11. November 2024
Consequences of hunting law
A legally binding conviction for tax evasion can lead to the loss of a hunting license and firearms ownership permit – even if the offense has no connection whatsoever to weapons or hunting. The decisive threshold is generally 60 daily fines.
1. From which penalties are consequences for the hunting license and firearms ownership permit threatened?
|Legal Consequence| Criminal Law Prerequisite|
|--- | ---|
|Generally, unreliability for five years| an intentional offense with at least 60 daily fines|
|Also, general unreliability|at least two legally binding convictions with smaller fines|
|General unreliability|in principle, any prison sentence for an intentional offense, even suspended|
|Mandatory unreliability for ten years|intentional offense with a prison sentence of at least one year|
|One fine of up to 59 daily fines||generally, no automatic general unreliability, but case-by-case review is possible|
Tax evasion under Section 370 of the German Fiscal Code (AO) is an intentional criminal offense. Therefore, Section 5 Paragraph 2 Number 1 Letter a of the Weapons Act (WaffG) applies regardless of whether the evasion was related to weapons or hunting. The decisive factor is the number of daily rates, not the monetary amount. Even a total fine of, for example, 70 daily rates is sufficient.
2. What are the consequences of a conviction for a hunting license?
The hunting authority must inquire with the firearms authority whether the applicant's reliability and personal suitability, as defined in Sections 5 and 6 of the German Weapons Act (WaffG), are met. If the applicant lacks reliability under weapons law, a standard hunting license may not be issued or renewed. Any hunting license already issued must be declared invalid and confiscated. The only remaining legal option is a falconry license, which does not authorize the use of firearms.
In practice, this means:
-
no hunting with firearms;
-
refusal of the next renewal or immediate confiscation of the current hunting license;
-
possible imposition of an additional hunting license reissuance ban;
-
potential impact on a hunting lease or the applicant's status as a co-lessee, depending on the contract terms and state hunting law.
Tax evasion does not typically result in the immediate revocation of a hunting license by the criminal court under Section 41 of the Federal Hunting Act (BJagdG). Rather, the consequence arises subsequently in the administrative proceedings regarding reliability.
3. What are the legal consequences under firearms law if convicted?
In addition to the hunting license, the following are regularly threatened:
-
Revocation of the firearms possession license;
-
Revocation of other firearms permits, such as the European Firearms Pass or the Small Firearms License;
-
Obligation to transfer firearms and ammunition to an authorized person within a specified period or to render them permanently unusable;
-
Seizure and, if necessary, disposal or confiscation if the order is not complied with.
-
Objections and appeals against a revocation of the firearms possession license due to a lack of reliability generally do not have suspensive effect.
Therefore, an urgent application pursuant to Section 80 Paragraph 5 of the Administrative Court Procedure Act (VwGO) must be filed immediately, if necessary.
4. What is the significance of the five-year period?
In the case of a fine of at least 60 daily rates, the presumption of unreliability generally applies for five years from the date the last conviction becomes legally binding. The decisive factor is not the date of the offense, the end of the period of infringement, or the issuance of the penal order, but rather its legal force.
Periods of officially or judicially ordered detention are not included in the calculation of this period. After the five years have elapsed, old permits are not automatically returned; hunting licenses and, if applicable, firearms licenses must be reapplied for. Other relevant information may be considered during the review.
5. What exceptions to the presumption of unreliability exist?
The word "generally" theoretically allows for an atypical exception. However, the requirements are very high.
According to the Federal Administrative Court, the following are particularly insufficient:
-
that the tax evasion was unrelated to firearms;
-
that the person concerned had no prior convictions;
-
that they handled firearms reliably;
-
that he has paid the back taxes;
-
that the limit of 60 daily rates was only slightly exceeded;
-
that he has been hunting or participating in shooting sports without incident for many years.
An exception is primarily considered if special circumstances of the specific offense make it appear unusually lenient. The firearms authority may generally assume the correctness of the legally binding criminal court decision. Federal Administrative Court, Decision of July 21, 2008 – 3 B 12.08
Current Bavarian case law expressly confirms this strict line for tax offenses: The Bavarian Administrative Court of Appeal (BayVGH) held that the revocation of firearms licenses was likely lawful in the case of a total fine of 70 daily rates for two counts of tax evasion. Neither the lack of a connection to the firearm, nor the back payment, nor the slight exceeding of the threshold constituted an exception. Bavarian Administrative Court of Appeal (BayVGH), Decision of January 29, 2026 – 24 CS 25.2477
6. What is important for tax evasion defense?
The consequences under hunting and firearms law must be considered as early as during plea negotiations, sentencing, and when applying for a summary penalty order:
Inquire about hunting licenses and firearms ownership early on.
The ancillary consequences are easily overlooked in tax evasion proceedings.
The 60-day limit is a strong line of defense.
59 and 60 daily rates can have completely different consequences under administrative law.
The overall sentence also matters.
Therefore, in cases of multiple tax evasion offenses, the individual sentence should not be considered alone.
Two minor convictions can also be detrimental.
Reducing the sentence to fewer than 60 daily rates does not reliably solve the problem if there is already another relevant intentional conviction.
Dismissal of charges under Section 153a of the German Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO) is usually significantly more advantageous.
It is not a conviction and does not directly trigger the presumption under Section 5 Paragraph 2 No. 1 of the German Weapons Act (WaffG). An independent official assessment of known facts remains theoretically possible.
A two-week period applies to penalty orders.
If an objection is not filed in time, the penalty order becomes equivalent to a legally binding judgment. The ancillary consequences should therefore be reviewed before it becomes legally binding.
After revocation, do not store weapons "with friends" without authorization.
Transfer is permitted only to a demonstrably authorized person, a firearms dealer, or another permitted safekeeping location.
The key principle in practice is therefore: For a hunter, 60 daily rates for tax evasion are not just a criminal number, but regularly the threshold for losing their hunting license and firearms possession.