Having company bank accounts seized represents one of the most critical moments for a business's survival. The sudden freeze of liquidity prevents honoring commitments to suppliers, paying employees, and remitting taxes, effectively paralyzing the entire commercial activity and undermining partners' trust. As an attorney experienced in criminal law in Milan, Avv. Marco Bianucci deeply understands the urgency and gravity of this situation, offering legal assistance aimed at promptly addressing the precautionary measure and protecting business continuity.
In the context of tax criminal law, the seizure of company bank accounts generally takes the form of a precautionary seizure aimed at confiscation by equivalent. This precautionary instrument is activated by the Judicial Authority when there is a well-founded suspicion that tax crimes of a certain severity have been committed, such as the failure to pay VAT or withholdings, the issuance or use of invoices for non-existent transactions, or fraudulent tax returns. The primary objective of the Public Prosecutor's Office is to block sums of money equal to the tax presumed to have been evaded, thereby guaranteeing the Treasury's creditor claim in view of a potential future criminal conviction.
The precautionary measure primarily affects the liquid assets present in the bank accounts held by the company. However, in specific circumstances provided for by law, if the company's assets are insufficient to cover the profit of the alleged crime, the seizure can also extend to the personal assets of the director or legal representative. Understanding the scope, limits, and legitimacy of such an extension is a fundamental step in establishing a solid defense strategy and protecting the assets of those who conduct business.
Dealing with a seizure order requires maximum promptness and a thorough understanding of criminal procedural dynamics. The approach of Avv. Marco Bianucci, a criminal lawyer in Milan, focuses on a meticulous analysis of the order issued by the Judge for Preliminary Investigations. The first fundamental step is to rigorously verify the existence of the legal prerequisites justifying the precautionary measure, namely the well-founded suspicion of the commission of the crime and the concrete risk that the free availability of assets could aggravate the consequences of the offense.
Once any formal defects, motivational shortcomings, or errors in the Judge's assessment are identified, the Bianucci Law Firm develops the most appropriate strategy to request the unseizure of funds. This operational phase may involve filing an appeal for review with the Review Court, aimed at demonstrating the illegitimacy of the restriction and requesting its annulment. Alternatively, specific requests can be made to unfreeze at least the liquidity strictly necessary to ensure business continuity, thereby allowing for the payment of employee salaries or essential utilities to avoid production interruption.
The timelines for unfreezing bank accounts strictly depend on the complexity of the case and the defense strategy chosen. If an appeal for review is filed, the Court is required to rule within strict and peremptory deadlines, usually within ten days of receiving the case files. However, the actual physical return of the funds requires execution of the order by the credit institution, which may involve additional business days of waiting. The defense's primary objective is always to act with the utmost urgency permitted by law to limit damage to business operations.
As a general rule, a precautionary seizure blocks the entire availability in the bank account until the sum indicated in the Judge's decree is reached. However, case law allows for the possibility of submitting a reasoned request to the presiding Judge to seek authorization to use part of the seized funds to cover essential, vital, and unavoidable expenses, such as employee salary payments. The Judge will evaluate the request, carefully balancing the precautionary needs of the investigation with the constitutional right to business survival and the protection of workers' rights.
Yes, if tax crimes were committed in the interest or for the benefit of the company, the law provides that, if the company's assets are insufficient to cover the entire amount of the tax presumed to have been evaded, the seizure by equivalent can extend to the personal assets of the legal representative or director in office at the time of the events. This occurs because the director is considered the individual who materially carried out the illicit conduct. In such cases, the defense will focus on demonstrating the actual sufficiency of the company's assets to avoid the seizure of personal assets, or on the absence of direct responsibility of the director.
Timeliness is absolutely the most important factor when dealing with a freeze of business liquidity. Delaying legal intervention can irreparably compromise the company's stability, leading it to insolvency in a short period. As a criminal lawyer in Milan, Avv. Marco Bianucci is available to thoroughly analyze the precautionary measure that has affected your company and promptly outline possible legal courses of action.
The costs and timelines of a procedure aimed at unseizure depend on numerous factors specific to each individual case, including the complexity of the charges brought by the Prosecutor's Office, the volume of documentation to be examined, and the amount of funds frozen. Contact the Bianucci Law Firm to schedule an initial consultation at the office located at via Alberto da Giussano, 26 in Milan. During the meeting, the applicable defense strategies will be clearly explained, and a transparent overview of the professional commitment required to protect your company's rights will be provided.