When customs officers conduct a formal audit of a business — known in Germany as a Betriebsprüfung, carried out by the Hauptzollamt (Main Customs Office) — employers face a legally demanding situation. The law requires them to cooperate actively, yet the same information they disclose during the audit can later give rise to criminal consequences. This tension between the statutory duty to cooperate and the constitutionally protected principle against compelled self-incrimination is one of the most practically significant challenges in German customs law.
The customs authorities conduct audits under the Schwarzarbeitsbekämpfungsgesetz (SchwarzArbG — the Act to Combat Undeclared Work) and the Sozialgesetzbuch (SGB — the German Social Code), examining compliance with obligations in the areas of social security, employment law, and taxation.
The lawyers at Schlun & Elseven have extensive practical experience dealing with the relevant customs authorities and are thoroughly familiar with the typical course of such audits. They advise and represent businesses from the moment a notice of audit is received, helping employers accurately assess their rights and obligations throughout the process — including the question of when silence is not only permissible, but advisable.
Cooperation Obligations under the SchwarzArbG and SGB
The legal basis for the duty to cooperate arises from a combination of statutory provisions. Under Section 5 SchwarzArbG, employers and employees are required to submit to inspections by the customs authorities and to cooperate actively. This includes providing information relevant to the audit and producing the relevant documents. Sections 28a and 28p of Book IV of the German Social Code (SGB IV) additionally govern reporting and verification obligations in the area of social security and the conduct of company audits. Section 98 of Book X of the German Social Code (SGB X) sets out the general obligation to provide information to social security bodies and also contains the statutory basis for the right to refuse to answer.
In terms of scope, the duty to cooperate is broadly defined. Employers must provide reasonable audit assistance and, in particular, produce payroll records, wage accounts, employment contracts, and written statements required under the Nachweisgesetz (the Act on Evidence of Essential Conditions of Employment, which requires employers to document key terms of the employment relationship in writing). The customs authorities are entitled to inspect all documents that directly or indirectly relate to compliance with minimum wage requirements and other social security obligations. The duty also extends to the electronic transmission of relevant data from certified payroll software. This is not merely a passive obligation to allow an inspection to take place — it is an active duty to assist, subject to clearly defined limits.
The Right to Refuse to Answer in Customs Audit Proceedings
Extensive as the duty to cooperate is, it is not without limits. The obligation to provide information ends where doing so would expose the person concerned to the risk of prosecution for a criminal offense or a regulatory offense (Ordnungswidrigkeit — a category of administrative offense under German law, distinct from criminal offenses and sanctioned by a fine rather than imprisonment). In that case, the person has the right to refuse to answer. This right is grounded in the constitutionally recognized principle of nemo tenetur se ipsum accusare — no one is required to incriminate themselves or a person close to them in a criminal offense or a sanctionable regulatory offense.
In practice, this means that while employers are generally required to produce documents and provide information, they are not obliged to make statements that could initiate or support criminal or regulatory proceedings against them. In such situations, exercising the right to refuse to answer is not only permissible — it is frequently the strategically appropriate course of action. That said, this right must not be invoked indiscriminately: an unjustified refusal to cooperate can itself constitute a regulatory offense subject to a fine. Drawing the line between a permissible refusal to answer and a sanctionable refusal to cooperate requires precise legal analysis in each individual case.
The Dilemma Facing Employers in Customs Audits
The tension described above creates a concrete dilemma in practice: disclose too much, and you risk self-incrimination; cooperate too little, and you risk fines for breach of the duty to cooperate. Both deliberate and negligent breaches of the statutory cooperation obligations are sanctioned as regulatory offenses under the SchwarzArbG. Employers who are unprepared when an audit takes place can find themselves in a position where every decision — whether to cooperate or to refuse — carries significant risks.
It should also be borne in mind that customs audits under the SchwarzArbG frequently serve as the starting point for criminal investigations. Information provided in what appears to be a routine company audit can subsequently be used as evidence in criminal proceedings. Employers should therefore be aware from the outset that the boundary between an administrative procedure and a criminal investigation is fluid — and should seek legal advice as early as possible.
Documents, Disclosure, and Audit Strategy
One of the most frequently arising questions concerns the scope of the documents that must be produced. As a general rule, all documents relevant to verifying compliance with social security, employment law, and — where applicable — tax obligations must be provided. These typically include payroll accounts, employment contracts, records of working hours, and wage statements. Which documents must be produced in any given case, and which may be withheld, cannot be determined in the abstract — it always requires a concrete legal assessment.
A separate question arises regarding the consequences of exercising the right to refuse to answer. Doing so entitles employers to withhold certain information without this being treated as a sanctionable failure to cooperate — provided the legal requirements for invoking that right are met. However, the right to refuse to answer does not release an employer from the obligation to produce documents where there is no concrete risk of self-incrimination. Furthermore, the scope of the right to refuse to answer in administrative proceedings differs from the rights afforded to accused persons under the Strafprozessordnung (StPO — the German Code of Criminal Procedure). A misjudgment can result in the right being waived prematurely, or being asserted in an area where it does not legally apply.
The aim of a legally guided audit strategy is therefore to comply fully with statutory cooperation obligations without inadvertently providing self-incriminating material. This requires careful preparation: identifying which documents must be produced, which information may be withheld, and how to respond if the authorities escalate matters. Legal assistance before and during the audit protects against procedural errors and ensures that neither action nor inaction places the client in a legally disadvantageous position.
How Schlun & Elseven Can Help
Schlun & Elseven advises and represents employers and businesses at all stages of a customs audit under the SchwarzArbG and the SGB — from the initial audit notification through to criminal defense proceedings.
Legal Advice on Communication with the Audit Authorities
Our lawyers will advise you precisely on which information you are required to provide and which documents you must produce — and where your right to refuse cooperation begins. The goal is a mode of communication with the customs authorities that fully meets the legal requirements without unnecessarily exposing your business.
Representation Throughout the Customs Audit
Schlun & Elseven accompanies you through the entire audit process, ensuring your rights are protected at every stage. Our lawyers attend audit appointments, coordinate the production of documents, and serve as the point of contact for the audit authorities — so that you are never placed in a position of having to respond unprepared to questions that may have far-reaching consequences.
Representation in Criminal Proceedings
Should the audit transition into criminal proceedings, our specialist lawyers will assume full responsibility for your criminal defense. We secure your procedural rights, review the lawfulness of any official measures taken, and represent your interests before investigative authorities and courts.
FAQ: Customs Audits, the Duty to Cooperate, and the Right to Refuse to Answer
The duty to cooperate arises primarily from Section 5 SchwarzArbG, as well as Sections 28a and 28p SGB IV and Section 98 SGB X. Under these provisions, employers are required to submit to inspections by the customs authorities, produce documents relevant to the audit, and provide information to the extent necessary to verify compliance with social security, employment law, and tax obligations.
No. There is a right to refuse to answer where providing information would expose the person concerned to the risk of prosecution for a criminal offense or a regulatory offense. This right is grounded in the constitutional principle of nemo tenetur se ipsum accusare and protects against compelled self-incrimination.
An unjustified refusal to cooperate can be sanctioned as a regulatory offense under the SchwarzArbG. Where the legal requirements for refusing to answer are genuinely met, however, that refusal may not be sanctioned. The distinction is legally complex in individual cases and should always be made with the assistance of a lawyer.
As a general rule, yes. Information and documents provided in the course of an administrative procedure can become relevant as evidence in any subsequent criminal or regulatory proceedings. This underscores the importance of seeking legal advice before the audit begins and of avoiding unconsidered statements.
The obligation typically covers employment contracts, payroll accounts, records of working hours, wage statements, and written documentation required under the Nachweisgesetz. The electronic transmission of data from certified payroll software may also be required. Which documents must be produced in a specific case — and which may be withheld — always requires an individual legal assessment.
As soon as you receive notice of an upcoming audit, or when customs officers appear at your premises, you should seek legal advice without delay. Mistakes made at an early stage of the audit process often cannot be corrected later. The earlier you obtain legal advice, the more effectively your rights can be protected.
Practice Group: German Customs Lawyers
Practice Group:
German Customs Lawyers
Contact Schlun & Elseven Rechtsanwälte
Please use our online form to outline your request to us. After receiving your request, we will make a brief initial assessment based on the facts described and provide you with a cost offer. You can then decide whether you would like to engage our services.
