Defence for companies and administrators · Author: Francisco Javier Martín Porras, criminal lawyer and court expert · SCJE team
Debts with the Social Security become an offence when there is defraudation: evading the payment of contributions above 50,000 euros within four calendar years, or obtaining benefits through deceit. The inspection and the criminal route run in parallel, and the difference between the administrative surcharge and prison lies in the fraudulent intent and the figures. Full regularisation before learning of the investigation exempts: arriving in time is everything.
In brief. In brief. Contribution fraud above 50,000 euros in 4 years: prison of 1 to 5 years and a fine of one to six times the amount (art. 307). Aggravated offence above 120,000 euros, organisation or front men: prison of 2 to 6 years. Benefit fraud (art. 307 ter): prison of 6 months to 3 years. Liability derivations to administrators run in parallel.
Article 307 punishes evading the payment of Social Security contributions or unduly enjoying deductions, when the amount exceeds 50,000 euros within four calendar years: prison of 1 to 5 years and a fine of one to six times the defrauded amount. Declared non-payment alone is not enough: a fraudulent mechanism is required (concealed workers, shell companies, deliberate under-contribution). Article 307 bis raises the penalty to 2 to 6 years and the limitation period to 10 years when the fraud exceeds 120,000 euros, is committed within an organisation or uses front men. Article 307 ter punishes obtaining benefits through simulation or conscious concealment, where fraudulent ERTE schemes, fictitious registrations and simulated incapacities fall.
The emergency exit of the provision is complete regularisation (contribution, surcharges, interest) BEFORE formal knowledge of inspection or judicial action: it exempts from criminal liability and covers prior instrumental falsehoods. We design regularisations with certified date and our own expert calculation, because paying badly or late loses the exemption and leaves the confession served.
| Conduct | Article | Content | Penalty |
|---|---|---|---|
| Contribution fraud | Art. 307 CP | Defrauded contributions above 50,000 euros in 4 years | 1 to 5 years and fine of one to six times |
| Aggravated fraud | Art. 307 bis CP | Above 120,000 euros, organisation or front men | 2 to 6 years; limitation raised to 10 years |
| Regularisation | Art. 307.3 CP | Complete payment before formal knowledge | Full exemption from criminal liability |
| Benefit fraud | Art. 307 ter CP | Simulation, misrepresentation, conscious concealment | 6 months to 3 years; attenuated for small amounts |
| Subsidy fraud | Art. 308 CP | Obtaining above 100,000 euros falsifying conditions | 1 to 5 years of prison |
| EU funds | Art. 308 bis CP | Specific rules with a 10,000-euro threshold | Own framework for European funds |
| Administrators | Art. 31 CP | Personal liability for the company’s fraud | Personal intervention required; delegation defends |
| The company | Art. 310 bis CP | Corporate criminal liability | Fines and possible loss of public aid |
Summary drawn from the Spanish source page for orientation purposes. The applicable provisions are those of the Criminal Code in force at the relevant time; each case requires individual analysis by a criminal lawyer.
Original commentary by the firm on articles 307 to 310 bis CP. The difference between the administrative surcharge and prison lies in the fraudulent intent and the figures: transparent documented non-payment is the antithesis of intent, and complete regularisation before formal knowledge of proceedings is the emergency exit that we design with certified date and expert calculation.
Debt is not an offence: companies that declare and cannot pay are in the enforcement route, not the criminal one. Documenting that transparency is the defence.
Complete regularisation before formal knowledge of the inspection exempts entirely and covers instrumental falsehoods: it is surgery with a certified date, not a transfer.
The criminal derivation requires personal intervention: proven real delegation and ignorance defend the formal administrator; signing everything does not.
We separate the massive management error from the designed fraud: the emails with the advisory firm usually decide who knew what, and files are audited before the inspection rereads them in a criminal key.
Speak to a criminal lawyer
Criminal defence in English before the courts of Alicante and the rest of Spain, for residents and for visitors who have flown home.
Société de Conseil Juridique et Expert es un despacho de abogados con sedes en Madrid, Alicante, Londres y París, especializado en defensa y acusación penal, delitos económicos y corporativos y derecho tecnológico. Trabajamos con orientación estratégica en procedimientos penales complejos, propiedad intelectual y análisis forense avanzado, y prestamos consultoría jurídica, compliance y escudos de protección a particulares y empresas. Atendemos desde Alicante y Madrid, con consulta online en toda España y asistencia al detenido 24 horas. Resuelva sus dudas en las preguntas frecuentes o solicite una primera consulta.
Copyright © 2026 Société de Conseil Juridique et Expert S.L.
