An investigation by the FIOD (the Dutch Fiscal Information and Investigation Service) is a criminal investigation into possible financial or tax crime. It is not the same as an ordinary tax audit. Your company, a director or an employee may be a suspect, but the company may also be approached because it holds information about someone else. That capacity helps determine which rights and obligations apply.
Nederlands: Lees dit artikel in het Nederlands: FIOD-onderzoek bij uw bedrijf: wat moet u doen?
Türkçe: Bu makaleyi Türkçe okuyun: Şirketinizde FIOD soruşturması: ne yapmalısınız?
Has the FIOD turned up at your premises, have records been demanded or have you received an invitation to be interviewed? Instruct a criminal defence lawyer, preserve relevant data and establish who needs legal assistance. Do not let employees align their statements with one another and do not alter any records after the event. A structured initial response helps to safeguard both the legal position and business continuity.
What does the FIOD investigate
The FIOD is the investigation service of the Dutch Ministry of Finance and focuses on financial and tax crime. Investigations may relate to, among other things, tax fraud, money laundering, bankruptcy fraud or other financial offences. The precise suspicion and the parties involved differ from case to case.
An investigation may start with information from another investigation, signals from a regulator, police reports or financial data. You do not need to know in advance that an investigation is taking place. A search or arrest may be the first visible moment, while data has already been gathered before then.
The FIOD gathers evidence within a criminal-law framework, under the direction of the Public Prosecution Service (Openbaar Ministerie). That makes the preparation of statements and the provision of information important. A statement intended as a quick bookkeeping explanation may also be used in assessing intent, involvement or de facto management.
The difference between a tax audit and a criminal investigation
In a tax audit, obligations to provide information and keep records may apply. In a criminal investigation, a suspect has, among other things, the right not to be required to cooperate in their own conviction, within the limits of the applicable rules. The relationship between tax obligations and criminal-law safeguards can be complex.
It must therefore be clear who is asking the questions, on what legal basis and for what purpose. A request from a tax inspector, an order from an investigating officer and a voluntary conversation are not the same. The nature of the information requested may also make a difference: existing records and giving an explanatory statement do not always call for the same assessment.
Do not ignore a request for information, but do not assume either that everything must be provided without consultation. Have the legal basis, scope and response deadline assessed. Where necessary, your lawyer can coordinate with a tax adviser or accountant, so that obligations are met while the relevant criminal-law safeguards are preserved.
Who is the lawyer’s client
In an investigation into a business, the interests of the legal entity, directors and employees may diverge. A lawyer instructed by the company does not automatically represent every person involved. That must be clear before any substantive discussions take place.
The company may, for example, argue that an employee acted outside their authority, while that employee says that management determined the policy. Directors may also disagree among themselves about knowledge, responsibility and actual involvement. A single joint defence is then not automatically appropriate.
Record on whose behalf a lawyer is acting and whether separate legal assistance is needed. Who pays the bill does not by itself decide who the client is. A clear demarcation prevents someone from sharing confidential information without understanding whose interests the recipient represents.
What to do during a search
Ask for the officer in charge, the legal basis and the purpose of the action. Let your lawyer know immediately at which address the FIOD is present and which documents have been shown. Do not obstruct the search and ask whether any objections can be recorded.
Appoint one person to keep track of practical information: which rooms are being searched, which data carriers are being taken and which orders are being made? That person does not have to give a substantive statement on behalf of everyone. Distinguish between practical assistance and answers about the alleged facts.
The powers depend on the situation and the type of premises. Business premises and a home above or next to the business do not necessarily enjoy the same safeguards. Your lawyer can test the powers used against the Dutch Code of Criminal Procedure (Sv) and any applicable special legislation.
Preserving data and securing business processes
A criminal investigation is no reason to clean up the records. Stop the automatic deletion of potentially relevant data where that is lawful and necessary for preservation, and record which preservation measures have been taken. Do not alter invoices, emails or contracts to make them fit a statement better.
With legal and technical support, identify which systems contain relevant data. Think of accounting, email, payment platforms, project records and business chat channels. The aim is to preserve the existing information and handle it in a verifiable way, not to hide or move evidence.
An instruction to employees can be short and factual: keep relevant documents, delete nothing, refer questions about the investigation to the designated contact person and do not align statements. Employees should also know that they can seek their own legal advice if they are personally involved.
An overview of orders and seizures
For each order, record who is making it, which legal basis is cited, which period is covered and when a response is required. Keep the original text. A request summarised orally can create uncertainty about exactly what has to be supplied.
| Item | What you record |
|---|---|
| Request or order | Date, sender, legal basis and scope |
| Data | Systems, period, responsible administrator |
| Provision | What was supplied, when and through which channel |
| Seizure | Object, owner, description and seizure number |
| Confidentiality | Information potentially covered by legal professional privilege |
| Business interest | Specific consequences for essential operations |
In the event of a seizure, ask whether necessary copies or other arrangements are possible. Explain why certain data is needed to continue paying wages, making deliveries or meeting statutory obligations. Business operations do not give an automatic right to have property returned, but a specific interest can be relevant to a practical or legal solution.
Confidential documents and legal professional privilege
Communication with a lawyer may be covered by legal professional privilege (verschoningsrecht). With large collections of digital data, it is important to identify potentially protected information at an early stage. Article 98 of the Dutch Code of Criminal Procedure contains safeguards and gives the examining magistrate (rechter-commissaris) a role in assessing certain documents.
Not all communication with every adviser enjoys the same protection. An accountant or tax adviser does not, merely by virtue of that capacity, have the same general privilege as a lawyer. Whether a specific situation enjoys special protection must be assessed separately.
Copying a lawyer into old correspondence after the event does not automatically make business documents protected. Have the selection and handling of potentially confidential data go through the proper procedure. That keeps the discussion focused on the content and legal status of the documents, without new problems arising from unilateral changes.
Preparing for a FIOD interview
A financial interview may concern events from years ago. Invoices, emails and bank transactions are sometimes placed side by side to infer knowledge or intent. Without preparation, there is a risk that you recognise a document too quickly or wrongly give a usual way of working as the explanation for a specific transaction.
Discuss with your lawyer which facts are being investigated and which documents are available. Distinguish between what you did yourself, what you knew at the time and what you infer from the records after the event. If you do not know something, it is better to say so clearly than to make up a plausible explanation.
As a suspect you can exercise your right to remain silent. Whether and when a substantive statement is wise depends on your position and the case file. An extensive interview without preparation can have consequences both for your personal defence and for that of the company. The general information on an invitation to be interviewed ties in with this.
Directors and de facto management
A legal entity can commit criminal offences. In addition, under certain conditions, those who ordered the offence or exercised de facto management (feitelijk leidinggeven) may be held criminally liable. Article 51 of the Dutch Criminal Code (Sr) is an important basis for this.
A formal director’s title does not automatically prove de facto management of a criminal offence. Conversely, the absence of such a title does not rule out involvement. The actual role, powers, knowledge and conduct must be examined. The question of who signed a document is only one part of that assessment.
Therefore gather information about the division of tasks, decision-making, controls and escalations. Who approved payments? Who received warnings? Who could intervene and what was done next? Existing minutes and correspondence are more valuable here than an organisation chart drawn up after the event that does not reflect actual practice.
A mistake is not automatically fraud
Incorrect records or an incorrect tax return can have various causes. For a criminal offence, it must be established which statutory conditions apply, including any intent requirement. A mistake does not automatically prove that requirement.
At the same time, saying that the accountant took care of everything is not a complete defence. The information you provided, your own knowledge and your response to warning signs may be relevant. Investigate which data you supplied, which advice you received and whether you had reason to doubt its accuracy.
A substantive reconstruction can help to distinguish between an administrative error, a difference of opinion on tax treatment and knowingly wrongful conduct. That calls for cooperation between legal and financial expertise. Also read the explanation on fraud and forgery.
Corrections during an ongoing investigation
Sometimes a company discovers errors during the investigation that need to be rectified. A correction may be necessary, but must be carried out carefully. Adjusting records without keeping the original and without a clear explanation can raise questions about the reliability of the data.
So first discuss the nature of the error, any statutory obligations to rectify it and the criminal-law context. Record what is being corrected, why and on the basis of which existing information. Do not create new documents that are presented as if they already existed earlier.
A voluntary correction or payment does not automatically end a criminal investigation. Its significance depends on the applicable rules, the timing and the circumstances. So do not act solely on the basis of a general story about voluntary disclosure or rectification when specific investigative steps are already being taken.
Communication with employees, customers and banks
An investigation can quickly lead to questions. Establish who communicates on behalf of the company and which facts are actually known. A businesslike announcement that an investigation exists does not have to anticipate guilt or the outcome.
Avoid firm statements that there is nothing wrong if the suspicion is not yet clear. Nor should you share confidential case documents with a large group. Employees mainly need practical clarity about their work, points of contact and their own position.
A bank, insurer or contracting party may request information on the basis of its own rules and agreements. Assess those requests separately and align your answers with the criminal case. The information on fraud registrations with financial institutions may be relevant if a bank takes measures.
Seizure and financial continuity
A seizure of accounts or business assets can have a direct effect on wages, suppliers and ongoing assignments. Draw up a specific overview of the frozen assets and the payments that must be made. A general statement that the company cannot continue is less useful than a substantiated analysis of liquidity and obligations.
The ground for the seizure determines which arguments are relevant. A seizure of a data carrier as evidence calls for a different assessment from a protective seizure (conservatoir beslag) to secure a possible fine or confiscation of the proceeds of crime (ontneming). Ownership by other group companies or third parties must also be substantiated.
Your lawyer can make contact about practical options and, if necessary, assess legal proceedings. Do not move assets yourself or route payments through other people to avoid seizure. That can cause new problems and worsen your position in the investigation.
A fictitious example of differing interests
Suppose a company is being investigated because of incorrect invoices. The director says that the accounts department decided on the content independently. The accounts employee says that she only carried out instructions and repeatedly asked questions. Both statements may be relevant, but their interests may diverge.
The company also needs continuity and a response to the bank. It is then not enough to organise one joint meeting in which everyone has to endorse the same explanation. It must first be established who needs what legal assistance and which existing documents show what actually happened.
This example shows why an investigation calls for several workstreams: individual defence, the position of the legal entity, data management and business operations. Good coordination means that those subjects are carefully linked, without artificially equating different interests.
How a FIOD investigation can end
An investigation can lead to a dismissal (the Public Prosecution Service drops the case), an out-of-court disposal or prosecution before the criminal court. Which route is possible depends on the facts, the evidence and the policy applicable to the case. Any promise that payment always prevents prosecution would be incorrect.
Where a disposal is proposed, other consequences must also be considered. Think of confiscation, tax adjustments, registrations, contractual obligations and the position of directors. A settlement for the legal entity does not automatically end all personal risks.
So record which facts and persons a decision covers. Assess the reasoning and any conditions and check what is still outstanding. Even after the investigation has ended, seizures, costs and registrations may need to be dealt with separately.
One timeline for the investigation and business decisions
Alongside the financial records, keep a factual timeline of orders received, interviews, seizures and important business decisions. Note who took a decision and on the basis of which information. This makes it possible later to distinguish what was already known before the investigation and what was only discovered during it.
Let the timeline refer to existing sources and avoid speculation about the motives of employees or investigators. A document intended for consultation with your lawyer must be handled through the agreed route. Handling confidentiality correctly deserves attention, but a label such as internal or confidential does not in itself provide legal protection. A clear record of the process mainly helps to keep track of deadlines, responsibilities and factual changes.
Frequently asked questions about the FIOD
Is a FIOD visit an ordinary tax audit?
Not necessarily. The FIOD carries out criminal investigations into financial and tax crime. Ask about the purpose, the legal basis and your capacity. That information helps determine which rights and obligations apply.
Should my accountant accompany me to the interview?
An accountant can provide important financial information, but is no substitute for a criminal defence lawyer. Your procedural position and the right to legal assistance require separate attention. Cooperation can be useful if the roles are clear.
Can the company use the same lawyer as the director?
That is not automatically appropriate. It must first be assessed whether interests may conflict. Make clear on whose behalf the lawyer is acting and whether directors or employees need separate legal assistance.
May I correct errors in the records?
Rectification may be necessary, but must be done carefully and verifiably. Keep the originals and discuss statutory obligations and criminal-law consequences. Do not create backdated documents and do not present new documents as old records.
Do I have to stop all business activities during the investigation?
That does not follow automatically from the existence of an investigation. Seizures, conditions and practical restrictions can, however, have an impact. Map these out specifically and have it assessed which activities can lawfully continue.
What information should I send to a lawyer first?
Send invitations, orders, seizure documents and an overview of the individuals and legal entities involved. Mention any running deadlines and urgent business problems. First discuss how large volumes of data or confidential data can be supplied securely.
Assistance with a financial criminal investigation
Arslan Advocaten can assess the suspicion, the legal assistance required and the consequences for your company. See our services in criminal law and fraud or contact us. Let us know whether a search is taking place right now, an interview has been scheduled or a deadline for an information order is about to expire.
Sources
Editorial team and responsible attorney
Editorial team: Arslan Advocaten. Responsible attorney for criminal law: Melanie Schulpen.
Last editorially updated: 22 September 2026. This general information is no substitute for an assessment of your own case.
