28 / 36
5.5
EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE AND SOL LEGISLATION
Considering that the so-called PIF Directive has not been approved and enacted yet, for the purpo-
ses of this report a provisional definition of financial interests is used, these meaning “all revenues
and expenditures covered by, acquired through, or due to: a) the Union budget; b) the budget of
institutions, bodies, offices and agencies established under the Treaties or budgets managed and
monitored by them”.
A comparison of crimes falling into the provisional definition of PIF crimes is used.
The limitation terms provided for crimes that might, whether or not directly, affect EU financial
interests are consistent with SOL provided at Member State-level for general corruption-related
crimes. This analysis shows that an approach focused on contrasting SOL effects only on EU-re-
lated crimes might not be the most sensible approach; a wider approach aiming at changing how
the national SOL framework is structured represents a better option, which is also probably easier
for Member States to accept.
Corruption-related crime
Bulgaria Greece
52
Italy
Portugal
53
Romania Spain
R A R A R A R A R A
R
VAT fraud
5 or
15
8 or
20 6 7.5 5 or
10
7.5 or
15 8 16 5 or 10
54
Embezzlement against
European Union
15 22 5 or
15
8 or
20 6 7.5 15 22.5 8 16
5
Unjust obtainment of
supplies against EU
3 4.5
55
5 or
15
8 or
20 6 7.5 15 22.5 8 16
5
Fraud against EU
5 or
15
8 or
20 6 7.5 15 22.5 8 16
5
Corruption of EU public officials
10 or
15
56
15 or
22.5
5 or
15
8 or
20 6 7.5 15 22.5 8 16
10
Non-communication of conflicts
of interest against EU
6 7.5 15 22.5 5 10
5
Cigarette smuggling
10 15 5 8 5 6.25 5 7.5 8 16 1 to 5
57
Currency counterfeiting
15 22.5 5 or
15
8 or
20 12 15 15 22.5 8 16
15
Misuse of EU funds
5 or
15
8 or
20 6 7.5 5 or
10
7.5 or
15 5 10
5
EU-funds procurement violations
5 or
15
8 or
20
8 16
5