Dr. Peter BARANDT
Anwaltskanzlei (Frankfurt/Main und New York)
Rechtstipp
Herr
Dr. Dipl.-Kfm. Peter
Barandt, LL.M. (Dallas)
Fachanwalt für Steuerrecht
Rechtsanwalt
Vereidigter Buchprüfer
Attorney at Law (New York)
Vereidigter Übersetzer (Englisch-Deutsch)
Kanzlei
Anschrift
GERMAN CRIMINAL TAX FRAUD LAW FROM AN AMERICAN PERSPECTIVE, INCLUDING CRIMINAL INVASION OF GERMAN INHERITANCE (ESTATE) TAX
Rubrik: Staat & Verwaltung
Erstellungsdatum: 10.04.2007
Kurzbeschreibung:
Beitrag:
False declaration of taxes, delayed declaration of taxes and failure to declare taxes at all will be prosecuted in Germany under German Criminal Tax Fraud Law (“Steuerstrafrecht”) as a felony (“Verbrechen”), misdemeanor (“Vergehen”) or infraction (“Ordnungswidrigkeit”), depending on the gravity of charge.
Intentional Tax Fraud will be prosecuted as a felony (“Verbrechen”) or a misdemeanor (“Vergehen”), grossly negligent Criminal Tax Evasion will be prosecuted as an infraction (“Ordnungswidrigkeit”).
In case of the German Federal Inheritance (Estate) Tax (“Erbschaftsteuer”, “Erbschaftssteuer”) the relevant deadline for a beneficiary to declare is twofold.
In a first step, the beneficiary must notify the German Inheritance Tax Office of (“Erbschaftsteuer-Finanzamt”) about the death of Decedent and the nature and extent of the bequest made by the Decedent to him or her within three months from the time of his or her knowledge of Decedent’s death.
Thereafter, the German Inheritance Tax Office (to be distinguished from the German C.I.D.) will determine an individual deadline for the filing of the German Inheritance (Estate) Tax return, which the latter may extend upon request.
Once any of the two aforementioned deadlines will be missed without excuse, probable cause for criminal tax fraud may be assumed.
Punishment for intentional Tax Fraud will be a fine or imprisonment of up to five years, in severe cases imprisonment of up ten years.
Imprisonment sentences up to two years can be and usually are on probation.
In practice, the criminal investigation will be conducted by the Criminal Investigation Department (C.I.D.) (“Steuerfahndung”) of the German Internal Revenue Service (I.R.S.)
For the German equivalent of a U.S. grandjury inditement and for a possible subsequent trial the C.I.D. of the I.R.S. will have to hand over the case to the District Attorney’s Office (D.A.) (“Staatsanwaltschaft”).
The instruments preferably used by the C.I.D. (“Steuerfahndung”) to effectively exert pressure on taxpayers to produce a confession of having committed Tax Fraud are Search and Seizure Orders and Arrest Warrants.
Pre-Trial Detention (“Untersuchungshaft”) can be up to six months initially and can be extended several times.
Release from Pretrial Detention (“Untersuchungshaft”) will be possible under a bail, i.e. a bond.
The German C.I.D. (“Steuerfahndung”) and the German D.A. (“Staatsanwaltschaft”) must seek the entering of Search and Seizure Orders (“Durchsuchungsbeschluss”, “Beschlagnahmebeschluss”, “Durchsuchungs- und Beschlagnahmebeschluss”) and of Arrest Warrants (“Haftbefehle”) before the German Criminal Courts, i.e. before the Federal Courts at their lowest level of the Municipal Courts (“Amtsgerichte”).
In lieu of a U.S. grand jury inditement the German D.A.’s Office will have to present its case directly to the German Criminal Court Judge for the opening of a criminal trial.
In practice, there will be limited control exercised over the German C.I.D. (“Steuerfahndung”) only by the German courts since both civil law, i.e. substantive civil tax law (“Steuerrecht”) and procedural civil tax law (“Steuerverfahrensrecht”), on one hand and criminal law (“Strafrecht”) and criminal procedure law (“Strafverfahrensrecht”) are overlapping here and since both the Investigating Judge having the power to vacate measures of the C.I.D. and ordinary German attorneys defending a taxpayer typically have only little professional legal education and expertise in German Tax Law.
On the other hand, a German Certified Public Accountant (“C.P.A.”) typically will have virtually no education and expertise in German Criminal Procedure Law (“Strafverfahrensrecht”) governing the criminal investigation proceedings.
Criminal prosecution by the German C.I.D. (“Steuerfahndung”) or the German D.A. (“Staatsanwaltschaft”) will typically be accompanied by parallel civil measures by the German Government against the taxpayer, such as the simultaneous impounding of a general lien on a taxpayer’s German assets with the ensuing garnishment of all of his or her bank accounts and with the attachment of major parts of the taxpayer’s personal property together with the encumbering of his or her real property with preliminary mortgages in favor of the German Government.
Such civil tax law measures undertaken by the German Government must be vacated and appealed by the taxpayer separately before the German Tax Courts (“Finanzgerichte”).
All courts, i.e. both German Criminal Courts (“Strafgerichte”) and Tax Courts (“Finanzgerichte”), are Federal Courts.
All German Criminal Tax Fraud Law (“Steuerstrafrecht”) and Civil Tax Law (“Steuerrecht”) is Federal also.
One of the most promising approaches chosen by a German Criminal Defense Attorney against his adversarial counterpart, i.e. against the German C.I.D. (“Steuerfahndung”) or D.A. (“Staatsanwaltschaft”), will be the separate questioning and quelling the German Government’s alleged tax claim per se before the German Tax Courts (“Finanzgerichte”) holding local jurisdiction over the taxpayer.
The German Tax Court will decide by a three judge panel in a much fairer and more diligent way than the taxpayer can expect from the single judge deciding in the German criminal court system who sometimes cannot withstand adapting the “hunting instinct” frequently controling the actions of the German C.I.D. (“Steuerfahndung”) and the German D.A. (“Staatsanwaltschaft”).
Accordingly, the German Tax Courts are allocated at a much higher level than the German Criminal Courts holding jurisdiction over Tax Fraud cases.
For instance, in the German State of Hesse (“Hessen”) holding local jurisdiction for Frankfurt there are some 58 different local criminal courts (“Amtsgerichte”) as opposed to just one single German Tax Court (“Finanzgericht”) holding local jurisdiction on a statewide basis for the entire State of Hesse (“Hessen”).
Attorneys or C.P.A.s may be accused by the C.I.D. (“Steuerfahndung”) of having colluded with the accused taxpayer thereby disqualifying them from further defending their clients.
Also in a German criminal prosecution and investigation proceeding (“Steuerstrafverfahren”) for alleged Criminal Tax Fraud (“Steuerhinterziehung”), as in any other German criminal prosecution and investigation proceeding (“Strafverfahren”, “Ermittlungsverfahren”) a defendant must not have more than three defense attorneys.
The German Inheritance (Estate) Tax return (“Erbschaftsteuererklärung”) is a sole Federal tax return since State Inheritance (Estate) Taxes are unknown in Germany.
Unlike the U.S. Form 706 Federal Estate Tax return and unlike the New York State Estate Tax the German Inheritance (Estate) Tax return (“Erbschaftsteuererklärung”) will not automatically become due nine months after death.
Instead, the German Inheritance Tax Office (“Erbschaftsteuer-Finanzamt”) (to be distinguished from the German C.I.D. (“Steuerfahndung”)) will set an individual deadline for the filing of the German Inheritance (Estate) Tax return (“Erbschaftsteuererklärung”) in each case, after the expiration of which probable cause for criminal tax fraud (“Steuerhinterziehung”) might be assumed by the German C.I.D. (“Steuerfahndung”) and the German D.A. (“Staatsanwaltschaft”) unless the German Inheritance Tax Office (“Erbschaftsteuer-Finanzamt”) will have granted an extension of such deadline (“Fristverlängerung”) prior to its expiration.
For annually due German Federal taxes such as the German Federal Income Tax and the German Federal Corporate Tax the general filing deadline corresponding to the U.S. general filing deadline of April 15 of the following year is May 31 of the following year.
Interest penalties levied on criminally evaded tax claims are six percent per annum.
Given a civil Statute of Limitations period for intentional Criminal Tax Fraud (“Steuerhinterziehung”) of ten years plus an initial tolling period of up to another three years plus a duration of the criminal investigation proceeding (“Ermittlungsverfahren”) by the C.I.D. (“Steuerfahndung”) of usually several more years, the German Government’s interest penalty bill in many cases will run up as high as the allegedly criminally evaded tax claim itself or even will exceed it.
Intentional Tax Fraud will be prosecuted as a felony (“Verbrechen”) or a misdemeanor (“Vergehen”), grossly negligent Criminal Tax Evasion will be prosecuted as an infraction (“Ordnungswidrigkeit”).
In case of the German Federal Inheritance (Estate) Tax (“Erbschaftsteuer”, “Erbschaftssteuer”) the relevant deadline for a beneficiary to declare is twofold.
In a first step, the beneficiary must notify the German Inheritance Tax Office of (“Erbschaftsteuer-Finanzamt”) about the death of Decedent and the nature and extent of the bequest made by the Decedent to him or her within three months from the time of his or her knowledge of Decedent’s death.
Thereafter, the German Inheritance Tax Office (to be distinguished from the German C.I.D.) will determine an individual deadline for the filing of the German Inheritance (Estate) Tax return, which the latter may extend upon request.
Once any of the two aforementioned deadlines will be missed without excuse, probable cause for criminal tax fraud may be assumed.
Punishment for intentional Tax Fraud will be a fine or imprisonment of up to five years, in severe cases imprisonment of up ten years.
Imprisonment sentences up to two years can be and usually are on probation.
In practice, the criminal investigation will be conducted by the Criminal Investigation Department (C.I.D.) (“Steuerfahndung”) of the German Internal Revenue Service (I.R.S.)
For the German equivalent of a U.S. grandjury inditement and for a possible subsequent trial the C.I.D. of the I.R.S. will have to hand over the case to the District Attorney’s Office (D.A.) (“Staatsanwaltschaft”).
The instruments preferably used by the C.I.D. (“Steuerfahndung”) to effectively exert pressure on taxpayers to produce a confession of having committed Tax Fraud are Search and Seizure Orders and Arrest Warrants.
Pre-Trial Detention (“Untersuchungshaft”) can be up to six months initially and can be extended several times.
Release from Pretrial Detention (“Untersuchungshaft”) will be possible under a bail, i.e. a bond.
The German C.I.D. (“Steuerfahndung”) and the German D.A. (“Staatsanwaltschaft”) must seek the entering of Search and Seizure Orders (“Durchsuchungsbeschluss”, “Beschlagnahmebeschluss”, “Durchsuchungs- und Beschlagnahmebeschluss”) and of Arrest Warrants (“Haftbefehle”) before the German Criminal Courts, i.e. before the Federal Courts at their lowest level of the Municipal Courts (“Amtsgerichte”).
In lieu of a U.S. grand jury inditement the German D.A.’s Office will have to present its case directly to the German Criminal Court Judge for the opening of a criminal trial.
In practice, there will be limited control exercised over the German C.I.D. (“Steuerfahndung”) only by the German courts since both civil law, i.e. substantive civil tax law (“Steuerrecht”) and procedural civil tax law (“Steuerverfahrensrecht”), on one hand and criminal law (“Strafrecht”) and criminal procedure law (“Strafverfahrensrecht”) are overlapping here and since both the Investigating Judge having the power to vacate measures of the C.I.D. and ordinary German attorneys defending a taxpayer typically have only little professional legal education and expertise in German Tax Law.
On the other hand, a German Certified Public Accountant (“C.P.A.”) typically will have virtually no education and expertise in German Criminal Procedure Law (“Strafverfahrensrecht”) governing the criminal investigation proceedings.
Criminal prosecution by the German C.I.D. (“Steuerfahndung”) or the German D.A. (“Staatsanwaltschaft”) will typically be accompanied by parallel civil measures by the German Government against the taxpayer, such as the simultaneous impounding of a general lien on a taxpayer’s German assets with the ensuing garnishment of all of his or her bank accounts and with the attachment of major parts of the taxpayer’s personal property together with the encumbering of his or her real property with preliminary mortgages in favor of the German Government.
Such civil tax law measures undertaken by the German Government must be vacated and appealed by the taxpayer separately before the German Tax Courts (“Finanzgerichte”).
All courts, i.e. both German Criminal Courts (“Strafgerichte”) and Tax Courts (“Finanzgerichte”), are Federal Courts.
All German Criminal Tax Fraud Law (“Steuerstrafrecht”) and Civil Tax Law (“Steuerrecht”) is Federal also.
One of the most promising approaches chosen by a German Criminal Defense Attorney against his adversarial counterpart, i.e. against the German C.I.D. (“Steuerfahndung”) or D.A. (“Staatsanwaltschaft”), will be the separate questioning and quelling the German Government’s alleged tax claim per se before the German Tax Courts (“Finanzgerichte”) holding local jurisdiction over the taxpayer.
The German Tax Court will decide by a three judge panel in a much fairer and more diligent way than the taxpayer can expect from the single judge deciding in the German criminal court system who sometimes cannot withstand adapting the “hunting instinct” frequently controling the actions of the German C.I.D. (“Steuerfahndung”) and the German D.A. (“Staatsanwaltschaft”).
Accordingly, the German Tax Courts are allocated at a much higher level than the German Criminal Courts holding jurisdiction over Tax Fraud cases.
For instance, in the German State of Hesse (“Hessen”) holding local jurisdiction for Frankfurt there are some 58 different local criminal courts (“Amtsgerichte”) as opposed to just one single German Tax Court (“Finanzgericht”) holding local jurisdiction on a statewide basis for the entire State of Hesse (“Hessen”).
Attorneys or C.P.A.s may be accused by the C.I.D. (“Steuerfahndung”) of having colluded with the accused taxpayer thereby disqualifying them from further defending their clients.
Also in a German criminal prosecution and investigation proceeding (“Steuerstrafverfahren”) for alleged Criminal Tax Fraud (“Steuerhinterziehung”), as in any other German criminal prosecution and investigation proceeding (“Strafverfahren”, “Ermittlungsverfahren”) a defendant must not have more than three defense attorneys.
The German Inheritance (Estate) Tax return (“Erbschaftsteuererklärung”) is a sole Federal tax return since State Inheritance (Estate) Taxes are unknown in Germany.
Unlike the U.S. Form 706 Federal Estate Tax return and unlike the New York State Estate Tax the German Inheritance (Estate) Tax return (“Erbschaftsteuererklärung”) will not automatically become due nine months after death.
Instead, the German Inheritance Tax Office (“Erbschaftsteuer-Finanzamt”) (to be distinguished from the German C.I.D. (“Steuerfahndung”)) will set an individual deadline for the filing of the German Inheritance (Estate) Tax return (“Erbschaftsteuererklärung”) in each case, after the expiration of which probable cause for criminal tax fraud (“Steuerhinterziehung”) might be assumed by the German C.I.D. (“Steuerfahndung”) and the German D.A. (“Staatsanwaltschaft”) unless the German Inheritance Tax Office (“Erbschaftsteuer-Finanzamt”) will have granted an extension of such deadline (“Fristverlängerung”) prior to its expiration.
For annually due German Federal taxes such as the German Federal Income Tax and the German Federal Corporate Tax the general filing deadline corresponding to the U.S. general filing deadline of April 15 of the following year is May 31 of the following year.
Interest penalties levied on criminally evaded tax claims are six percent per annum.
Given a civil Statute of Limitations period for intentional Criminal Tax Fraud (“Steuerhinterziehung”) of ten years plus an initial tolling period of up to another three years plus a duration of the criminal investigation proceeding (“Ermittlungsverfahren”) by the C.I.D. (“Steuerfahndung”) of usually several more years, the German Government’s interest penalty bill in many cases will run up as high as the allegedly criminally evaded tax claim itself or even will exceed it.
Disclaimer: Der Anwalt-Suchservice übernimmt keinerlei Gewähr für die Aktualität, Wahrheitsgehalt, Richtigkeit, Vollständigkeit oder Qualität der eingestellten Fachartikel. Allein verantwortlich für deren Inhalt ist die Autorin/der Autor.
Bitte beachten Sie, dass der Fachartikel den rechtlichen Stand der Dinge zum Zeitpunkt seiner Veröffentlichung darstellt. Dieser Fachartikel ist urheberrechtlich geschützt. Eine Vervielfältigung oder Verwendung des Textes oder einer Grafik in anderen elektronischen oder gedruckten Publikationen ist ohne ausdrückliche Zustimmung des Autors nicht gestattet.
Top Beiträge in dieser Rubrik:
nach oben rollen

-
Abstandsflächenrecht nach der Bayerischen Bauordnung (BayBO)
(3289 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 29.05.2010 Autor: Wolfgang Raithel)
-
Zahlungsaufforderung ist kein Verwaltungsakt
(3231 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 23.01.2008 Autor: Bernhard Müller)
-
Auswahlgespräch allein genügt nicht - Fehlerhafte Ermessensausübung bei der Beförderung von Beamten
(2789 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 08.10.2008 Autor: Marcus Schneider-Bodien)
-
Beamtenrecht: Zur Bedeutung dienstlicher Beurteilungen in beamtenrechtlichen Stellenbesetzungsverfahren
(2758 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 30.10.2010 Autor: Hanns-Christian Fricke)
-
Handwerksrecht: Altgesellenregelung, technischer Betriebsleiter, Schwarzarbeit
(2697 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 16.03.2009 Autor: Simone Baiker)
-
Folgefehler in hochschulrechtlicher Prüfung
(2599 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 20.09.2007 Autor: Wolfgang Raithel)
-
Dienstliche Beurteilung kann rechtswidrig sein – Chancen für Beamte
(2597 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 24.08.2009 Autor: Florian Hupperts)
-
Finanzielle Abgeltung für nicht genommenen Urlaub bei Zurruhesetzung eines Beamten?
(2574 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 19.08.2010 Autor: Florian Hupperts)
-
Ausländerrecht - Die Niederlassungserlaubnis von RA Thomas Eschle
(2448 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 09.12.2010 Autor: Thomas Eschle)
-
Beamtenrecht: Zeckenbiss kann Dienstunfall sein
(2414 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 06.09.2010 Autor: Florian Hupperts)
-
Beamtenrecht: Was kann der Beamte gegen seine dienstliche Beurteilung vorbringen
(2363 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 14.10.2010 Autor: Florian Hupperts)
-
Beamtenrecht: Zum Wahlrecht des Dienstherrn zwischen Umsetzungs-, Versetzungs- und Beförderungsentscheidungen
(2315 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 30.10.2010 Autor: Hanns-Christian Fricke)
-
Beamtenrecht: Schadensersatz wegen unterbliebener Beförderung
(2308 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 18.12.2009 Autor: Florian Hupperts)
-
Dienstfahrzeug falsch betankt: Abwehr des Schadensersatzes möglich?
(2306 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 25.02.2010 Autor: Florian Hupperts)
-
Befangenheit eines Hochschulprofessors
(2274 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 17.01.2008 Autor: Wolfgang Raithel)
-
Soldatenrecht: Rückerstattung der Ausbildungskosten
(2253 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 29.05.2009 Autor: Marcus Richter)
-
BVerfG: Entscheidung des BVerwG über Entschädigungsregelung für Flughafen Berlin-Schönefeld verletzt Art. 14 GG
(2248 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 14.03.2010 Autor: Björn Blume)
-
Eigenständiges Aufenthaltsrecht für Ehegatten
(2215 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 20.03.2008 Autor: Söhnke Leupolt)
-
Neue Rechtsprechung zu Auswahlkriterien bei Beförderungen
(2199 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 30.10.2009 Autor: Florian Hupperts)
-
Wehrpflichtrecht: BA-Studium - Duale Ausbildung - Zurückstellung - Bundeswehr
(2169 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 01.04.2010 Autor: Marcus Richter)
-
Aufenthalt sowie unselbständige / selbständige Tätigkeit rumänischer und bulgarischer Staatsangehöriger
(2140 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 26.07.2011 Autor: Peter Auer)
-
Handwerksrecht, Altgesellenregelung
(2092 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 30.09.2008 Autor: Simone Baiker)
-
Bayerisches Kommunalabgabengesetz (KAG) - Duldungsbescheid
(2085 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 23.04.2009 Autor: Wolfgang Raithel)
-
EEG-Novelle 2009
(1865 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 29.11.2008 Autor: Hanns-Christian Fricke)
-
Beamtenrecht-Anordnung eines Sofortvollzuges (§ 80 Abs.1 S.1 VwGO)
(1857 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 29.04.2009 Autor: Wolfgang Raithel)
-
Rechtliche Rahmenbedingungen des Schutzes vor Verkehrslärm von Bahn und Schiene
(1848 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 16.05.2008 Autor: Wolfgang Baumann)
-
Rechtswidrigkeit eines Planfeststellungsbeschlusses-Abwägungsfehler
(1746 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 23.04.2009 Autor: Wolfgang Raithel)
-
Disziplinarische Folgen einer Straftat für Beamte häufig wesentlich einschneidender als die strafrechtlichen
(1739 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 21.05.2010 Autor: Florian Hupperts)
-
Bay. Kommunalabgabenrecht - Grundstücksanschluß
(1721 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 31.05.2010 Autor: Wolfgang Raithel)
-
Geothermie: Ein neuer Weg der kommunalen Energieversorgung
(1599 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 16.05.2008 Autor: Wolfgang Baumann)
-
Auch Dachvorsprünge sind in Abstandsflächen mit einzurechnen
(1598 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 20.09.2007 Autor: Wolfgang Raithel)
-
Aufenthaltsrecht aus Art. 6 ARB 1/80 für türkische Studenten
(1522 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 13.07.2011 Autor: Peter Auer)
-
Windenergie und Nachbarschutz
(1517 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 07.04.2011 Autor: Wolfgang Raithel)
-
Holzbetriebene Biomasseanlagen nach dem EEG
(1498 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 16.05.2008 Autor: Wolfgang Baumann)
-
Wehrpflichtrecht: Bundeswehr, Ausmusterung, Verweigerung, Zurückstellung - Rechtsanwalt
(1480 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 10.01.2009 Autor: Marcus Richter)
-
Gemeinschaftsrechtswidrigkeit nationaler aufenthaltsrechtlicher Normen / Praktiken ggü. türkischen Staatsangehörigen
(1457 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 26.07.2011 Autor: Peter Auer)
-
Grundstzentscheidung des BVerwG zur Studienplatzklage
(1447 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 20.03.2008 Autor: Söhnke Leupolt)
-
Genehmigung private Ersatzschule - Urteil des BayVGH vom 22.04.09
(1429 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 22.04.2009 Autor: Wolfgang Raithel)
-
Schulden bei BAFöG-Berechnung - Zeitpunkt der Rückzahlung ist nicht allein entscheidend
(1387 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 16.10.2009 Autor: Florian Hupperts)
-
GERMAN CRIMINAL TAX FRAUD LAW FROM AN AMERICAN PERSPECTIVE, INCLUDING CRIMINAL INVASION OF GERMAN INHERITANCE (ESTATE) TAX
(1329 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 10.04.2007 Autor: Peter Barandt)
-
Anspruch auf bauaufsichtliches Einschreiten? Ausnahmsweise ja
(1292 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 07.04.2011 Autor: Wolfgang Raithel)
-
Studiengebühren in NRW
(1258 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 30.09.2008 Autor: Simone Baiker)
-
Neues im Umweltrecht: Die Rechtslage nach dem neuen Umweltschadensgesetz
(1243 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 14.07.2007 Autor: Christa Kordes-Altstadt)
-
EEG-Novelle 2009
(1221 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 29.11.2008 Autor: Hanns-Christian Fricke)
-
EEG-Novelle 2009
(1183 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 29.11.2008 Autor: Hanns-Christian Fricke)
-
"Illegale" Schüler müssen endlich nicht mehr von ihren Lehrern den Ausländerbehörde gemeldet werden
(1155 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 13.07.2011 Autor: Peter Auer)
-
Verfassungsrechtsschutz gegen Flughäfen
(1145 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 16.05.2008 Autor: Wolfgang Baumann)
-
Hochschulrecht: Studienplatzklage – Humanmedizin SS 2009
(1138 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 16.03.2009 Autor: Simone Baiker)
-
Ausweisungsschutz für assoziationsberechtigte türkische Staatsangehörige
(1135 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 10.08.2011 Autor: Peter Auer)
-
Subventionsrecht: Rückforderung - Richtiger Adressat
(1132 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 04.03.2010 Autor: Marcus Richter)
-
Praktische Tipps zur Genehmigung von Biomasseanlagen
(1101 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 16.05.2008 Autor: Wolfgang Baumann)
-
Erschließungsvertrag - Angemessenheit der Gegenleistung
(1098 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 07.04.2011 Autor: Wolfgang Raithel)
-
Wehrpflichtrecht: Studium im Ausland
(1076 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 29.05.2009 Autor: Marcus Richter)
-
EEG-Novelle 2009
(1072 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 29.11.2008 Autor: Hanns-Christian Fricke)
-
Eignungsfeststellung an bayerischer Hochschule
(1071 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 17.01.2008 Autor: Wolfgang Raithel)
-
Argrarinvestitionsförderung Bayern
(1054 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 17.01.2008 Autor: Wolfgang Raithel)
-
Keinen Studienplatz erhalten? Klagen Sie sich in Ihren Wunschstudiengang ein
(1023 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 26.08.2010 Autor: Florian Hupperts)
-
Hochschulrecht: Zulassung zum Studium - Studienplatzklage
(951 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 16.03.2009 Autor: Simone Baiker)
-
Härtefallkommission für Ausländer in Baden-Württemberg
(521 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 03.01.2012 Autor: Thomas Eschle)
-
Einstellung zum gehobenen Polizeivollzugsdienst: OVG Beschluss gegen Ablehnungsbescheid
(501 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 04.11.2011 Autor: Florian Hupperts)
-
Recht und Moral – was einen Bundespräsidenten von Privatpersonen oder anderen Politikern unterscheidet.
(405 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 06.01.2012 Autor: Holger Hesterberg)
-
Verjährung von Abschiebungskosten
(340 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 23.02.2012 Autor: Peter Auer)
-
Zusammenhang zwischen Erschließungsbeitragsrecht und Bebauungsplan
(309 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 19.01.2012 Autor: Wolfgang Raithel)
-
Zustellung von §§ 26a, 27a AsylVfG-Bescheiden an Bevollmächtigte bzw. Heilung von Zustellungsmängeln nach §§ 7,8 VwZG ?
(277 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 01.03.2012 Autor: Peter Auer)
-
Denkmaleigenschaft eines Gebäudes und Nachbarschutz
(266 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 19.01.2012 Autor: Wolfgang Raithel)
-
Eingreifen des § 10 Abs. 6 StAG auch bei krankheitsbedingter Unfähigkeit zur Absolvierung der Sprachprüfung
(250 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 08.03.2012 Autor: Peter Auer)
-
Urteil VGH München: Konkurrentenstreit im Personenbeförderungsrecht
(226 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 23.02.2012 Autor: Wolfgang Raithel)
-
Öffentliches Baurecht Bayern - Garagengestaltungssatzung Art. 98 BayBO
(223 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 12.03.2012 Autor: Wolfgang Raithel)
-
Warnschussarrest für Jugendliche: Abschreckung oder Zielverfehlung?
(104 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 29.03.2012 Autor: Carsten Herrle)
-
Anwendbarkeit des Art. 9 RL 64/221 EWG auf assoziationsberechtigte türkische Staatsangehörige auch nach "Ziebell" ?
(40 mal gelesen)
(verfasst am: 16.05.2012 Autor: Peter Auer)
nach unten rollen



