Investigators in Berlin are investigating an organised tax fraud case. At the centre of the allegations is a civil servant. Details from investigative sources now reveal the alleged extent of the scheme.
The investigation focuses on Mohamed B.*, a former civil servant at the Charlottenburg-Wilmersdorf tax office. He is alleged to have approved input tax refunds over a period of years, even though the companies did not actually exist or engage in any real business activity. Investigators say that this case is one of the largest of its kind in recent history and that it is alarming how easily the allegedly criminal network is said to have operated.
According to investigators, the gang made 366 unauthorised input tax claims between June 2018 and January 2022. Investigators list a number of companies that are believed to have been part of the fraud, including several with almost identical names. These companies had neither staff nor significant turnover, yet large amounts of input tax were regularly claimed and paid out by the tax office.
The choice of names for many of the companies is also striking. According to information obtained by this editorial team, investigators do not believe this to be a coincidence, but rather a deliberate strategy: the companies are said to have been named with the initial letter S so that they fell within the area of responsibility of Mohamed B. As the responsible clerk, he is said to have checked and approved the input tax returns. According to investigators, he did so even when no supporting documents were available or the information was obviously implausible. Internal control mechanisms therefore failed to work.
The Berlin tax authorities reject the allegations but have not commented on the specific case. A spokesperson for the Senate Department of Finance told the newspaper WELT AM SONNTAG that they do not comment on individual cases or ongoing investigations, citing tax secrecy laws. Regardless of this, the tax authorities have a large number of organisational, professional and technical audit and control mechanisms at their disposal. These are reviewed on an ongoing basis. However, despite extensive preventive measures, absolute protection against criminal behaviour cannot always be guaranteed, especially in cases involving a high level of criminal energy.
Any breaches of duty by civil servants would be thoroughly investigated and prosecuted, with criminal investigations being conducted by the law enforcement authorities, the spokesperson continued. However, the investigators’ findings contradict this claim by the administration. According to them, no thorough investigation took place. The investigators suspect that the Berlin case is not an isolated one.
The investigations paint a picture of a structure based on the division of labour. Several defendants are said to have acted as formal managing directors, often people with no knowledge of German language. Others are said to have organised accounts, obtained powers of attorney and made cash withdrawals.
The gang is said to have withdrawn a total of more than €587,000 from the accounts of two alleged hotel companies alone. The investigation has been ongoing since 2022. According to information from WELT AM SONNTAG, searches were carried out on suspects in several federal states. The gang was even monitored and wiretapped at times. According to information from security circles, searches were even carried out at two Berlin notaries in the course of the proceedings.
The investigations are extremely complex and, it seems, have not always been conducted with sufficient personnel. For example, one suspect moved away during the investigation. Where to: unclear.
WELT AM SONNTAG had attempted early on to shed light on the background to the complex proceedings. As early as 2022, the editorial team inquired about the number of defendants, the amount of damage and the status of the investigations. The Berlin public prosecutor’s office refused to provide information, citing tax secrecy. The editorial team then took legal action. Der Tagesspiegel newspaper was ultimately the first to report on the case.
Despite the alleged millions in damages to the state, the Berlin Administrative Court dismissed the lawsuit in April 2025. Although the court recognised the press’s interest in the information, it gave higher priority to data protection. Critics consider this argument problematic, as it does not concern private income tax, but alleged corporate tax evasion.