Double Accounting: B Accounting as a Crime

The double accounting, popularly known as "B accounting" or "corporate black money", is the most severe form of accounting-tax fraud: the systematic maintenance of two sets of books, one official submitted to the Commercial Registry and the Spanish Tax Authority (A accounting) and another secret reflecting the complete economic reality, including undeclared income, unbilled expenses, off-the-books salaries and concealed operations. Consolidated Supreme Court case-law has enshrined the criterion that B accounting is not a grey area or a reproachable administrative practice: it is real concurrence of offences articulating the falsification of accounts (Art. 290 CP) with the offence against the Public Treasury (Art. 305 CP) when the defrauded amount exceeds EUR 120,000 per tax and year. As criminal lawyers specialising in double accounting, we intervene from the first inspection procedure to limit the file's scope.

The typical modalities of B accounting are varied and tend to combine. We find unbilled cash sales (typical in hospitality, retail, professional services with cash payment); false received invoices inflating deductible expenses to reduce the tax base; partial off-the-books salaries reducing Social Security contributions and withheld income tax; triangular operations with shell companies in low-tax jurisdictions to divert margins; collections in personal accounts of partners or directors not recorded in corporate accounting; and use of opaque cards, cryptoassets and cash pooling to manage B funds outside the traditional banking circuit. A particularly dangerous variant is the subsequent integration of B funds via fictitious loans, simulated capital increases or asset acquisitions, opening the door to the offence of money laundering under Art. 301 CP in concurrence.

The penalties in double-accounting cases can be severe due to the real concurrence. The falsification of accounts (Art. 290 CP) carries prison from 1 to 3 years and fine from 6 to 12 months. The tax offence (Art. 305 CP), when the amount exceeds EUR 120,000, sanctions with prison from 1 to 5 years and fine equal to sextuple; in its aggravated form (amount exceeding EUR 600,000, organisation, figureheads), penalties rise to 6 years' prison and the limitation period extends to 10 years. If money laundering concurs, prison from 6 months to 6 years and fine equal to triple are added. To custodial penalties are added special disqualification from managing companies, loss of access to public subsidies and tax benefits for 3-6 years, and civil liability for the defrauded amount with interest. In concurrence, penalties accumulate and can reach over a decade of effective prison.

The technical defence articulates several complementary lines. First, the voluntary tax regularisation under Art. 305.4 CP when inspection proceedings have not yet been notified: this is the most powerful absolutory excuse in economic criminal law, extinguishing criminal liability for tax fraud if the full debt is acknowledged and paid with interest. Second, the technical discussion of the amount through economic expertise recalculating the tax base applying all legally available deductible expenses, deductions and offsets; if we bring the amount below EUR 120,000, the tax offence disappears, being reconducted to administrative infringement. Third, the vincible or invincible mistake of prohibition (Art. 14 CP) in cases of effective delegation to external tax and accounting advisors. Fourth, the challenge to the evidentiary chain: home searches without proportionate judicial authorisation, void communication interceptions, breaches of the right against self-incrimination during inspection. Fifth, the strategic plea agreement with the Public Prosecutor's Office to achieve suspendable sentences and avoid effective imprisonment.

In current forensic practice we observe intensified control through forensic computer audit and big-data tools allowing the Spanish Tax Authority to detect inconsistencies between cash flow, tax returns, supplier payments and utility consumption. Organic Law 1/2025 on Justice Service Efficiency, EU Directive 2017/1371 on the protection of EU financial interests, Act 11/2021 on anti-fraud measures and recent Supreme Court case-law have significantly hardened the punitive regime. At Alonso Sala, we tackle each file with a multidisciplinary criminal-tax-accounting team: we conduct reverse audit of the accounting, evaluate regularisation contingencies, articulate party economic expertise, manage coordination with the client's auditors and tax advisors, and build a comprehensive defence minimising the criminal scope of the file and protecting personal and corporate assets.