Self-Disclosure for Foreign Trade Law Violations in Germany: Your Chance at Immunity from Prosecution

The Foreign Trade and Payments Act and the accompanying Foreign Trade and Payments Ordinance (AWV) govern which transactions and positions must be reported, and to which authority. Under Section 23(1) AWG, oversight responsibility lies with the Main Customs Offices, the German Federal Bank (Deutsche Bundesbank), the Federal Office for Economic Affairs and Export Control (BAFA), and the Federal Office for Agriculture and Food, among others. The most practically significant reporting obligations are found in Sections 64 and following of the AWV.

The reporting obligation most frequently relevant in business practice concerns cross-border payment flows. A payment transaction between a domestic party and a foreign party that exceeds the threshold of 50,000 euros must be reported. This increased threshold has been applied since January 1, 2025; it previously stood at 12,500 euros. The nationality of the parties involved is irrelevant; what matters is solely their place of business or residence.

The definition of a payment was also expanded effective January 1, 2025. Since then, Section 67(3) AWV also covers the transfer of crypto assets and the contribution of property and rights to companies. As a result, the scope of this provision is considerably broader than many companies assume – a careful case-by-case review is essential. Reports must be submitted to the German Federal Bank and must be filed electronically through the Bundesbank’s reporting portal no later than the seventh business day of the month following the payment.

The requirements for electronic submission should not be underestimated in practice: the forms are complex, and the Bundesbank accepts custom file formats only to a very limited extent. Private individuals also have the option to report by telephone.

Beyond the payment reporting obligation, the Foreign Trade and Payments Ordinance contains additional reporting requirements that may be relevant for internationally active companies:

• Company holdings: Direct and portfolio holdings of domestic parties abroad, as well as of foreign parties within Germany, are reportable under Sections 64 and 65 AWV once certain holding thresholds are exceeded.
• Claims and liabilities involving foreign parties: If a domestic party’s claims against, or liabilities to, foreign parties reach or exceed 6 million euros in total at month’s end, the reporting obligation under Section 66 AWV applies.
• Reporting obligations for financial institutions: Under Section 70 AWV, banks and credit institutions are subject to separate reporting obligations for cross-border payments of 50,000 euros or more, provided these relate to securities transactions or card transactions arising from travel.

Violations of the reporting obligations under Section 67 AWV are regulatory offenses that can be punished under Section 19(6) AWG with a fine of up to 30,000 euros per individual violation (Section 67(1) AWV in conjunction with Section 19(3) No. 1b AWG in conjunction with Section 81(2) No. 19 AWV). The limitation period is three years.

In addition, Section 30 OWiG allows for a corporate fine to be imposed where the violation is connected to the business activity of a legal entity. Supervisory personnel in leadership roles – such as managing directors or compliance officers – can also be fined under Section 130 OWiG if they failed to exercise the required oversight.

Beyond the reporting obligation under Section 67 AWV, the Foreign Trade and Payments Act sets out several other practically relevant regulatory offenses:

• Section 19(3) AWG covers violations of national security or maritime trade regulations, as well as the failure to present, exhibit, or declare goods as required upon crossing a border under Section 27(1), sentence 1 AWG.
• Section 19(4) AWG concerns conduct that violates European restrictions on foreign trade under Section 82 AWV.
• Section 19(5) AWG addresses violations of information, record-keeping, and reporting obligations arising from EU sanctions regulations.

Since September 2013, Section 22(4) AWG has provided for the possibility of a fine-eliminating self-disclosure. The provision is structurally modeled on the self-disclosure mechanism known from tax criminal law for reckless tax evasion under Section 378 AO, though it has its own distinct requirements. An effective self-disclosure creates a bar to prosecution: it not only precludes the imposition of a fine for the reported violation but also prevents regulatory offense proceedings against supervisory personnel under Section 130 OWiG, as well as a corporate fine under Section 30 OWiG.

For a self-disclosure to be effective, the following cumulative requirements must be met:

1. Applicable regulatory offense: Self-disclosure is available only for violations falling under Section 19(3) through (5) AWG. Not every violation of a foreign trade law obligation is eligible for self-disclosure.
2. Negligent conduct: Immunity from prosecution can only be achieved if the violation was committed negligently rather than intentionally. The distinction between negligence and intent is ultimately drawn by the competent authority, and this assessment carries a significant degree of legal uncertainty, which a carefully prepared and professionally drafted self-disclosure can help minimize.
3. Discovery through internal review and voluntary disclosure: The violation must have been uncovered through the company’s own internal review. The disclosure must be made voluntarily – meaning before the competent authority has begun its own investigation into the specific violation.
4. Appropriate remedial measures: The party making the disclosure must take suitable steps to prevent comparable violations in the future. Such measures typically include implementing an effective compliance management system, establishing clear internal responsibilities with monitoring of deadlines, and deploying electronic monitoring systems.

The window for an effective self-disclosure is limited: once the authority becomes aware of the violation and opens an investigation, voluntariness – and with it the fine-eliminating effect – is lost.

Foreign trade law compliance presents internationally active companies with complex challenges that carry significant liability risk. Schlun & Elseven Rechtsanwälte supports companies and their management bodies both in the preventive design of appropriate reporting processes and in addressing violations that have already occurred, as part of our broader work as a customs lawyer for full-service foreign trade compliance. Where an AWG violation has taken place, our lawyers assess the requirements for an effective self-disclosure under Section 22(4) AWG, prepare the necessary disclosure to the authority, and guide the entire process through to its conclusion. Our goal is to secure the fine-eliminating effect of the self-disclosure and protect the company and its responsible individuals from further sanctions. Given the substantially tightened legal environment following the 2026 AWG amendment, early legal advice is more important than ever – particularly since the boundary between regulatory offenses eligible for self-disclosure and criminally relevant conduct requires careful case-by-case assessment.