Cum-Ex and Cum-Cum Criminal Defence Lawyer in Frankfurt, Germany

---

English-speaking defence in Cum-Ex and Cum-Cum proceedings

If you are facing a Cum-Ex or Cum-Cum investigation in Germany, you need criminal defence that combines tax criminal law, capital-market understanding and procedural experience. Our boutique law firm Buchert Jacob Peter in Frankfurt am Main defends private individuals, executives, traders, bankers, advisors, investors, family offices and companies in complex tax criminal proceedings throughout Germany.

Cum-Ex and Cum-Cum cases are not ordinary tax disputes. They often involve large case files, cross-border trading chains, dividend withholding tax, securities lending, short sales, OTC transactions, bank documentation, tax certificates, external legal or tax advice, internal memoranda, asset confiscation and parallel tax proceedings. From the first contact with tax investigators, prosecution authorities or courts, the defence must be structured, evidence-focused and strategically controlled.

We advise and defend international clients in English. We act from the investigation stage to indictment, main hearing, negotiations with authorities, asset-confiscation issues and, where necessary, appellate or revision proceedings.

Our specialists for Cum-Ex and Cum-Cum criminal tax proceedings in Frankfurt and Germany

Cum-Ex or Cum-Cum investigation in Germany?

Do not make statements to tax investigators, police, prosecution authorities or tax offices before obtaining criminal defence advice. In complex tax criminal proceedings, early explanations can later become central evidence.

Buchert Jacob Peter defends individuals, executives, advisors, investors and companies in Cum-Ex, Cum-Cum and other high-stakes tax criminal cases in Frankfurt and throughout Germany.

Call now: +49 69 710 33 330 or email kanzlei@dr-buchert.de.

English-speaking criminal tax defence for Cum-Ex and Cum-Cum cases

Cum-Ex and Cum-Cum proceedings are among the most demanding areas of German white-collar criminal defence. They require more than a general understanding of tax law. The defence must reconstruct the trading structure, identify the individual role of the accused person, analyse the tax declarations, examine the flow of securities and payments, test the prosecution’s theory of intent and address possible confiscation claims.

In practice, German authorities often investigate several levels at the same time: traders, bank employees, investment managers, tax departments, board members, external advisors, lawyers, tax consultants, intermediaries and beneficial investors. A person may be treated as a suspect even if their role was limited, technical, advisory or based on information supplied by others. This makes role analysis one of the central defence tasks.

For international clients, additional questions arise. Documents may be located abroad. Foreign lawyers, banks or tax advisors may be involved. The client may not be familiar with German criminal procedure. There may be parallel proceedings in other jurisdictions. We therefore explain the German process in English, coordinate with foreign counsel where appropriate and build a defence strategy that takes both German criminal procedure and the international context into account.

For broader information on German tax criminal law, please see our page on tax evasion defence in Germany. Related white-collar topics are covered on our page white-collar crime defence in Germany.

What are Cum-Ex transactions?

Cum-Ex transactions are securities transactions around the dividend record date. Shares are typically bought “cum dividend”, meaning with dividend entitlement, but delivered “ex dividend”, meaning after the dividend entitlement has been separated. In many suspected Cum-Ex structures, the trades were linked to short sales, securities lending, OTC transactions, hedging instruments and settlement mechanisms that created dividend compensation payments.

The criminal allegation usually concerns the tax treatment of capital gains withholding tax. German authorities and courts have focused on whether capital gains withholding tax that had been withheld only once was credited or refunded more than once. From a criminal-law perspective, the accusation often centres on allegedly incorrect or incomplete tax declarations and the question whether the person involved acted intentionally within the meaning of German tax evasion law.

The legal assessment cannot be reduced to the label “Cum-Ex”. The concrete transaction chain matters. The defence must examine the exact timing around the dividend date, the role of the short seller, the purchaser, any securities lender, banks and custodians, the settlement path, the tax certificates, the actual withholding of tax and the declarations made to the tax office. Small details in the trading chain can become decisive for the prosecution theory and for the defence.

What are Cum-Cum transactions?

Cum-Cum transactions are different from Cum-Ex transactions. They typically involve temporary share transfers around the dividend date in order to achieve a more favourable dividend withholding tax position. The focus is often on whether shares, dividend entitlement and economic ownership were attributed to a party that could obtain a better tax result than the original holder.

In Cum-Cum investigations, German authorities may examine whether the transaction had sufficient economic substance, who held civil-law and economic ownership, who bore opportunities and risks, whether the share transfer was only temporary, whether securities lending or security arrangements were involved and whether tax returns or later corrections were required. In some cases, § 153 AO, the German provision on correcting tax declarations, becomes relevant because authorities may ask when a taxpayer or responsible person recognised a possible inaccuracy.

For the defence, Cum-Cum cases require careful analysis of ownership attribution, contractual arrangements, economic risk, decision-making, internal tax assessments, external advice and the timing of any knowledge. There is no responsible defence strategy without a precise reconstruction of the facts.

Cum-Ex, Cum-Cum and German tax evasion defence

German Cum-Ex and Cum-Cum cases are usually investigated as tax criminal matters. The central offence is often tax evasion under § 370 AO. Depending on the facts, authorities may also examine aiding and abetting, corporate fines, money laundering issues, professional misconduct, breach of trust or asset-confiscation questions.

For criminal defence, the tax result alone is not enough. The prosecution must establish an individual criminal allegation. In many cases, the decisive questions are: Who knew what? Who controlled which part of the transaction? Who prepared or approved the tax declaration? Was the person aware of the relevant tax treatment? Were all relevant facts disclosed to the tax authorities? Did the person rely on external legal or tax advice? Was the role merely technical, administrative or professional? Could intent be proven beyond the complexity of the structure?

These questions show why Cum-Ex and Cum-Cum defence must be individualised. A trader, a bank employee, a board member, a tax department employee, an external advisor and an investor may all appear in the same investigation, but their legal exposure can be very different. Effective defence must separate personal responsibility from structural assumptions.

Key issues German authorities usually examine

In Cum-Ex and Cum-Cum proceedings, the case file often contains trading records, tax certificates, bank communications, e-mails, chat messages, memoranda, legal opinions, tax advice, settlement documentation, securities lending agreements, internal approvals and correspondence with tax authorities. The defence must evaluate these materials systematically.

Authorities commonly focus on the following issues:

• the structure of the trading chain around the dividend date;
• the role of short sales, securities lending and OTC transactions;
• whether capital gains withholding tax was actually withheld and paid;
• whether tax certificates were issued and how they were used;
• whether tax declarations were complete and accurate;
• whether the accused person knew about the tax effect pursued;
• whether legal or tax advice was obtained and relied upon;
• whether management, compliance or tax departments were involved;
• whether economic ownership can be attributed as claimed;
• whether proceeds or advantages are subject to confiscation.

For the defence, each of these issues can become a point of attack. The prosecution’s reconstruction of a trading chain may be incomplete. The individual role may be overstated. The subjective element may not be supported by reliable evidence. External advice may have shaped the client’s understanding. Documents may have been interpreted without sufficient technical or tax context. Asset calculations may be excessive, duplicative or insufficiently connected to the alleged offence.

Defence strategy in Cum-Ex and Cum-Cum proceedings

Our first objective is to secure the client’s procedural position. This means protecting the right to remain silent, preventing uncontrolled communication with authorities, requesting access to the case file and identifying urgent risks such as searches, seizure, arrest, freezing of assets or reputational exposure.

Once the case file is available, the defence must map the transaction structure. In Cum-Ex cases, this includes the dividend date, short sales, securities lending, settlement timing, dividend compensation, tax certificates, claims for credit or refund and communications with the tax office. In Cum-Cum cases, the focus is often on temporary transfers, economic ownership, dividend attribution, securities lending, collateral arrangements, tax treatment and any possible correction duties.

The next step is individual role analysis. We examine what the client actually did, what information was available, which decisions were made by others, whether the client relied on advice, whether the client had a genuine tax function or merely executed instructions, and whether the prosecution can prove intent. In complex financial structures, this distinction is often decisive.

We also address procedural and financial risks. Cum-Ex and Cum-Cum proceedings often involve searches, seizure of documents, freezing of accounts, confiscation orders, corporate fine proceedings and parallel tax disputes. The defence must therefore protect both the personal criminal position and the economic consequences of the case.

Searches, seizure and file access

Cum-Ex and Cum-Cum investigations often begin with searches of offices, private homes, banks, advisors or company premises. Documents, computers, phones, servers, e-mail archives and financial records may be seized or copied. In this situation, no one should make substantive statements about the allegations. The first task is to ensure that the search is documented, that procedural rights are preserved and that defence counsel takes over communication with the authorities.

Access to the case file is one of the central tools of the defence. Without knowing the case file, no reliable statement should be made. The file usually reveals the prosecution’s theory, the evidence relied upon, the alleged role of the client, the relevant tax years, the suspected amount, the documents considered important and possible confiscation calculations.

After file access, we can decide whether a written defence statement is useful, whether the allegations should be challenged procedurally, whether individual documents require contextual explanation, whether expert input is needed and whether negotiations with authorities are appropriate.

Intent, reliance on advice and professional roles

In German criminal tax law, intent is a central issue. In Cum-Ex and Cum-Cum cases, the prosecution often attempts to infer intent from the structure, communications, warnings, press coverage, internal discussions or external advice. The defence must not accept such inferences without close scrutiny.

In many cases, the accused person acted within a limited professional role. A trader may have executed transactions without tax responsibility. A tax department employee may have relied on documentation provided by others. A board member may have received summaries rather than operational detail. An external advisor may have been instructed on a narrow legal question. An investor may have relied on bank or advisor representations.

Professional conduct, including legal or tax advice, can come under scrutiny. However, not every professional contribution to a complex transaction is a criminal act. The defence must identify the precise mandate, the information available at the time, the limits of the advice, the client’s reliance, internal documentation and whether there was any proven knowledge of an unlawful tax effect.

Asset confiscation and financial exposure

Asset confiscation is often one of the largest risks in Cum-Ex and Cum-Cum cases. Authorities may attempt to recover alleged tax advantages, trading profits, value increases, indirect benefits or amounts attributed to companies or individuals. These calculations can be complex and may exceed the realistic personal benefit of the accused person.

Defence against confiscation requires detailed financial analysis. We examine causation, attribution, double recovery, the relationship between individual and corporate benefit, the role of third parties, whether an advantage was actually obtained, whether it remains traceable and whether the calculation is legally and factually sustainable.

This part of the defence is not secondary. In many white-collar and tax criminal cases, the financial consequences may be as significant as the criminal sanction itself. A strong defence strategy must therefore address confiscation from the beginning.

Cum-Ex and Cum-Cum proceedings against companies and executives

Companies may be affected by Cum-Ex and Cum-Cum proceedings even when the formal accusation is directed at individuals. German authorities may examine corporate fines, supervision duties, compliance structures, internal controls and the role of management. Executives may be accused of approving, tolerating or failing to prevent relevant conduct.

For companies, the defence must often combine criminal procedure, internal fact-finding, document preservation, communication strategy and coordination with tax or regulatory advisors. For executives, the key issue is individual responsibility. It is not enough for the prosecution to point to a corporate position. The prosecution must establish the personal contribution, knowledge and responsibility of the accused person.

We defend both individuals and companies in white-collar and tax criminal proceedings. Where necessary, we coordinate the defence with internal investigations, compliance reviews and parallel tax proceedings.

Why instruct Buchert Jacob Peter?

Buchert Jacob Peter is a Frankfurt-based boutique law firm focusing on criminal defence, white-collar crime and tax criminal law. Our lawyers defend clients in complex criminal proceedings throughout Germany, including cases involving tax evasion, corporate crime, financial investigations, asset confiscation and criminal compliance.

Our team combines criminal defence experience with tax-criminal and accounting-related expertise. This is particularly important in Cum-Ex and Cum-Cum cases, where the defence must understand not only criminal procedure, but also securities transactions, settlement flows, tax certificates, withholding tax, economic ownership and financial documentation.

We work discreetly, strategically and with partner-level attention. We are based in Frankfurt am Main and advise international clients in English.

Our Cum-Ex and Cum-Cum defence approach

• Immediate protection of rights: We protect the right to remain silent, take over communication with authorities and prevent uncontrolled statements.
• File access and case analysis: We obtain the case file and analyse the prosecution theory, the alleged tax effect, the evidence and the client’s individual role.
• Transaction reconstruction: We map trading chains, dividend dates, settlement flows, securities lending, tax certificates and communication lines.
• Intent defence: We examine whether intent can be proven, whether facts were disclosed, whether advice was relied upon and whether the client’s role has been overstated.
• Confiscation defence: We challenge excessive or unsupported asset-confiscation theories and analyse attribution, causation and double recovery.
• Proceedings management: We develop a strategy for investigations, indictment, main hearing, negotiations, discontinuation options and appellate issues.

Further reading on our website

Further information on related topics is available here:

• Tax evasion defence in Germany
• White-collar crime defence in Germany
• Criminal compliance and corporate fines
• Searches during criminal investigations
• Steuerstrafrecht
• Cum-Ex – legal analysis in German
• Cum-Ex trading – overview in German
• Cum-Cum transactions in German

FAQ – Cum-Ex and Cum-Cum criminal defence in Germany

Is Cum-Ex treated as tax evasion in Germany?

German criminal proceedings in Cum-Ex cases usually focus on the allegation that capital gains withholding tax was credited or refunded more than once although it had only been paid once. Authorities often treat this as tax evasion under § 370 AO. The defence must examine the concrete structure, the declarations made, the tax certificates, the individual role and the subjective element.

How do Cum-Cum cases differ from Cum-Ex cases?

Cum-Ex cases typically concern dividend-date transactions with alleged multiple tax credits or refunds. Cum-Cum cases usually concern temporary share transfers around the dividend date and the question whether dividend withholding tax was reduced through attribution of ownership to a party with a more favourable tax position. The factual and legal analysis is different.

What should I do if I receive a summons or search order?

Do not make a statement about the allegations before speaking to a criminal defence lawyer. Contact defence counsel immediately, preserve documents and avoid informal explanations to investigators, tax authorities or other parties.

Can a Cum-Ex or Cum-Cum investigation end without a main hearing?

Depending on the facts, the evidence and the individual role, different procedural outcomes may be possible, including discontinuation, limitation of the proceedings, negotiation or trial. No outcome should be assumed without careful file analysis.

What role does intent play?

Intent is often decisive. The prosecution must prove that the accused person had the required knowledge and will in relation to the alleged tax evasion. In complex financial structures, the defence must carefully analyse information flow, reliance on advice, role limitations and the client’s actual understanding at the relevant time.

Are advisors and lawyers also at risk?

Yes, advisors may come under scrutiny if authorities believe that professional advice contributed to an unlawful tax structure. However, professional advice is not automatically criminal. The defence must examine the mandate, available information, advice given, reliance and whether any alleged contribution was made with criminal intent.

What are the asset risks?

Authorities may pursue confiscation of alleged tax advantages, profits or value benefits. These calculations must be checked carefully. Attribution, causation, double recovery and the relationship between personal and corporate benefit are often central defence issues.

Can Buchert Jacob Peter advise in English?

Yes. We advise and defend international clients in English and coordinate with foreign lawyers, companies, families and advisors where appropriate.

Speak to an English-speaking Cum-Ex and Cum-Cum defence lawyer in Frankfurt

If you are affected by a Cum-Ex or Cum-Cum investigation in Germany, early defence advice is essential. We can secure access to the case file, analyse the transaction structure, protect your right to remain silent and develop a strategy for criminal defence, asset protection and reputation management.

Contact Buchert Jacob Peter: +49 69 710 33 330 or kanzlei@dr-buchert.de.

Your contacts for Cum-Ex and Cum-Cum criminal defence

Our Frankfurt criminal defence team advises and defends clients in tax criminal law, white-collar crime and complex financial investigations.

• Attorney Dr. Caroline Jacob, Partner, Specialist Lawyer for Criminal Law
• Attorney Frank M. Peter, Partner, Specialist Lawyer for Criminal Law
• Prof. Dr. Frank Peter Schuster, Of Counsel
• Tax advisor and former tax investigator Frank Wehrheim, cooperation partner

Our law firm Buchert Jacob Peter has worked in criminal defence in Frankfurt am Main for more than 25 years. We represent clients throughout Germany.

Buchert Jacob Peter Rechtsanwälte Partnerschaftsgesellschaft mbB
Kaiserstraße 22
60311 Frankfurt am Main
Germany

Phone: +49 69 710 33 330
Email: kanzlei@dr-buchert.de

More about our work: Tax evasion defence, white-collar crime defence, attorneys and contact.

---