis of information provided by OLAF; to facilitate correct collection of the customs debt generated by criminal customs offencesSAnti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralDetectionRecovery and sanctionSmuggling / Illicit tradeSingleAdministrativeARecoveryto clarify or consolidate existing rulesS 
 
 
 
meeting  –  Area  of  post-release  audit  and  control’  during  which  the  participants  exchange  their 
experience of carrying out post-clearance checks. On the basis of this cooperation, a ‘V4 Bulletin’ is 
also  published  which  sets  out  incorrect  tariff  classifications  identified  when  carrying  out  post-
clearance checks. 

Estonia:  Revenue  –  Customs:  Introduction  of  individual-based  and  commodity-based 
risk management 
Estonia reported about the Introduction of personalised and commodity-based risk management in 
2019,  involving  both  organisational,  IT  technology  and  ideological  changes  in  customs’  risk 
assessment. The assessment of risks in tax and customs issues will be harmonised according to the 
rules  of  procedure.  Customs  permits  are  dealt  with  on  a  personal  basis  to  ensure  in  2020  that  all 
information  at  the  ETCB  (both  tax  and  customs)  is  taken  into  account  when  assessing  risks  and 
setting priorities of control. Operational reporting on the application of selectivity criteria has been 
implemented. 

Greece: Revenue - Customs: Establishment of an operational planning and coordination 
directorate 
In 2019, Greece reported the establishment of an operational planning and coordination directorate 
called ‘Executive Customs Audit Service (EYTE)’, based in the Prefecture of Attica, and of two new 
Sub-Directorates called ‘Prosecution Audits of Mobile Inspection Units’, in the Customs Audit 
Services of Attica and Thessaloniki. The measure is part of the bid to modernise the Customs Service 
and builds on the need for the departments carrying out auditing tasks to become more specialised 
based on auditing typology. 

One reason for the reform was the adoption of the best practices of the EU Member States as part of 
the obligation to reduce controls at the time of customs clearance (with regard to physical checks, 
5% on import and 1% on export) with a view to the immediate release of the goods and a reduction 
in administrative costs. The review of the audit policy led to the need to enhance the conduct of ex-
ante audits and prosecution audits by specialised teams throughout Greece. 

32 

Anti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionCustoms / TOR / Illicit tradeSingleOperationalNMaking checks more effectiveEnhanced coordination, and cooperation, targeting of checks, enhanced ex-post controlsSAnti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionSCustoms / TOR / Illicit tradeSingleOperationalN / AIT tools ('IT data feeding', 'Other IT'), web reporting / Hotline, risk indicators, increased umber of checksEnhanced coordination, cooperation and information flow, targeting of checks and investigations, enhanced ex-ante controls 
 
 
 
Portugal: Revenue – Customs: Measures in the field of tax revenue 
In 2019, Portugal reported that a number of anti-fraud measures have been adopted to tackle under-
invoicing,  whereby  electronic checks  are  systematically  carried  out  to  compare  against  certain  risk 
thresholds, with customs declarations being selected automatically for specific customs checks. The 
requisite IT developments have been carried out. 

Portugal:  Revenue  –  Customs:  System  for  the  profiling  and  segmentation  of  economic 
operators 
In 2019, the Portuguese Tax Agency (AT) has developed a system for the profiling and segmentation 
of economic operators in order to prevent and detect tax revenue fraud. 

Romania: Revenue – Customs: Administrative, organisational and operational measures 
in the field of tobacco and tobacco products smuggling 
The  Romanian  customs  authorities  adopted  a  national  strategy  in  the  field  of  preventing  and 
combating  illicit  trafficking  in  cigarettes  and  tobacco  products  over  the  period  2019-2021.  This 
strategy  is  geared  to  the  adoption  and  implementation  of  strategic  lines  of  action  in  the  field  of 
preventing and combating illicit trafficking in cigarettes and tobacco products, in cooperation with all 

33 

Anti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionOrganised crime, smuggling / illicit tradeSingleOrganisationalNCompetence, inter-agency cooperationIncreased resourcesSAnti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionc) Organised crime;i) Customs/ToR/illicit tradeSingleAdministrativeAc) Monitoring/desk checks;d) On the spot checksb) To enhance existing measureSAnti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionSi) Customs/ToR/illicit tradeSingleOperationalAa) IT tools (“IT data feeding”, “Other IT”);c) Flagging practiced) Targeting of checks;f) Enhanced ex-ante controls;g) Enhanced ex-post controls 
 
 
 
 
law  enforcement  authorities  and  with  support  of  cigarette  manufacturers  and/or  other  national 
and/or international institutions/bodies. 

This is done to combat Illicit trafficking in cigarettes which causes major financial losses for the EU 
budget through non-payment of customs duties and other taxes such as VAT and excise duties; this 
favours  the  underground  economy  and  finances  organised  crime  groups  and  terrorism.  Tobacco 
products  originating  from  illegal  trade  are  not  manufactured  in  accordance  with  the  requirements 
laid down in EU legislation and may affect the health of consumers in Member States. 

Tax fraud 
The Member States have reported five measures in this field. They include: 

  Three operational measures, such as organising a technical training on ‘tools for monitoring 
and auditing of e-commerce and acquisition of tools’ (Croatia), increased inspections of sub-
contractors in the construction sector (Estonia) as well as IT application to combat VAT fraud 
(Italy). 

  Two  legislative  measures  reported  by  Poland  that  concern,  amongst  other  things, 

amendments to the VAT act.  

Croatia: Revenue – Tax fraud: Technical training on tools for monitoring and auditing of 
e-commerce and acquisition of tools 
In 2019, Croatia implemented the project ‘Technical training on tools for monitoring and auditing of 
e-commerce and acquisition of tools’ funded from the European Social Fund (ESF). With this project, 
Croatian Tax Administration shall acquire a combination of tools to be used for monitoring, analysing 
and auditing of activities which make part of digital economy. This shall enable inspectors to detect 
actors and entities that perform business activities through Internet not declaring appropriate taxes, 
or that perform fraudulent activities. 

34 

Anti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionInvestigation and prosecutionOrganisationalNc) Inter- agency cooperation;e) Fraud awareness trainingsa) Increased resourcesOperationalNd) Risk indicators;e) Increased number of checks;f) Structured cooperation with law enforcementb) Enhanced cooperationSi) Customs/TOR/illicit tradePackageAdministrativeNd) On the spot checks;h) Penaltyb) To enhance existing measureAnti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralDetectionInvestigation and prosecutionFinancial crime (including money laundering), fraud definitionPackageOperationalNIT tools ('IT data feeding', 'Other IT tools'), risk indicatorsTargeting of checks and investigations, enhanced ex-ante and ex-post controlsS 
 
 
 
Estonia: Revenue – Tax fraud: Inspection of sub-contractors in the construction sector  
The  Estonian  Ministry of Finance,  in cooperation with the Tax and  Customs Board, implemented a 
measure in the public procurement register to combat under-the-table wages. As of 1 August 2019, 
contracting authorities can designate in the register the conditions for checking sub-contractors to be 
used  under  a  procurement  contract.  In  construction  contracts  and  concession  contracts  for 
construction, inspection of the grounds for excluding sub-contractors is compulsory, whereas in the 
case of other contracts it is voluntary. Using the register, it is possible to carry out automated checks 
in  other  national  IT  systems  on  sub-contractors  that  were  added  or  changed  in  the  course  of  a 
contract. 

Italy: Revenue – Tax Fraud: IT applications to combat VAT fraud 
In 2019, two IT applications based on the integrated use of the data derived from electronic invoicing 
have  been  made  available  to  the  Italian  departments.  These  applications  shall  help  guiding  the 
selection of taxpayers to be subjected to checks or controls and to identify, in a timely manner, those 
potentially engaged in VAT fraud.  

Poland:  Revenue  –  Tax  Fraud:  Act  of  12  April  2019  amending  the  VAT  act  and  certain 
other acts 
In 2019, Poland reported the legislative amendments have been made to further tighten up the VAT 
Act.  Combating  VAT  fraud  is  one  of  the  Polish  government’s  priorities.  Increasing  the  certainty  of 
transactions and the transparency of VAT settlements between honest traders is also important. The 
instrument  is  aimed  at  minimising  the  risk  of  traders  inadvertently  becoming  involved  in  VAT 
carousels  and  increasing  the  security  and  certainty  of  business  transactions  by  providing  taxable 
persons  with  free  and  rapid  access  to  up-to-date  data  on  their  partners,  strengthening  fair 
competition between businesses and limiting the shadow economy. 

A single public-access database has been created in the form of a list of taxable persons, containing 
all  the  data  in  the  two  existing  lists  plus  data  on  the  status  of  active  taxable  persons  and  entities 
exempt  from  VAT.  Payments  by  taxable  persons  for  goods  and  services  have  been  facilitated  and 

35 

Anti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionPublic procurementSingleOperationalNIT tools ('IT data feeding', 'Other IT'), web reporting / Hotline, risk indicators, structured cooperation with law enforcementEnhanced information flow, targeting of checks, targeting of investigations, enhanced ex-ante and ex-post controlsSAnti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionInvestigation and prosecutionAntifraud or anticorruption strategySingleOperationalNIT tools ('IT data feeding', 'Other IT'), risk indicatorstargeting of checks and investigations, enhanced ex-post controlsS 
 
 
 
speeded  up  by  providing  the  list  in  a  form  allowing  an  automatic  check  on  whether  operators’ 
accounts figure on the list. The solutions introduced should curb VAT fraud and its knock-on effects 
on budget revenue. 

Poland:  Revenue  –  Tax  fraud:  Act  of  9  August  2019  amending  the  VAT  act  and  certain 
other acts 
In  2019,  Poland  reported  that  a  provisional  solution  restricting  VAT  fraud  by  reverse-charging  has 
been  replaced  by  a  systemic  solution  imposing  a  split-payment  mechanism  for  transactions 
concerning goods and services particularly prone to fraud. This mechanism is exceptionally important 
and  effective,  since  it  targets  the  very  idea  of  VAT  fraud,  eliminating  the  risk  that  traders  will  go 
missing with VAT that has been paid to them by their partners but not yet deducted. The mechanism 
renders fraud at the level of the transaction itself practically impossible. 

The  instrument  replaces  the  temporary  solution  of  reverse  charging  by  introducing  a  systemic 
solution that effectively eliminates VAT fraud. It is reckoned that it will reduce the VAT gap by about 
0.5  percentage  points,  calculated  in  relation  to  theoretical  VAT  revenue.  It  will  also  increase  the 
security of business transactions. 

Customs and tax fraud 
The Member States have reported three measures in this area:  

  Two legislative measures, namely new provisions to the VAT act and an amendment to the 

Customs act, have been reported by Bulgaria. 

  A package of measures of organisational and operational nature implemented by the 

customs and risk management departments of the Hungarian National Tax and Customs 
Administration.  

36 

Anti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionRecovery and sanctionOrganised crime, preventing and combating VAT fraudSingleLegislativeN/ADefinition of a specific topicto clarify or consolidate existing rules, to remedy flawsSAnti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionRecovery and sanctionPreventing and combating VAT fraudSingleLegislativeN/ADefinition of a specific topicto clarify or consolidate existing rules, to remedy flawsS 
 
 
 
Bulgaria: Revenue – Customs and Tax fraud: New provisions of the Value Added Tax Act 
In  2019,  Bulgaria  added  on  proposal of  the  National  Revenue  Agency  new  provisions to  the  Value 
Added Tax Act (Article 96(10) and (11)). These provisions state that if two or more persons acting in 
concert carry out successively the same activity on the same business premises, the taxable turnover 
of each subsequent person shall include the turnover generated on the premises by all persons who 
have  successively  carried  out  the  activity  on  the  premises  concerned  before  it,  for  a  period  not 
exceeding the last 12 consecutive months, including the current month, and shall be regarded as the 
turnover generated by the person concerned on the first day of the start of the same activity on the 
premises . 

The  rule  specifically  provides  an  aggregation  of  the  turnovers  forming  the  taxable  turnover  for 
mandatory  VAT  registration  of  taxable  persons.  Its  purpose  is  to  put  an  end  to  a  practice  of 
formally changing the entities performing the same activity on a business site before reaching the 
turnover  threshold  for  mandatory  registration  under  the  VAT  Act.  These  persons  are  legally 
distinct but related in one way or another and act in concert. 

Bulgaria: Revenue -  Customs and Tax fraud: Amendment to the Customs Act  
In  2019,  Bulgaria  reported  that  Articles  66c  and  195a  were  created  in  the  amended  Customs  Act 
(published  in  SG  No  102/2019)  pursuant  to  which,  on  the  proposal  of  the  Director  of  the  Customs 
Agency, by way of an order the Minister for Finance establishes a list of goods presenting a high risk 
to  the  financial  interests  of  the  European  Union;  where  lower  values  are  declared,  the  customs 
authorities  require  a  guarantee  in  an  amount  ensuring  payment  of  the  customs  debt  and  other 
receivables  which  may  arise  upon  importation,  calculated  on  the  basis  of  the  fair  prices  for  those 
goods  at  the  time  of  declaration  (as  per  the  THESEUS  system  of  the  Commission  Joint  Research 
Centre). 

This  measure  was  implemented  because  in  accordance  with  the  2019  action  programme  for  TOR 
control, the Commission’s Directorate-General for the Budget (DG BUDG) carried out an inspection in 
Bulgaria  in  the  field  of  ‘Customs  value  control  strategy’  and  ‘Management  of  the  B  account  and 
corrections  of  the  A  account’.  Taking  into  account  the  preliminary  findings  of  the  inspection  team 
presented  on  18  October  2019,  ‘Guidelines  for  the  harmonisation  of  the  practice  of  verifying, 
accepting  and/or  challenging  the  declared  customs  value  of  imported  goods’  were  established  by 
Order No ZAM-1746/32 - 341402 of 27.11.2019 of the Director of the Customs Agency. 

37 

Anti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionFinancial crime (including money laundering), SingleLegislativeAFinancial penaltiesto remedy flawsS 
 
 
Hungary:  Revenue  –  Customs  and  Tax  Fraud:  Measures  taken by  the  customs  and  risk 
management departments of the National Tax and Customs Administration  
In 2019, Hungary took a compilation of measures of the 2020 post-release control plan. On basis of 
the  opinion  of  OLAF,  the  Member  State  and  the  management,  risk  profiles  of  economic  operators 
taking  part  in  fraudulent  trade  and  initiating  import  customs  procedures  with  fake  invoices  and 
significantly undervalued imports were drawn up, and associated indicators of criminality prepared.  

Economic  operators  with  the  highest  risk  were  selected  for  post-release  controls  centrally,  on  the 
basis  of  uniform  national  criteria.  Owing  to  the  existence  of  profiles  of  economic  operators 
associated  with  fake  invoices  and  the  strict  checks  conducted  as  a  consequence,  their  import 
activities in Hungary were restricted. 

Also, a management circular updating Annexes II and III to the OWNRES User Manual was issued. The 
annexes  to  the  OWNRES  manual  provide  information  on  current  expectations  with  regard  to 
identifying the irregularities detected. 

Anti-fraud measures in Expenditure 
The Member States have reported a total of 21 measures in Expenditure. These have been divided 
into five subgroups, depending on the area(s) in which they are implemented.  

Multiple areas of shared management 
The Member States have reported four measures in this field.  

One  country  (Bulgaria)  has  reported  a  legislative  measure,  more  precisely,  an  amendment  of  the 
regulation on  indicating  irregularities.  A  second  country  (Greece)  has  reported about  a  package  of 
operational and legislative measures connected to the establishment of the National Transparency 
Authority.  Another  country  (Hungary)  has  reported  a  package  of  operational  measures  that  came 
with the the further development of a beneficiary data link system and a package of organisational 
measures related to several trainings within the network of institutions dealing with EU funds.  

38 

Anti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionFraud definition, TOR / customs / illicit trade, antifraud or anticorruption strategy, countering attempted fraud related to under-declaring of customs valueSingleLegislativeADefinition of a specific topic, financial penaltiesto remedy flaws, to enforce the rules in line with developments in EU lawSAnti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReason for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionSOperationalN / Ad) Risk indicators;e) Increased number of checks;f) Structured cooperation with law enforcementd) Targeting of checks;e) Targeting of investigations;f) Enhanced ex-ante controlsi) Customs/TOR/illicit tradePackageOrganisationalAg) Otherc) Neutral on resources 
 
 
 
Bulgaria:  all  areas  of  Expenditure:  Amendment  of  the  Regulation  on  indicating 
irregularities  
On  23  August  2019,  Bulgaria  amended  the  Regulation  on  indicating  irregularities  constituting 
grounds for making financial corrections and the percentage indicators for determining the amount 
of financial corrections under the ZUSESIF (published in SG No 67/2019 with effect from 23 August 
2019)  in  conjunction  with  Commission  Decision  С  (2019)3452  of  14  May  2019  establishing  new 
Guidelines  for  determining  financial  corrections  to  be  made  to  expenditure  financed  by  the  Union 
under shared management, for non-compliance with the rules on public procurement. 

The  amended  Annexes  1  and  2  to  the  Regulation  specify  the  types  of  irregularities  constituting  a 
breach  of  the  applicable  law  through  the  beneficiary’s  acts  or  omissions  and  which  result  or  may 
result in damage to funds from the European structural and investment funds, and which constitute 
grounds  for  making  a  financial  correction  under  Article  70  of  the  European  Union  Structural  and 
Investment Funds Management Act, as well as the minimum and maximum rates of the percentage 
indicators for financial corrections set for irregularities pursuant to Article 70(1). 

This measure was taken because under Article 143(1) of Regulation No 1303/2013, Member States 
are responsible for investigating irregularities and for making the financial corrections required and 
pursuing recoveries. Also, under  Article  122(2) of Regulation No 1303/2013, Member States are  to 
prevent,  detect  and  correct  irregularities  and  recover  amounts  unduly  paid.  As  formulated,  it  is 
primarily the Member States’ obligation to prove that an irregularity has occurred and to recover all 
amounts unduly paid. 

Greece: All areas of Expenditure: Establishment of the National Transparency Authority  
In 2019, Greece reported that they established a national transparency authority (Law  4622/2019). 
The National Transparency Authority is an Independent Authority resulting from the merger of five 
audit  bodies  and  one  coordination  body.  The  basic  principles  governing  the  Authority  are  zero 
tolerance  for  corruption,  transparency  as  a  precondition  for  fair  and  sustainable  development  and 
enhanced accountability of state institutions. The Authority has been designated as an AFCOS; it has 
enhanced coordination and operational competences and 503 employees, of whom 320 are auditors. 

The establishment of the Authority constitutes a significant administrative reform in the area of the 
fight  against  corruption.  Merging  the  audit  bodies  enabled  the  problem  of  the  fragmentation  and 
overlapping of competences during audits to be resolved and reinforced the role of AFCOS as it now 
has operational/audit competences, which are carried out in accordance with international auditing 
standards.  The  Authority  is  also  active  in the  field of  prevention  and  public  awareness-raising with 
regard to corruption, using modern methodological tools.  

39 

Anti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralDetectionRecovery and sanctionSPublic procurement, conflict of interest, shared management and control of EU fundsSingleLegislativeAPowers, recoveryto enforce the rules in line with EU law 
 
 
Hungary:  Expenditure  –  Cohesion  policy  and  Fund  for  the  most  deprived:  Further 
development of beneficiary data link system 
In 2019, Hungary further developed the company data link system managed by the National Office 
for  the  Judiciary  (OBH).  Prior  to  this,  it  has  already  been  established  with  the  National  Company 
Information and Company Data Service Provider (OCCSz) in the part of the national IT system (FAIR) 
dealing with EU funds (EUPR). As a result, the range of searchable company data has been expanded. 
This has enabled not only existing company data to be searched for, but also all changes that have 
taken place within the lifetime of the beneficiary registered as a company, which are also important 
for preventing fraud. 

Hungary:  Expenditure  –  Agriculture,  Cohesion  policy  and  Fund  for  the  most  deprived: 
Several trainings within the network of institutions dealing with EU funds 
In 2019, Hungary has held several trainings for employees of institutions dealing with EU funds. The 
Ministry  of  Innovation  and  Technology  (ITM)  organized  a  basic  training  course  for  new  entrants 
‘Introduction to the system of European Structural and Investment Fund’. It also organized, with the 
involvement  of  Hungary’s  anti-fraud  coordination  service  (AFCOS),  a  training  course  ‘Fraud 
prevention in EU development policy and protection of the EU’s financial interests’. This training aims 
to clarify basic concepts such as, for example, ‘suspicion of irregularity’, ‘systemic irregularity’, ‘fraud’ 
or ‘corruption’, but also OLAF’s tasks or categories of indicators of fraud.  

 Furthermore,  the  e-learning  curriculum  for  the  Hungarian  State  Treasury’s  Paying  Agency  course 
‘From foolishness to fraud – anti-fraud refresher training to help identify and prevent fraud’ has been 
prepared. The relevant staff members are obliged to assimilate the curriculum along with examples 
of current cases once every three years. By doing so, the staff members will be able to identify and 
take action against possible cases of fraud more effectively. 

40 

Anti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReason for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionInvestigation and prosecutionIT tools ('IT data feeding', 'Other IT'), web reporting/hotline, risk indicators, increased number of checks, structured cooperation with law enforcement and judicial authoritiesEnhanced cooperation, coordination and information flow; targeting of checks and investigationsPublic procurement, corruption, conflict of interest, AFCOS, Whistleblower, Shared management and control of EU funds, antifraud or anticorruption strategyPackageLegislativeNCompetences, powers, definition of a specific topicending overlapping competences, standardising auditing standards, streamlinig the human ressources; cost-efficiencySOperationalN/AAnti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventiond) Targeting of checks;f) Enhanced ex-ante controlsSj) Shared management and control of EU fundsPackageOperationalAa) IT tools ("IT data feeding", "Other IT");c) Flagging practice;d) Risk indicatorsAnti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionf) Fraud definition;j) shared management and control of EU funds;l) OtherPackageOrganisationalN / Ad) General trainings;e) Fraud awareness trainingsc) Neutral on resourcesS 
 
 
 
 
Agriculture 
The Member States have reported four measures in this field.  

One  country  (Austria)  has  reported  an  administrative  measure,  namely  the  transfer  of  the  overall 
implementation of measures in the wine sector to the paying agency AMA. A second country (Italy) 
has  reported  an  organisational  measure  that  is  about  a  cooperation  project  between  the  National 
Agency  for  the  Administration  and  Divestment  of  Assets  Seized  and  Confiscated  from  Organised 
Crime, the Agricultural Payments Agency and the judicial authorities.  

Another  country  (Lithuania)  has  approved  a  legislative  measure  concerning  the  sanctions  for 
Violation  of  Legal  Acts  in  the  Implementation  of  the  Lithuanian  Rural  Development  Programme.  A 
package  of  organisational  and  operational  measures  has  been  reported  by  a  fourth  country 
(Denmark).  These  measures  are  part  of  an  action  plan  to  prevent  fraud  with  resources  from 
agriculture funds. 

Austria: Expenditure – Agriculture: Transfer of the overall implementation of measures 
in the wine sector to the paying agency AMA 
In 2019, Austria transferred the whole subsidy management in the wine sector to the paying agency 
AMA. Until end of 2018 the assessment of wine sector applications was done in the relevant unit of 
the Ministry for Agriculture in coordination with the Paying Agency, which was responsible for on the 
spot checks and payment of subsidies. Recent developments have induced the transfer of the whole 
subsidy  management to  the  paying  agency  AMA  to  ensure  the  need  to  integrate  the  area  based 
measure ‘wine restructuring’ into the Integrated Administration and Control Scheme (IACCS) and to 
improve the control and sanction system for wine investments and promotion by making use of the 
elaborate  Paying  agency  system  from  application  to  payment.  Furthermore,  the  administrative 
system could be improved by the possibility to offer IT based applications directly managed by the 
Paying agency.  

Denmark: Expenditure  - Agriculture: Action plan to prevent fraud with resources from 
agriculture funds 
The  Danish  Ministry of Environment  and Food adopted an action plan for the agricultural funds in 
October 2018. It contains the following anti-fraud measures that were implemented in 2019: Firstly, 
temporary assistance from the Government’s legal adviser in investigating red flag cases. Secondly, 
external expert assistance from Deloitte for producing a risk analysis in relation to fraud and project 
support and thirdly, extra resources for the paying agency for combating fraud. 

The  action  plan  will  proactively  tackle  potential  problem  areas  relating  to  fraud.  Expert  legal 
assistance  in  assessing  specific  red  flag  cases  will  give  the  paying  agency  a  sound  basis  for  dealing 
with current and future cases. A risk analysis focusing on known and new risks for an area particularly 
exposed to fraud will strengthen our potential for risk-based and effective measures to combat fraud 

41 

Anti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionSShared management and control of EU fundsSingleAdministrativeAa) Eligibility criteria;b) Management of funds;c) Monitoring/desk checks;d) On the spot checksa) To clarify or consolidate existing rules 
 
 
in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  the  regulation.  Extra  resources  for  and  focus  on  fraud 
prevention at the paying agency will strengthen our ability to detect and follow up on red flags. 

Italy:  Expenditure  –  Agriculture:  Cooperation  project  between  the  National  Agency  for 
the  Administration  and  Divestment  of  Assets  Seized  and  Confiscated  from  Organised 
Crime, the Agricultural Payments Agency and the judicial authorities 
Italy reported that in 2019, a project proposal was presented for the implementation of a prevention 
system  orientated  towards  risk  analysis  and  the  development  of  anti-fraud  traceability  systems 
through cooperation between the National Agency for the Administration and Divestment of Assets 
Seized and Confiscated from Organised Crime and the judicial authorities.  

The  project  is  to  involve  a  series  of  cooperative  activities  with  other  administrations  for  data 
exchanges,  for  setting  up  applications  for  mobile  devices,  and  for  dedicated  web  and  desktop 
applications.  The  primary  recipients  in  the  first  phase  will  be  the  National  Agency  for  the 
Administration  and  Divestment  of  Assets  Seized  and  Confiscated  from  Organised  Crime,  law 
enforcement, and the local authorities. The objective is the strengthening of the rule of law and the 
safeguarding  of  public  resources  through  digital  infrastructure  that  identifies  fraudulent  conduct, 
combatting corruption and the criminal infiltration of financial channels in agriculture.  

Lithuania:  Expenditure  –  Agriculture:  Approval  of  the  Methodology  of  Sanctions  for 
Violation  of  Legal  Acts  in  the  Implementation  of  the  Lithuanian  Rural  Development 
Programme 2014-2020 Measures 
In  2019,  Lithuania  reported  about  the  Order  of  the  Minister  of  Agriculture  of  the  Republic  of 
Lithuania No. 3D-322 of 24/05/2019 ‘On the Amendment of Order of the Minister of Agriculture of 
the Republic of Lithuania No. 3D-929 of 04/12/2014 Concerning the Approval of the Methodology of 
Sanctions  for  Violation  of  Legal  Acts  in  the  Implementation  of  the  Lithuanian  Rural  Development 
Programme 2014–2020 Measures’. 

42 

Anti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReason for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionInvestigation and prosecutionRisk indicatorsEnhanced information flow, targeting of checks, enhanced ex-ante controlsControl of EU fundsPackageOrganisationalACompetence, fraud awareness trainingsIncreased resourcesSOperationalAAnti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionSShared management and control of EU fundsSingleOrganisationalNInter-agency cooperation in order to foster data exchangesNeutral on resources 
 
 
 
This  Methodology  sets  out  the  rules  of  the  application  of  sanctions  defined  in  the  Rules  of  the 
Administration  of  the  Lithuanian  Rural  Development  Programme  2014-2020  to  applicants, 
beneficiaries  and  partners  for  the  violation  of  relevant  legal  acts.  This  Methodology  represents 
effective and practical guidelines for civil servants of the Ministry of Agriculture and National Paying 
Agency under the Ministry of Agriculture. 

Fisheries 
One Member State (Denmark) has reported one measure in this field.  The administrative measure is 
to secure the arm length’s principle between beneficiary and supplier.  

Denmark: Expenditure - Fisheries: Arm length’s principle 
In  2019,  Denmark  implemented  an  administrative  measure  to  secure  the  arm’s  length  principle 
between  beneficiary  and  supplier,  so  that  the  beneficiaries  don’t  artificially  raise  the  costs  for  an 
investment or a project. The Danish Fisheries agency has updated its administration practices on this 
particular measure. In their case-handling procedures, they have formulated certain questions to the 
casehandlers  in  areas  that  they  have  experienced  are  sensitive  to  fraud  (intentionally  and  by 
mistake).  The  casehandler  is  guided  in  what  to  be  aware  of  and  in  doubt  should  contact  the  legal 
support of the Danish Fisheries agency for clarification.  

In  order  to  secure  the  use  and  effect  of  EU  funds,  it  is  important  to  focus  on  that  the  expenses 
funded by the EU are correct and correspond with market prices. Focus on the arm’s length principle 
between beneficiary and supplier when determining reasonable prices for an investment or a project 
is one of several measures or principles that will help safeguard the EU funds.  

Agriculture and Fisheries 
The Member States have reported two measures in this field.   

43 

Anti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionRecovery and sanctionk) Other (Violations and fraud prevention, protection of the EU and national financial interests)SingleLegislativeAc) Definition of a specific topic;d) Recovery;e) Financial penaltiesc) To enforce the rules in line with developments in EU law;d) OtherSAnti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionConflict of interestSingleAdministrativeAMonitoring/desk checksto enhance existing measureS 
 
 
 
One country (Germany) reported an administrative measure aimed at raising awareness on conflicts 
of interest  among the  competent  authorities  in the agriculture and fisheries sector, whilst  another 
country  (Slovenia)  took  an  organisational  measure  and  organized  a  training  for  employees  of  the 
Agency for Agricultural Markets and Rural Development on fraud prevention and detection.  

Germany:  Expenditure  –  Agriculture  and  Fisheries:  Raising  awareness  on  conflicts  of 
interest among the competent authorities in the agriculture and fisheries sector  
German civil service law contains many rules to prevent conflicts of interest. In 2019, they reported 
that they implemented measures in order to further raise awareness of conflict of interests among 
the competent authorities in the area of agriculture and fisheries (administrative authorities, paying 
agencies, audit bodies and competent authorities) by the amended wording of Article 61 of the EU 
Financial  Regulation.  These  authorities  were  advised  to  include  the  legal  basis  and  procedural 
instructions in the procedural rules on fraud prevention. 

Slovenia: Expenditure – Agriculture and Fisheries: Training for employees of the Agency 
for Agricultural Markets and Rural Development on fraud prevention and detection 
In  2019,  Slovenia  reported  that  the  Agency  for  Agricultural  Markets  and  Rural  Development 
continued  to  train  their  employees  on  detection  and  prevention  of  fraud  and  artificially  created 
conditions.  Employees  of  the  Agency  are  managing  administrative  procedures  and  therefore,  it  is 
considered important to regularly train them on these topics.  

Cohesion policy 
The Member States have reported 10 measures in this field. They include: 

  Four operational measures, such as self-assessment of the fraud risk as regards to the ESF 
(Germany),  a  project  called  ‘Strengthening  law  enforcement’s  analytical  capacity  in 
preventing and detecting corruption crimes against the EU’s financial interests’ (Lithuania), 

44 

Anti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionSConflict of interestSingleAdministrativeAEligibility criteria, management of funds,  monitoring/desk checks, on the spot checks, investigationto enhance existing measures, cross-cutting measure/multi-agency measure/measure with impact on various bodiesAnti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionf) Fraud definition;j) Shared management and control of EU fundsSingleOrganisationalAe) Fraud awareness trainingsa) Increased resourcesS 
 
 
 
‘cross-checks’ IT applications (Poland) or strengthening cooperation between administration 
and judicial authorities (Portugal).  

  Three  administrative  measures,  such  as  the  implementation  of  a  whistle-blower  scheme 
(Denmark),  updating  ERDF-related  procedures  within  the  authorities  of  a  federal  land 
(Germany: Schleswig-Holstein) or a package of administrative measures within a project in 
cooperation  with  the  OECD  tackling  fraud  and  corruption  within  the  ESIF  implementation 
(Slovakia).  

An organisational measure has been reported by one country (Belgium); it is about the participation 
in  training  courses.  One  country  (Finland)  has  implemented  a  package  of  organisational  and 
operational  measures  related  to  the  establishment  of  a  fraud-reporting  channel  for  the  Structural 
Funds.  Another  country  (Austria)  has  reported  a  package  of  administrative  and  operational 
measures in conjunction with a high density of verifications.  

Austria:  Expenditure  –  Cohesion  policy:  Administrative  measures/procedures:  High 
density of verifications 
A  high  density  of  verifications  conducted  by  the  Austrian  authorities  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. 

Belgium: Expenditure – Cohesion policy: Participation in training courses 
Several Belgian  services  attended a conference  or training course  in 2019 to further improve  their 
awareness  on  fraud  prevention  and  detection.  ERDF  Wallonia  attended  a  high-level  conflict  of 
interest  prevention  conference  (Art.61),  whilst  ERDF  Brussels,  ERDF  Wallonia  and  ESF  Wallonia 
participated  in  a  DG  REGIO  training  course  ‘Identifying  and  deterring  fraud  and  corruption  in  ESI 
funds 2014-2020’.  

Denmark: Expenditure – Cohesion policy: Whistle-blower scheme 
In  2019,  Denmark  implemented  a  whistle-blower  scheme  that  provides  the  possibility  for 
anonymous  reporting  via  an  online  form.  Giving  contact  details  when  reporting  a  case  is  optional. 

45 

Anti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReason for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionRecovery and sanctionSOperationalAa) IT tools (“IT data feeding”, “Other IT”);h) Otherc) Enhanced information flow;d) Targeting of checksa) Public procurement;e) Conflict of interest;j) Shared management and control of EU fundsPackageAdministrativeAa) Eligibility criteria;b) Management of funds;d) On the spot checks;g) Irregularities reporting;i) Recoveryc) Cross-cutting measure, multi-agency measure/ measure with impact on various bodies;d) OtherAnti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionPublic procurement, Conflict of interestSingleOrganisationalACompetence, Inter - agency cooperation, Fraud awareness trainingsNeutral on resourcesS 
 
 
 
This  measure  can  potentially  help  give  people  who  would  normally  not  report  fraud  with  EU 
resources the courage to report a situation, because there is less risk of their identity being disclosed 
to the individuals or companies they are reporting.  

Finland: Expenditure – Cohesion policy: Establishment of a fraud-reporting channel for 
the Structural Funds  
The  Finnish  Structural  Funds  Managing  Authority  has  set  up  a  fraud-reporting  channel  for  the 
Structural Funds on its website and has provided specific information on the fight against fraud. In 
addition, the Managing Authority conducted an information campaign on the fight against fraud. This 
measure aims at strengthening the fight against fraud and raise public awareness of the problem.  

Germany: Expenditure – Cohesion policy: Updating of ERDF-related procedures within 
the authorities of Schleswig-Holstein  
Germany  reported  that  in  May  2019,  a  training  was  held  by  the  Kiel  Public  Prosecutor’s  Office  on 
subsidy fraud under Section 264 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Also, subsequent updating of the 
guidelines for anti-corruption measures and fighting fraud in the ERDF OP 2014-2020 with regard to 
the authority's internal procedures and the handling of notable cases took place.  

46 

Anti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralDetectionInvestigation and prosecutionWhistle-blowers, control of EU funds, anti-fraud or anti-corruption strategySingleAdministrativeN/AMonitoring/desk checksto enhance existing measureSAnti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReason for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionRecovery and sanctionWeb reporting/Hotline, Increased number of checksEnhanced information flow, ex-ante controls and ex-post controls; Targeting of checks and investigationsConflict of interests, WhistleblowerPackageOrganisationalNCompetence, Inter-agency cooperation, General trainings, Fraud awareness trainings, Handling of notifications through the fraud-reporting channelIncreased resourcesSOperationalNAnti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralDetectionInvestigation and prosecutionFraud definition, antifraud or anticorruption strategySingleAdministrativeN/AMonitoring/desk checks, on the spot checks, irregularities reportingto enhance existing measuresS 
 
 
 
 
Germany: Expenditure – Cohesion policy: Self-assessment of the fraud risk as regards 
the ESF 
In 2019, Germany reported that they implemented the fraud risk self-assessment recommended in 
the Commission Guidance Note on fraud risk assessment and effective and proportionate anti-fraud 
measures by the ESF managing authority at OP level in the ESF federal programme. Under the fraud 
risk self-assessment, the impact of widespread fraud risks and the likelihood of their occurrence are 
assessed and the necessary risk mitigation measures are described. 

Lithuania:  Expenditure  –  Cohesion  policy:  Project  ‘Strengthening  law  enforcement 
analytical  capacity  in  preventing  and  detecting  corruption  crimes  against  EU  financial 
interests’   
In  2019,  Lithuanian  Special  Investigation  Service  implemented  the  project  ‘Strengthening  law 
enforcement  analytical  capacity  in  preventing  and  detecting  corruption  crimes  against  EU  financial 
interests’. The project was funded under the HERCULE III Programme administered by the European 
Anti-Fraud Office of the European Commission (OLAF) (HERCULE-2018-TA-AG/831525-ACIPC. The aim 
of the project was to enhance data-driven and evidence-based approaches in corruption and fraud 
risk management in order to prevent damage to the EU and national financial interests. 

The  project  has  expanded  STT’s  technical  data  analysis  capabilities  by  integrating  advanced  data 
analysis tools into existing analytics system. Moreover, the strategical, tactical, and operational skills 
of  the  officers  to  detect  corruption  and  fraud  risks  and  its manifestation  were  enhanced.  The  new 
tools have enabled a speedier and more efficient detection of possible corruption- and fraud-related 
acts and their modus operandi, as well as better reporting and delivery of relevant information to the 
decision makers in a timely manner. 

47 

Anti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionPublic procurement, corruption, conflict of interest, fraud definition, shared management and control of EU funds, antifraud or anticorruption strategySingleOperationalAImplementation of the fraud risk self-assessment recommended in the Commission Guidance Note by the ESF management authority at OP level in the ESF federal programmeUnder the fraud risk self-assessment, the impact of widespread fraud risks and the likelihood of their occurrence are assessed and the necessary risk mitigation measures are describedSAnti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionInvestigation and prosecutionSa) Public procurement;b) Financial crime (including money laundering);d) Corruption;e) Conflict of interest;j) shared management and control of EU funds;k) Antifraud or anticorruption SingleOperationalNa) IT tools (“IT data feeding”, “Other IT”);c) Flagging practice;d) Risk indicators;e) Increased number of checks;f) Structured cooperation with law enforcement;h) Othera) Enhanced coordination;b) Enhanced cooperation;c) Enhanced information flow;d) Targeting of checks;e) Targeting of investigations;f) Enhanced ex-ante controls;g) Enhanced ex-post controls;h) Other 
 
 
 
Poland: Expenditure – Cohesion policy: ‘Cross Checks’ IT application 
In  2019,  Poland  implemented  the  use  of  the  ‘Cross  Checks’  IT  application  that  identifies  cases  of 
double  financing  of  expenditure  incurred  by  beneficiaries  implementing  projects  co-financed  by 
Union funds. 

The  IT  application  is  intended  to  detect  and  identify  cases  of  double  financing  of  expenditure 
incurred by beneficiaries. The latest search technology has been used to set up a big data platform 
with a machine algorithm that flags up suspected cases of invoices issued by a given issuer (based on 
the  NIP  number)  that  may  have  been  submitted  more  than  once.  The  entire  population  of 
documents supporting expenditure is now analysed. 

Portugal:  Expenditure  –  Cohesion  policy:  Strengthening  cooperation  between 
administration and judicial authorities 
In  2019,  Portugal  reported  that  they  implemented  some  measures  in  order  to  strengthen 
cooperation between the Agency for Development and Cohesion (which coordinates the Structural 
Fund) and the Public Prosecutor’s Office.  

Slovakia: Expenditure – Cohesion policy: Project in cooperation with the OECD tackling 
fraud and corruption within the ESIF implementation 
In  2019,  the  Deputy  Prime  Minister’s  Office  of  Slovakia  for  Investments  and  Informatization  has 
carried  out  an  international  project  in  cooperation  with  the  OECD  tackling  fraud  and  corruption 
within the ESIF implementation. The final outcome of the project is a strategy/AP depicting specific 
measures.  This  document  will  be  the  basis  for  conceptualising  a  national  approach  to  tackle  fraud 
and corruption within the ESIF implementation. 

The  project  and  its  final  outcome  address  untapped  potential  in  the  given  area;  notably  issues  of 
governance,  monitoring  and  evaluation,  training,  fostering  ethical  principles  and  policy  culture  or 
whole-government partnership.  

48 

Anti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionSShared management and control of EU fundsSingleOperationalNIT tools ('IT data feeding', 'Other IT')Enhanced confirmation, cooperation and information flow; targeting of checksAnti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralInvestigation and prosecutionRecovery and sanctionj) Shared management and control of EU fundsSingleOperationalNg) Structured cooperation with judicial authoritiesb) Enhanced cooperation;g) Enhanced ex-post controlsS 
 
 
 
Additional measures reported by the Member States 
Bulgaria 
Creation of the unit ‘Crimes against the financial system and the financial interests of the 
EU and against the creditors’ at the Prosecutor’s Office 
Organisational measure — by Order of the Prosecutor General No RD-04-171/20.05.2019, a separate 
unit  ‘Crimes  against  the  financial  system  and  the  financial  interests  of  the  EU  and  against  the 
creditors’  was  created  in  Specialised  Department  01  of  the  Prosecutor's  Office  attached  to  the 
Supreme  Court  of  Cassation  whose  function  is  handling  and  control  of  files  and  cases  concerning 
offences related to the misuse of EU funds. 

Denmark 
Expenditure – Cohesion policy: OBS lists 
In 2019, Denmark reported that they do data-driven sampling based on data collected their project-
reporting tool in which the projects file their reports. Data is compared at project level, across 
projects and based on criteria that are continuously updated. They have developed their own IT 
system in which the projects file their reports and state that this system enables them to extract 
large quantities of raw data that are easy to analyse. 

Germany 
Legislative measures to combat fraud affecting the financial interests of the Union 
The Act transposing Directive (EU) 2017/1371 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 
2017  on  the  fight  against  fraud  to  the  Union’s  financial  interests  of  19  June  2019  (BGBl.  I  p.  844) 
entered  into  force  on  28  June  2019,  thereby  ensuring  that  criminal  law  incorporates  measures  to 
combat PIF offences in Germany. 

Estonia 
Specific cooperation with different authorities 

1.  Cooperation  between  the  ARIB  and  the  Environmental  Inspectorate  in  the  areas  of  the 
mutual  exchange  of  large  amounts  of  information,  analysis  and  the  organisation  of  joint 
inspections, within the framework of EMFF measure 1.15 (fishing gear). The innovation lies in 
the labelling of supported fishing gear.  

2.  Regular  cooperation  between  the  State  Shared  Service  Centre  (hereinafter  ‘the  SSSC’)  and 
regional investigative bodies in order to prevent potential fraud in one high-risk aid measure. 

49 

Anti-fraud cycle stepsArea coveredSingle / PackageType of MeasureNew / AmendmentScopeReasons for  measure / expected resultsHorizontal / sectoralPreventionDetectionSa) Public procurement;e) Conflict of interest;f) Fraud definition;g) AFCOS;j) Shared management and control of EU funds;k) Other (Antifraud or anticorruption strategy)PackageAdministrativeN / Ab) Management of funds;c) Monitoring/desk checks;d) On the spot checks;e) Audit checklist;g) Irregularities reporting;j) Otherb) To enhance existing measure;c) Cross-cutting measure, multi-agency measure/ measure with impact on various bodies 
 
 
3.  The  Competition  Authority  is  handling  criminal  proceedings  in  connection  with  the 
purchasing of drying equipment using aid from the ARIB - procurement fraud in the area of 
competition. 

Greece 
Measures concerning expenditure 

1.  Drawing-up  and  updating  of  checklists  for  system  audits  and  audits  of  acts  issued  by  the 

Audit Authority (EDEL).  

2.  Amendment  of  the  legislative  framework  regarding  the  competences  of  the  Independent 
Department for Extraordinary Audits of the Audit Authority (EDEL). In particular, Article 68 of 
Law  4607/2019  (Greek  Government  Gazette,  Series  I,  No.  65)  amended  Article  60  of 
Presidential  Decree  142/2017  (Organisation  of  the  Ministry  of  Finance)  and  redefined  the 
competences  of  the  above  Department  in  order  to  bring  them  into  line  with  the 
competences of the audit authorities as set out in the EU regulations. 

3.  Singe  typology  for  findings  (irregularities/suspected  fraud):  During  the  review  of  Guidance 
Documents  EGESIF_15-0008-05/03-12-2018  and  EGESIF_15-0002-04/17-12-2018,  an  Annex 
was  added, containing the typology for findings relating to verifications and audits (Special 
Service for Institutional Support - ΕΥΘΥ). 

4.  Updating of the guidelines and checklist under Regulation (EU) 1306/2013  of the European 
Parliament  and  of  the  Council,  and  provision  of  information  and  guidance  to  auditors  by 
means of internal meetings and cooperation (Agricultural Funds). 

5.  Tool for assessing the risk of fraud, as described in the MCS of the 2014-2020 Fisheries and 
Maritime Operational Programme, applied from 2017 and updated every year (Fisheries and 
Maritime Fund). 

Measures concerning revenue 

1. 

Instructions  to  the  Operational  Departments  of  the  Financial  Crime  Unit  (SDOE)  on 
monitoring the application of Articles 39 and 40 of Law 4155/13 (fraud against the interests 
of the EU/SDOE). 

2.  Participation  of  a  representative  of  the  SDOE  Directorate-General  in  a  seminar  entitled 
‘Excise  fraud’  organised  by  CEPOL  (EU  agency  that  promotes  European  and  international 
cooperation in the field of law enforcement through training, with a view to exchanging good 
practices, knowledge and expertise). 

3.  Selection of goods to be checked based on weighing results (IAPR - Customs). 
4.  Pan-Hellenic  Undertakings for combating the smuggling of goods that  are subject  to excise 

duty and in the case of undervaluation (IAPR - Customs). 

Latvia 
Measures in the area of procurement 
1.  Amendments to the Public procurement law in order to improve competition;  
2.  The  Procurement  Monitoring  Bureau  has  organized  several  workshops  on  the  most  common 

procurement errors in EU funded projects, educating more than 300 participants;  

3.  A  specific  inter-institutional  working  group  (consisting  of  the  Procurement Monitoring  Bureau, 
the  Competition  Council,  the  Corruption  prevention  and  combating  bureau  and  other 
institutions) has been established to improve the public procurement system 

50 

 
 
Administration of the FEAD 
The risks of fraud have been re-assessed and the risk register updated. Furthermore, a plan for action 
to prevent and mitigate risks has been drawn up.  

Action plan concerning the ESIF funds 
The  Action  Plan  for  minimizing  risks  of  fraud  and  corruption  concerning  the  ESIF  funds  has  been 
updated.  

Prevention of tax fraud 
Control measures have been taken for users of electronic devices and equipment for the registration 
of  taxes  and  other  charges  and  monitoring  measures  have  been  taken  to  verify  the  compliance  of 
electronic devices and equipment for the registration of taxes and other charges 

Organisational measures taken by the General prosecutor’s office 

1.  The  General  prosecutor’s  office  made  a  decision  which  identified  cases  of  fraud  and 
embezzlement related to the causing of material damage to the State or use of EU funds and 
foreign financial assistance funds as a matter of particular concern. 
 The  information  system  of  the  Prosecutor's  Office  does  not  specify  cases  related  to  the 
violation  of  the  European  Union's  financial  interests.  Therefore,  in  2019,  the  General 
prosecutor’s  office  issued  a  decision  that  all  prosecutors  must  fulfil  separate  registers  for 
cases related to the EU financial interest. 

2. 

Informative campaign #FraudOff! 
The social informative campaign #FraudOff! took place for the third year in 2019. The focus theme 
for  2019  was  the  reporting  culture.  Within  the  campaign,  Latvian  authorities  communicated  the 
positive effects of reporting and its necessity in order to fight fraud and corruption to the population. 
A  reporting  tool  was  created  where  individuals  can  report  about  different  irregularities  in  an  easy 
and understandable way. The tool is situated on the website www.atkrapies.lv 

Trainings for beneficiaries and investigative bodies 
Educational  activities  on  project  implementation  issues  (including  irregularities  and  fraud)  for 
beneficiaries and for investigative bodies have been held.  

Romania 
Code of Ethics adopted by the National Agency for Public Procurement 
The  National  Agency  for  Public  Procurement  (ANAP)  adopted  the  Code  of  Ethics  and  Integrity  for 
ANAP Staff. It applies internally, exclusively to ANAP personnel - OPANAP No 3390/31.12.2019. 

Organisation of vocational traineeships by Federal Authorities and Agencies 
 Organisation  of  vocational  traineeships  in  the  PIF  area,  conducted  by  the  Audit  Authority,  the 
National  Agency  for  Public  Procurement,  the  National  Integrity  Agency,  the  Rural  Investment 
Financing Agency (AFIR), the Paying and Intervention Agency for Agriculture (APIA), the Ministry of 
the  Interior,  the  Ministry  of  European  Funds,  the  Ministry  of  Justice  (MJ),  the  Ministry  of  Public 
Works,  Development  and  Administration  (MLPDA)  and  the  National  Anti-Corruption  Directorate 
(DNA). For example, the DNA held a national workshop on 30 October - 1 November 2019 in which 
public  prosecutors,  senior  police  officers,  specialists  and  representatives  of  institutions  involved  in 
the  management  and  identification  of  irregularities  in  the  use  of  European  Union  Funds,  including 

51 

 
 
the  Ministry  of  European  Funds,  the  managing  authorities  (AFIR,  APIA),  the  Fight  against  Fraud 
Department  (DLAF)  and  the  Ministry  of  Regional  Development  and  Public  Administration  (MDRAP) 
took part. On 25 November 2019 the DNA hosted an international conference in Bucharest on trends 
in the investigation of fraud and corruption affecting the financial interests of the European Union. It 
was attended by 90 representatives of national prosecutors’ offices, anti-fraud coordination services 
(AFCOS) of EU Member States, Ukraine  and the Republic of Moldova, as well as representatives of 
OLAF. 

 Internal audits conducted at public authorities 
 The  MJ  conducted  an  internal  audit  of  the  corruption  prevention  system  at  all  public  authorities; 
internal  public  audit  missions  were  concluded,  and  the  technical  secretariat  supporting  the 
implementation of the National Anti-Corruption Strategy centralised a total of 3 669 audit reports. Of 
those,  over  500  were  submitted  by  central  departments  (including  local  branches  acting  in 
subordinate/coordinating  roles/under  authority,  public  enterprises,  etc.),  while  over  3  100  were 
submitted by local public administration departments. 

Implementation of the anti-bribery standard 
In June 2019, the AFIR obtained certification of the anti-bribery management system in accordance 
with  the  provisions  of  the  international  standard  ISO  37001:2016  and  has  completed  the 
implementation of the anti-bribery management system (SMAM), the process having been initiated 
in 2018. The MLPDA is in the process of implementing the ISO 37001 anti-bribery standard. 

Slovenia 
Implementation of FRC Decision into the Slovenian risk analysis system 
On 1 June 2018, Slovenia implemented fourteen FRC Risk profiles into the system .On 5 July 2018, 
the  Local  Customs  Dept.  were  informed  about  the  implementation  of  the  FRC  risk  profiles  by  an 
official  letter  .The  FRC  decision  adopted  on  31  May  2019  lays  down"  the  common  financial  risk 
criteria and standards" (FRC) that the customs authorities need to apply to goods declared for free 
circulation with the  aim of protecting the financial interests of the EU and its Member States. This 
measure  is  important  for  the  protection  of  the  EU’s  financial  interests  and  the  fight  against  fraud, 
due to the fact that it allows an electronic selection of the risk related information contained in the 
customs declarations.  

Spain 
Measure to avoid false declaration of land implemented by Regional Paying Agencies 
Several  Regional  Paying  Agencies  (e.g.  Extremadura)  have  implemented  a  measure  to  avoid  false 
declaration  of  lands  in  the  submission  of  proposals  for  grants  financed  with  agricultural  funds.  In 
particular,  this  measure  consists  of  giving  every  land  owner  the  possibility  to  notify  the  Paying 
Agency that his/her land is neither being exploited by him/her nor been rent out to anybody, so that 
nobody is entitled to ask for agricultural funds based on such piece of land. 

Once  the  Paying  Agency  receives  this  notification  (mainly  by  electronic  means),  the  corresponding 
piece of land is automatically blocked in the information systems of the Paying Agency, so that, if an 
application for agricultural funds based on such piece of land is received by the Paying Agency, it will 
be automatically rejected by the system, preventing potential fraudsters to declare lands which they 

52 

 
 
do neither own nor have exploited, with the purpose of illegally obtaining agricultural funds based on 
them. 

53 

 
 
 
 
Training on the Irregularity Management System organised by the 
Member States 

The Irregularity Management System (IMS) has more than 3,000 users across the 28 
Member States and (potential) candidate countries. In order to organise an adequate 
support to users, the Commission (OLAF) has put in place a system which is based 
on the "train the trainers" approach. 

Based on this  "decentralised" model, 37 training sessions were organised in  twelve 
Member States, attended by 563 trainees, as showed in Figure 8. 

Figure 8: Training sessions organised by Member States in 2019 

Member State 

# of training sessions 

# of Trainees 

AT 

BE 

BG 

DE 

ES 

IT 

HU 

PL 

1 

4 

9 

4 

1 

3 

5 

1 

2 

7 

26 

79 

35 

90 

60 

90 

TOTAL 

28 

389 

54 

 
 
 
 
Case Studies reported by Member States 
Bulgaria 
Misuse of EAFRD funds in connection with the construction of a guesthouse 
In 2011 P. registered an EOOD (single-member private limited liability company) for processing and 
marketing  agricultural  products.  The  EOOD  is  registered  as  a  farmer.  For  this  purpose,  agricultural 
land owned by D. was rented. In 2013 P. submitted an application at the PA of the SFA for financial 
aid under Measure 311 of the RDP for the construction of a guesthouse. The EOOD declared revenue 
from agricultural activities; copies of invoices  for the sale of agricultural produce  to a company for 
which D. is materially responsible were submitted.  The State Fund for Agriculture concluded a grant 
agreement with P. The funds came from a loan from a company owned by D. and from P.’s personal 
means.  The  company  contracted  for  the  construction  is  owned  by  D.  The  payment  request  was 
submitted by P.  The SFA paid the agreed amounts in 2015.An on-site check revealed that P. and G., a 
cohabiting  couple,  were  present  in  the  house.  Currently,  there  are  no  guests  in  the  house,  no 
contracts  with  tour  operator  companies,  no  cash  registers  or  visitors’  register  on  the  site.  The 
property on which the project was implemented is owned by the EOOD and was purchased in 2013 
from D. No declarations with regard to the site were submitted under the Local Taxes and Fees Act 
and the Tourism Act. No guests or commercial activity have been observed. The site is also used by D. 
and is known as D.’s house and D. and P. are relatives from which follows that D. is the actual owner 
of the  house. Artificial conditions for an EOOD registration as  a farmer were  created with the land 
lease contract with D. and the invoices for the sale of produce to D.’s company. The site was not used 
as  intended.  Pre-trial  proceedings  have  been  initiated  for  an  offence  under  Article  248a  of  the 
Criminal Code — submission of false information to the PA of the SFA in order to obtain EAFRD funds 
to build a guesthouse.  

Uncovered illegal factory for tobacco products not paying excise tax 
In  2019,  a  working  illegal  factory  producing  cigarettes  without  excise  tax  marking  was  uncovered. 
Moldova informed the Ministry of the Interior of Ukrainian and Moldovan nationals entering Bulgaria 
with the ultimate aim of working in an illegal cigarette  factory. When entering Bulgaria, they were 
identified  and  an  operation  was  initiated  to  check  the  information  received  about  the  purpose  of 
their stay in the country. In the course of the work, a building was found that met the criteria for an 
illegal  factory  site  in  terms  of  area,  communication,  electrical  autonomy,  cover.  The  persons  were 
staying  there.  Prior  to the  police  operation  to  uncover  criminal  activities,  operational  observations 
had  been  carried  out  to  determine  whether  the  building  constituted  an  illegal  manufacturing  site. 
Continuous  traffic  of  both  lorries  and  passenger  cars  was  observed  on  the  spot  in  the  absence  of 
officially registered commercial or production activity. About 1000 'master cases' of illegal cigarettes 
were seized as a result  of the  police operation. In addition to the excise goods, large  quantities  of 
tobacco  were  seized,  enough  for  the  production  of  more  than  3000  ‘master  cases’,  a  large  set  of 
consumables  for  the  manufacture  of  cigarettes:  adhesives,  films,  paperboard  cuttings  for  cigarette 
packs, etc. 

Croatia 
Customs case – irregularity and illegal treatment of tobacco precursors 
On 23 January 2019, customs officers of the Service for Mobile Unit Osijek, in cooperation with police 
officers,  detected  an  illegal  treatment  with  tobacco precursors,  in  quantity of  19.846,10  kg.  It  was 

55 

 
 
transported in a vehicle with polish registration plates, the driver was a citizen of Belarus. After the 
shipment exited the territory of the Republic of Croatia, it was returned to the customs territory of 
Croatia. Within the national legislation (Excise Law), there is a provision that stipulates that for each 
intended entrance to Croatia of tobacco products and precursors also, the operators have to notify 
the  ELO  (Excise  liaison  office).  This  measure  should  ensure  that  proper  surveillance  measures  are 
taken regarding the vehicle and the shipment. In this case, the operators did not notify the ELO about 
the entrance of goods, which led to the suspicion of illegal treatment with tobacco precursors and to 
a  detected  irregularity.  A  misdemeanour  proceeding  against  the  offender  was  conducted,  and  a 
decision for payment of excise in the amount of 11.907.660,00 HRK was submitted.  

Estonia 
Eradication of an International group of perpetrators specialized on excise fraud 
An international criminal group engaged in excise fraud in Estonia, France and Germany was blocked 
within  the  frames  of  criminal  proceedings  in  cooperation  with  Germany  and  France.  In  Estonia,  a 
criminal scheme was carried out in such a way that beer and wine were purchased from an Estonian 
producer free of excise duty and VAT, the sale and transport of which was formally to Germany. The 
German excise warehouses participating in the scheme  submitted electronic waybills via the EMCS 
concerning  the  dispatch  of  goods  in  the  terms  of  temporary  excise  duty  exemption  to  an  excise 
warehouse  in  another  Member  State  and  confirmed  that  the  goods  were  dispatched  to  a  German 
excise warehouse. In reality, excise goods were not transported out of Estonia, but was sold in the 
Estonian market. The same scheme was used in France, where the transport of goods was shown on 
papers to same German excise warehouses, but goods were actually sold in black market. In Estonia, 
three  persons  and  one  company  were  brought  to  justice  who  had  been  active  during  the  period 
04.07.2018  -  25.02.2019  and  caused  the  excise  damage  of  EUR  795  836,  92.  Such  a  fraud  scheme 
revealed  the  weaknesses  of  EMCS,  where  the  electronic  database  shows  the  traffic  and  receipt  of 
goods, but there were no goods in stock, in fact. 

Counterfeit goods detected in cooperation with German Customs authorities 
On the basis of information received from the German Customs authorities, a container sent  from 
Lebanon  that  arrived  in  Estonia  was  inspected,  from  which  10,000  000  Prince  cigarettes  were 
discovered. According to the manifest, cigarettes were supposed to move on to Russia. Neither the 
consignee  nor  the  consignor  contacted  the  Estonian  Customs  authorities.  Since  it  turned  out  that 
cigarettes were counterfeit, whole shipment was confiscated and are going to be destroyed. German 
colleagues also informed that a shipment of water pipe tobacco from the United Arab Emirates is on 
the transit way to Estonia and the load was taken into the Customs control. As inspection revealed 
that the goods were counterfeit, all subsequent consignments were inspected as well and three of 
the five consignments  (a total of 4,785 kilograms) were  counterfeit  Al Fakher’ water pipe  tobacco, 
which was confiscated.  

Bunkering fraud 
The ongoing priority will be fuel fraud in connection with bunkering, where the most recent example 
is  from  May  2019,  when  the  Estonian  Tax  and  Customs  Board,  carried  out  national  surveillance  in 
cooperation with the Police and Border Guard Board, on the VF cargo ship STK-1008 in the E-area of 
the Tallinn roadstead. The bunkering data of the ship were checked based on documentary sources 
on the ship, such as bunker Delivery Notes (BDN)), Oil Record Books. It was found on the spot that a 
bunker  delivery  note  was  available  on  board  the  cargo  ship,  but  the  quantity  of  fuel  on  board,  30 

56 

 
 
tonnes, was not included in the Oil Record Book. A later comparison of the shipping documents with 
the declared figure showed a difference of 175 tonnes, with a possible unpaid tax of EUR 182 337, 
27.  

Greece 
Special management service for the 2014-2020 Greek rural development programme 
Study on the creation of a database of reasonable costs of equipment and building infrastructure for 
the investment measures of the 2014-2020 Greek Rural Development Programme.  

The  third  deliverable (D3),  entitled  ‘Final Database  -  Evaluation  User  Guide  -  Proposal  for  adapting 
the  State  Aid  IT  System’,  includes  the  development  of  the  final  database  of  reasonable  costs  of 
machinery and building infrastructure, an evaluation user guide and a proposal for making the best 
use of the database using the State Aid IT System. The first update of the database was submitted on 
13 May 2019. 

The database of reasonable costs for the investment measures of the Rural Development Programme 
helps to strengthen the procedures to verify the reasonableness of costs of investment operations at 
the  evaluation  and  control  stages,  and  consequently  mitigates  the  risk  of  cost  overruns  for  the 
projects under the investment measures. 

Italy 
Traditional own resources - Activities to combat the smuggling of foreign manufactured 
tobacco products 
The  Economic  and  Financial  Police  Unit  of  the  Guardia  di  Finanza  in  Caserta,  through  operation 
‘Flyable’, has disbanded a criminal organisation dedicated to the smuggling of foreign manufactured 
tobacco products that has evaded around €6 million in taxes.  

The  investigation  initiated  as  the  result  of  the  stopping  of  an  articulated  vehicle  and  the  car 
accompanying it in August 2015 by the aforementioned division of the Guardia di Finanza as part of 
an international cooperation activity with a UK counterpart organisation. 

The  subsequent  investigative  activities,  carried  out  through  cross-checking  data  from  wiretapping 
and room bugging, video recordings, observation activities, shadowing, and checks, led to the seizure 
of  over  35  tonnes  of  contraband  cigarettes,  the  arrests  of  36  people  caught  in  the  act,  and  the 
implementation of precautionary measures on 14 parties involved, in various capacities, in crimes of 
cross-border criminal conspiracy to smuggle foreign manufactured tobacco products. 

Furthermore,  immovable  property,  articulated  vehicles  and  vans  used  for  transporting  cigarettes 
originating from Eastern Europe (Poland, Moldova and Ukraine) to sell in Italy were seized. 

Among the ploys used by the criminal organisation are the following: 

1.  vehicles fraudulently registered to third parties with double bottoms for hiding the goods (in 

semi-trailers of articulated vehicles and the underside of boots in vehicles); 

2.  an  underground  bunker  for  storing  the  cigarettes,  located  in  an  industrial  warehouse 

accessible through a fake manhole; 

3.  mobile phone accounts registered to front people; 

57 

 
 
4.  specific  transmitting/receiving  devices,  equipped  with  microphones  and  power  buttons, 
skilfully hidden under the dashboard of the vehicles used for illicit trafficking, all tuned to the 
same frequency; 

5.  sophisticated  instruments  to  detect the  presence  of possible  bugs  in  vehicles  or  members’ 

homes.  

Latvia 
Public procurements 
A leading employee of a scientific institute, establishing an organized group with two other persons, 
used a shell company and organized its participation in two public tenders of this same institute with 
notably more expensive offers. Before participating in the tenders, the employee found out the real 
costs of the orders and found a company to be hired as a subcontractor to accomplish the orders. 
Later using the shell company in 2011 and 2012 the notably more expensive offers were submitted 
to the tenders and admitted winners. By signing the contract, the state lost 832 418,65eur. 

Based on the received evidence, KNAB asked the State Prosecutor to initiate a criminal prosecution 
against three persons for fraud in an organized group (Article 177, Part 3 of the Criminal Law). 

Lithuania 
"Smart" purchase of equipment 
In 2019, the Financial Crime Investigation Service instituted a pre-trial investigation concerning fraud. 
The investigation has been carried out in close cooperation with the agency administering assistance. 
The company signed the grant agreement for the project of which the total value was EUR 1 906 157, 
48, including the own contribution of EUR 944 863, 98 Eur. 

 The project was aimed at equipping laboratory facilities by purchasing and installing equipment and 
at  carrying  out  research  activities.  In  the  course  of  the  investigation,  it  was  established  that  the 
Director of the company was acting with other persons and seeking to avoid the commitment to co-
finance  the project under the  Grant  Agreement  in order  to unlawfully acquire another property of 
high  value  (the  support  funds),  he  purchased  equipment  at  increased  prices  (the  prices  of  some 
pieces of  equipment  were  increased  by 20 times)  from  the Estonia-registered company which  was 
actually managed by him.  

Due  to  the  fact  that  the  submitted  payment  request  stated  the  false  prices  of  the  equipment,  he 
unlawfully acquired EUR 158 715 of the European Union support and the Lithuanian national budget 
funds  and  attempted  to  fraudulently  acquire  no  less  than  EUR  250  000  of  the  European  Union 
support and the Lithuanian national budget funds. 

In cooperation with the agency administering assistance, the investigation succeeded in preventing 
the  payment  of  no  less  than  EUR  250  000  of  the  EU  support  and  the  Lithuanian  national  budget 
funds. 

58 

 
 
Romania 
SOPHRD  (Sectoral  Operational  Programme  ‘Human  Resource  Development’)  -  2007-
2013-  Social  Economy  -  Use  or  presentation  in  bad  faith  of  false,  inaccurate  or 
incomplete  documents  or  declarations,  if  the  act  results  in  EU  funds  being  unduly 
obtained 
The  DNA  requested  the  Anti-Fraud  Department  to  carry  out  a  specialised  check  on  how  the 
beneficiary  X  SRL obtained non-reimbursable European Union funds for the  implementation of the 
project ‘From marginalisation to integration’, financed under the SOPHRD. 

The  overall  objective  of  the  project  was  to  promote  the  development  of  the  social  economy  by 
facilitating access to the labour market for 150 persons belonging to vulnerable groups (in particular 
persons  of  Roma  ethnicity,  persons  with  disabilities,  women,  etc.),  the  aim  being  to  reduce  social 
exclusion, discrimination and the risk of poverty by establishing six Social Economy Structures (SESs) 
with separate legal personality (four in the rural, and two in the urban environment). 

On  the  basis  of the  checks  it  carried  out,  the DLAF  established  that  the  beneficiary  had  submitted 
false  documents  in  order  to  create  the  appearance  of  carrying  out  specific  activities  under  the 
project, and that the six SESs were involved in some fictitious purchases.  

It also found indications of the possible commission of criminal offences: 

1.  the  falsification  -  by  forging  handwriting  and  signature  -  of  a  document  under  private 
signature  submitted  by  the  beneficiary  in  order  to  obtain  non-reimbursable  funding,  may 
constitute a crime under Article 322(1) of the Criminal Code; 

2.  the fact of the X SRL managing director having submitted several false documents resulting in 
European funds being unduly  obtained may constitute  a crime  under Article 181(1) of  Law 
No 78/2000; 

3.  the fact of the managing directors of the six SESs having signed partial acceptance reports in 
respect of IT application services in the business management field and the fact of the legal 
representatives  of  the  economic  operators  with  which  the  six  SESs  concluded  fictitious 
service  contracts  having  thus  helped  the  beneficiary  to  unduly  obtain  European  funds  may 
constitute  an  offence  under  Article  48(1)  of  the  Criminal  Code  in  conjunction  with  Article 
181(1) of Law No 78/2000. 

Following the checks, the DLAF sent a control report to the DNA and the MA. 

Slovakia 
Collusive behaviour of the tenderers 
In 2019, the Ministry of Transport and Construction of the Slovak Republic as the Managing Authority 
(MA)  for  the  Operational Programme  ‘Integrated  Infrastructure’  identified,  in  the  standard  ex-post 
financial control of a low value contract, the collusive behaviour of the tenderers. The MA applied a 
criminal  complaint  for  the  possible  commission  of  a  crime  pursuant  to  Section  266  of  the  Slovak 
Criminal  Code.  On  the  basis  of  the  identified  finding  in  the  public  procurement  control,  the 
municipality cancelled the public procurement and announced a new one. The criminal prosecution, 
which was initiated after the criminal complaint concerning the offense of "Machinations at the PP 

59 

 
 
and Public Auction" was arrested by the Resolution of the Police Force of the SR. Despite of that, this 
behaviour was not considered a crime. 

60