An accusation of trade fraud can stem from a disputed supply, a technical sheet that does not match the product, a statement of origin or quantity, or a label that presents the goods differently from reality. If you operate a business in Milan, it is natural to wonder whether a discrepancy can become a crime, who bears responsibility among the producer, importer, distributor, and seller, and what consequences the allegation might have for the company as well.
Not every commercial issue is a criminal fraud. I want to help you distinguish a contractual breach from the delivery of goods different from those declared or agreed upon, understand why each person's concrete role matters, and outline the specific features of food products. We will also examine which data should not be overlooked when a control report, a seizure, or a notice concerning Article 515 of the Italian Criminal Code arrives.
What Article 515 of the Italian Criminal Code Requires
Article 515 of the Italian Criminal Code concerns the delivery to the buyer of movable property different from that declared or agreed upon. The provision applies in the exercise of a commercial activity or in a shop open to the public. The discrepancy may concern the goods themselves, as well as their origin, provenance, quality, or quantity. The core of the allegation is therefore the comparison between what the buyer was supposed to receive and what was actually delivered.
Delivery is a concrete element. An inaccurate catalog, an incomplete negotiation, or questionable advertising do not automatically coincide with the offense described in Article 515 c.p. It is necessary to establish whether a sale or supply took place and which product actually reached the buyer. In online sales, for example, the page viewed at the time of the order and the contents of the shipment assume particular weight.
The benchmark for comparison must be identified. A contract may describe the goods in detail; at other times, the order, the order confirmation, the technical data sheet, the label, or the transport document specifies the product. Not all of these materials carry the same meaning in every relationship. If a general offer is followed by an order with different specifications, it is necessary to understand which document defined the actual supply.
A defect does not always equate to different goods. A product may malfunction, arrive damaged, or fail to comply with a commercial warranty without being different from what was declared or agreed upon. Conversely, an essential characteristic that was promised and subsequently absent can make the discrepancy clearer. Criminal defense starts from the precise allegation, not merely from the existence of a customer complaint.
Declared Product, Agreed Product, and Delivered Product
Information Defining the Sale
The words used to present the product matter when they influence the purchase. Provenance, composition, materials used, certification, quantity, technical compatibility, or production methods can be decisive features. A generic wording does not have the same relevance as a specification included in the order or a quality expressly requested for a particular assignment.
The batch and document version can change the answer. If the accusation refers to a label, it must be established whether that packaging accompanied the contested batch. If it refers to a technical data sheet, it matters which product version it referred to and when it was made available to the buyer. A subsequent change in graphics or catalog does not prove, by itself, what information was present on the date of delivery.
Correspondence must be read as a whole. It is not sufficient to isolate a favorable or unfavorable sentence. Product name, images, item code, sales conditions, technical attachments, and specific communications can all help explain what the buyer was reasonably entitled to expect. Truly visible clarification can clear up synthetic wording; a marginal note does not necessarily eliminate a contrary and more evident commercial message.
The Role of the Individual Involved
Corporate title does not replace the assessment of conduct. Administrators, purchasing managers, sales staff, importers, distributors, and retailers may intervene at different moments in the supply chain. To attribute the act to an individual, they must be linked to the information provided to the market, the choice of product, shipment, delivery, or the management of a known discrepancy.
Producers and retailers are not always in the same position. Those who package and directly describe the goods may have a different relationship with the contested information compared to those who receive products already closed and labeled. This does not automatically exclude the retailer's liability; however, the information at their disposal, the statements they added, and their actual power to influence the commercial presentation become decisive.
Labeling, Catalogs, and Distance Sales
An irregular label does not prove trade fraud on its own. A formal shortcoming, illegible data, or outdated information may be relevant under other profiles, but for Article 515 c.p., the connection with delivered goods different from those declared or agreed upon must emerge. The useful question is always concrete: what message did the buyer receive, and which goods were delivered?
Presentation does not coincide solely with the text of the label. Trade names, photographs, symbols, packaging, website descriptions, and materials sent to the customer can help outline the characteristics attributed to the asset. This applies particularly when sales occur through digital platforms: a change in format, quantity, or composition must be consistent with the information actually viewed before the order.
Online sales leave useful traces. Versions of product sheets, automatic confirmation messages, packaging images, order data, and batch records can help reconstruct whether the information was already incorrect before shipment or if the problem arose during the preparation of a single batch. One should not confuse a description left online by mistake with a product that, in contractual documents, was indicated correctly.
Future correction does not rewrite the past. Updating a page or replacing a label may be necessary to halt incorrect communication, but it does not erase what was sold previously. If there are disputes concerning specific batches, it is important that packaging, photographs, orders, and documents related to those supplies remain identifiable.
When the Goods Are Food Products
For food products, labeling follows specific European rules. Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 requires that food information not be misleading, particularly regarding nature, identity, properties, composition, quantity, origin, or provenance. The discipline also covers advertising and product presentation, not just data printed on the packaging. The institutional text is available in the Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 on the provision of food information to consumers.
The food supply chain requires further distinction. The operator under whose name or business name the product is marketed has specific duties regarding food information; other operators cannot ignore non-compliance that is known or presumable based on the professional data available to them. However, this does not allow attributing the same criminal conduct indiscriminately to everyone: role, knowledge, and intervention in commercial communication remain facts to be assessed.
As of May 29, 2026, specific food criminal offenses exist. Law No. 75 of April 21, 2026, which entered into force on May 29, 2026, introduced Articles 517-sexies and 517-septies of the Italian Criminal Code. The first concerns, under the conditions indicated by the norm, the circulation of adulterated or substantially non-compliant food, water, or beverages; the second concerns the use of false or misleading distinctive signs or indications on food or ingredients. The text of the reform can be consulted in Law No. 75 of 2026 published in the Official Gazette.
The date of the act is not a detail. For a dispute involving food products, it is necessary to distinguish operations prior to and following May 29, 2026, and then identify the contested act: substantially non-compliant goods, misleading information or signs, protected designations, or other hypotheses. Automatically using the formula "trade fraud" may prevent grasping the elements required by the concretely applicable norm.
Business and Corporate Liability
The investigated individual and the company have distinct legal positions. Article 25-bis.1 of Legislative Decree No. 231/2001 includes Article 515 c.p. among the crimes that can entail a pecuniary sanction for the entity of up to five hundred shares. This is not an automatic consequence of an investigation against an administrator or employee: the prerequisites proper to corporate liability must also be met.
For the enterprise, interest, advantage, and relevant organization matter. The event must therefore be read on two levels. For the individual, conduct and their contribution to the act are relevant; for the company, the conditions set forth in Legislative Decree No. 231/2001 and the relationship between the contested conduct and the entity's activity assume significance. Law No. 75 of 2026 reports the coordinated text of Article 25-bis.1, including the reference to Article 515 c.p.
Not all measures serve the same function. Replacing a product, informing a customer, or modifying a control procedure may be appropriate at the commercial and organizational level. These initiatives do not decide on their own whether a crime exists, but they can clarify when the company became aware of a discrepancy, how it circumscribed the affected batches, and what the information chain was between suppliers and sellers.
How to Navigate After an Inspection or Notice
The primary requirement is to delimit the fact with precision. It is necessary to understand whether the dispute concerns a declared origin, technical quality, quantity, composition, certification, or label. The truly useful material also changes: for provenance, supply chain and purchase documents may be central; for quantity, weights, formats, and shipping data; for promised quality, offers and technical sheets applicable to the supply.
Preserving the original context prevents misunderstandings. Product samples, packaging, labels, batch records, transport documents, website images, and communications referring to the contested sale must not be replaced or altered. An update necessary for the future must remain distinct from the documentation demonstrating how the asset was presented and delivered during the period subject to assessment.
Defense does not coincide with a generic denial. In some cases, the issue is the absence of a real discrepancy; in others, it is the incorrect identification of the document that defined the sale. It may also emerge that the product was presented correctly, that the dispute concerns only a single batch, or that the individual involved did not contribute to the information attributed to the goods. Each of these circumstances requires different defensive consequences.
The response to the customer must also be distinguished from the criminal response. A refund, replacement, or withdrawal of goods may concern the commercial relationship and market protection. They do not constitute, on their own, either an admission or an exclusion of criminal liability. However, they can be relevant for reconstructing timing, communications, the affected batch, and the initiatives adopted once the dispute emerged.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does a product discrepancy always constitute trade fraud?
No. The discrepancy must concern movable property delivered within commercial activity and must be compared with what was declared or agreed upon. A manufacturing defect, a delay, or a warranty issue may have contractual relevance without necessarily coinciding with Article 515 c.p. The concrete content of the sale matters, not just the buyer's dissatisfaction.
Can trade fraud concern relationships between two businesses?
Yes. The norm is not limited to sales to the final consumer. Even a supply between businesses can raise the issue of correspondence between delivered goods and declared or agreed characteristics. In these relationships, orders, confirmations, technical specifications, transport documents, and batch identification often assume particular relevance.
If the product is already labeled by the producer, is the retailer always excluded?
No, but the fact is important. Receiving pre-packaged goods can distinguish the retailer's position from that of the producer. However, it must be clarified whether the retailer added their own statements, requested a certain presentation, or possessed information incompatible with the label. The material origin of the packaging does not replace the assessment of personal contribution.
Can the company be involved together with the administrator?
It can be, but not automatically. For Article 515 c.p., Legislative Decree No. 231/2001 provides for the possible liability of the entity, with a pecuniary sanction of up to five hundred shares. However, the specific requirements of the 231 discipline must be verified, in addition to the conduct attributed to the individual and the connection of the act with the enterprise's interest or advantage.
Can I update labels and web pages after an inspection?
You can correct information for future sales without altering past evidence. Packaging, photographs, web page versions, batches, and documents referring to the dispute must remain reconstructible. Subsequent correction does not define the criminal meaning of the conduct on its own, but it can be clearly distinguished from historical documentation.
Discussing the Allegation in Milan
An investigative act requires a punctual reading of the contested fact. If the matter concerns a sale, a supply, a label, or food products in Milan, you can contact me to frame the invoked norm, the date of the facts, and the documents defining the goods and the roles of the individuals involved.