Investigation into MOL foundation practices to proceed following prosecutor decision
The Budapest Office of the Public Prosecutor has overturned a previous NAV decision and ordered an investigation into the MOL – New Europe Foundation's grant-making practices, citing the impossibility of excluding reasonable suspicion of criminal conduct.
Investigation into MOL foundation practices to proceed following prosecutor decision
On 18 June, the Budapest Office of the Public Prosecutor rejected the NAV's previous decision and enabled authorities to substantively examine the finances of the MOL – New Europe Foundation, according to reporting by Index.
According to the allegation, the organisation, which was established in 2021 and falls under the category of public-interest asset management foundations, entered into contracts and transferred money to various sports organisations and events in a manner that could have enabled tax evasion. A private individual lodged a complaint with the authorities at the end of February concerning this matter.
The essence of the complaint is that the foundation distributed several billion forints under the heading of "patronage", but the actual nature of the funds did not in all cases correspond to this classification. According to the complaint, the recipients were expected to provide communication services in return: the display of the MOL logo and name, as well as public appearances across multiple channels. However, this is not patronage support but rather advertising services, which should be subject to VAT.
According to the complaint, no invoices were issued for the disputed transactions, and VAT returns were not filed. The complainant estimates that the state budget lost several hundred million forints, in some cases exceeding one billion forints.
The NAV's criminal division rejected the complaint on 7 April, stating that there was no reasonable suspicion of criminal conduct. The authority contended that the complaint did not contain sufficient specifics and numerical data.
However, the complainant appealed, and the office of the public prosecutor has now upheld the appeal. In their decision, they stated that since the reasonable suspicion of criminal conduct cannot be clearly excluded, investigative steps are necessary to clarify the facts of the case.
Source: Google News HU — Crime (hu)