The most important facts at a glance
- Kick-back payments often constitute embezzlement - secret commissions can lead to prison sentences of up to five years
- Financial loss and breach of duty are decisive - not every commission is punishable, but secrecy and conflicts of interest are critical
- Compliance programs can provide preventive protection - clear guidelines and transparency significantly reduce criminal risks
What are kick-back payments?
Kick-back payments are secret commissions, bonuses or other remuneration paid to decision-makers in order to influence their business decisions in favor of a third party against the interests of their employer or client. These payments are typically made secretly and without the knowledge of the recipient's employer or principal and are added to the price of the actual service.
In business, kick-back payments come in various forms: as a commission for placing orders, as a „thank you“ for favoring certain suppliers or as a hidden participation in business transactions. While open and transparent commissions may be legally permissible, secret kick-back payments are often prosecuted under criminal law.
The distinction between permitted business practices and criminal breach of trust is often difficult and depends on the specific circumstances of the individual case. The decisive factors here are the secrecy of the payment, the recipient's obligations and the resulting financial loss. An experienced Lawyer for commercial criminal law can help to assess legal risks and develop defense strategies.
Legal basis of infidelity
Unfaithfulness according to § 266 StGB
The criminal offense of breach of trust under Section 266 of the German Criminal Code (StGB) covers cases in which someone abuses the authority granted to them over another person's assets or breaches their duty to protect another person's financial interests. The offense is divided into two variants: the abuse offense and the breach of trust offense. In the case of kick-back payments, the breach of trust offense is usually applied, as the recipient breaches his duty to loyally safeguard interests. Breach of trust is punishable by a prison sentence of up to five years or a fine; in particularly serious cases, the prison sentence can be between six months and ten years.
Prerequisites for the offense
Various requirements must be met in order to prove embezzlement. The perpetrator must have a duty to protect the financial interests of others, which may arise from the law, an official mandate, a legal transaction or a fiduciary relationship. The breach of duty must be objective and committed intentionally by the perpetrator, whereby conditional intent is sufficient. Finally, a financial loss must have occurred or assets must at least have been specifically endangered, so-called damage-equivalent endangerment of assets.
Special features of kick-back payments
In the case of kick-back payments, the breach of duty typically lies in the breach of the duty of loyalty to the employer or client. Managers and decision-makers are obliged to protect the interests of their company and avoid conflicts of interest. The secrecy of the payment is a strong indication of intent - anyone who conceals a commission thereby demonstrates their awareness of the impropriety of their actions. The financial loss can manifest itself in the form of inflated prices, poorer quality, lost profit opportunities or the distortion of business decisions.
Typical cases
Purchasing and procurement
Kick-back payments are particularly common in the purchasing sector. Purchasing managers or planners receive secret commissions from suppliers for placing orders or favoring certain suppliers. Typical scenarios include inflated invoice amounts where the difference flows back as a kick-back, preferential treatment of more expensive suppliers in return for commission payments or the manipulation of tendering procedures. The financial loss usually lies in the excessive procurement costs or the poorer quality of the purchased goods.
Distribution and sales
In the sales area, kick-back payments can occur when sales managers receive secret payments from customers for price discounts or better conditions. Such arrangements damage the company through lost profits and can jeopardize its market position. The legal assessment is often complex, as a distinction must be made between permissible sales incentives and impermissible bribes.
Construction and public contracts
The construction industry is traditionally susceptible to kick-back payments, especially in public tenders. Construction managers, architects or project managers can receive commissions from subcontractors or suppliers for the awarding of contracts. In the case of public contracts, the criminal offenses of bribery and corruption (Sections 332 and 334 of the German Criminal Code (StGB)) may also be fulfilled. The damages can be particularly high, as large construction sums are often involved.
Healthcare
Kick-back payments are particularly problematic in the healthcare sector, as they can cause not only economic damage but also damage to health. Doctors or hospital administrations can receive commissions from pharmaceutical companies or medical technology manufacturers, which can lead to medically unindicated treatments, excessive costs or the use of suboptimal medication.
Differentiation from permissible business practices
Transparent commissions
Not every commission is legally problematic. Open and transparent commission agreements that are known to all parties involved can be perfectly permissible. The decisive factor is transparency: if the employer is aware of the commission and approves it, there is generally no criminal breach of trust. The documentation and disclosure of commissions is an important component of compliance.
Acceptable gifts and invitations
Small gifts or business meals are common in business life and usually unproblematic. The threshold for criminal breach of trust is only exceeded if the gifts have a significant value or are intended to influence business decisions. Many companies set value limits of 25 to 100 euros for permissible gifts.
Standard market remuneration
In some industries, commissions or profit-sharing are standard market practice and are regulated transparently. As long as these remunerations are openly agreed and are proportionate to the service provided, they are legally unobjectionable. It only becomes problematic if the remuneration is excessive, is paid secretly or is intended to undermine the loyalty of the recipient.
Investigation procedure and presentation of evidence
Typical investigation approaches
Investigations into embezzlement through kick-back payments often begin with information from the company itself, from whistleblowers or as part of tax audits. The public prosecutor's office then conducts extensive investigations, which may include searches, seizures, account analyses and interrogations. The evaluation of emails, contracts and financial documents is particularly important.
Difficulties of proof
Proving kick-back payments can be difficult, as those involved often try to cover their tracks. Cash flows are disguised using complex structures, payments are disguised as legitimate business expenses or settled in cash. Proving financial loss is also often complex, as it must be shown that a different, more favorable decision would have been made without the kick-back payment.
International aspects
In the case of internationally active companies, kick-back payments can have cross-border dimensions, which complicates investigations and can lead to complex mutual legal assistance proceedings. The different national legal systems must be taken into account, as what is considered permissible in one country may be punishable in another.
Defense strategies
Denial of the breach of trust
One possible defense strategy is to dispute the elements of breach of trust. This can mean denying the existence of a fiduciary duty, disputing the breach of duty or denying the existence of financial loss. It can often be argued that the commission received was in the interests of the company or that no loss was incurred.
Damage
Since financial loss is an essential element of the offense, a successful defense may consist of disputing the existence of loss or contesting its amount. Alternative explanations can often be found for business decisions that are not attributable to kick-back payments.
Limitation objections
Simple embezzlement is time-barred after five years. In complex cases with long offense periods, objections to the statute of limitations may be successful, especially if the investigations were only initiated at a late stage.
Cooperation strategy
In some cases, a cooperation strategy in which the accused contributes to the investigation and makes amends can be useful. This can lead to a more lenient punishment and speed up the proceedings.
Preventive compliance measures
Guidelines and procedures
Companies should establish clear guidelines for dealing with commissions, gifts and other benefits. Important elements include value limits for permissible gifts, reporting obligations for benefits received, approval procedures for transactions with conflicts of interest and clear sanctions for violations.
Controls and monitoring
Effective compliance requires appropriate controls: regular internal audits, dual control principles for important decisions and the monitoring of supplier relationships. It is particularly important to control expenditure and cash flows and to analyze business decisions.
Training and sensitization
Employees must be sensitized to the risks of kick-back payments. Regular training sessions should explain the legal risks and provide practical examples of permissible and impermissible practices. Training for managers and employees in exposed positions is particularly important.
Whistleblower systems
Anonymous reporting systems can help to uncover kick-back payments at an early stage. The Whistleblower Protection Act obliges companies with 50 or more employees to set up internal reporting systems. It is important that reported cases are taken seriously and thoroughly investigated.
Consequences under labor law
International developments
Future outlook
The prosecution of white-collar crime is constantly being stepped up, while public prosecutors are becoming increasingly specialized. New technologies offer both opportunities and risks: Data analysis and artificial intelligence can detect suspicious patterns, while new payment systems enable new forms of concealment. Regulatory requirements are constantly being tightened by the Whistleblower Protection Act and new EU directives.
Strategic importance and legal complexity
Kick-back payments represent a significant criminal law risk that can have serious consequences for both companies and individuals. The distinction between permissible and impermissible practices is often difficult and requires careful legal analysis. Preventive compliance measures are the best protection against criminal risks, while professional criminal defense is essential in the event of investigations.
We have extensive experience in the defense of white-collar criminal proceedings and can provide support both in preventive advice and in ongoing investigations. Our expertise in criminal law and our understanding of economic contexts enable us to develop tailor-made strategies that both minimize criminal law risks and protect our clients' business interests.
Frequently asked questions
Kick-back payments are punishable if they are made secretly, constitute a breach of duty and lead to financial loss. The decisive factor is the breach of the duty of loyalty to the employer.
Embezzlement is punishable by a prison sentence of up to five years or a fine. In particularly serious cases, the prison sentence can be between six months and ten years.
No, transparent and disclosed commissions may be permissible. Secret payments aimed at influencing business decisions are particularly problematic.
Through clear compliance guidelines, regular training, effective controls and whistleblower systems, companies can minimize the risk of kick-back payments.
In the event of a search, a specialist criminal defence lawyer should be contacted immediately. It is important to be cooperative, but not to make any rash statements.
Yes, directors can be held liable under both criminal and civil law for kick-back payments, even if they were not directly involved.
The damage can result from excessive prices, lost profits or worsened conditions. Complex business appraisals are often required.
Kick-back payments can lead to termination without notice and claims for damages, even without a criminal conviction.
The statute of limitations for embezzlement is five years. However, the statute of limitations can be suspended by investigative actions.
Different legal systems may be involved in international matters. The USA and Great Britain are particularly strict and their laws can also affect German companies.
German 
English