Tax fraud among 45% of Super de Boer franchisees
On 11 November 2016, the Gelderland District Court, Arnhem location, sentenced various former Super de Boer franchisees to community service and fines for tax fraud. They were found guilty of skimming amounts of money from the cash register, so that those amounts remained outside the administration and therefore no tax was paid on them.
During an investigation by the Tax and Customs Administration in May 2008, it was found at a Super de Boer franchisee in Ede that negative round amounts were regularly entered in its cash register. These negative amounts were no longer included in the turnover according to the cash register files because they had been deducted from this. The Tax and Customs Administration then conducted further investigation into previously conducted due diligence at 64 other Super de Boer franchisees. This showed that the same fraud method was used in three cases. Subsequently, the Tax and Customs Administration requested the cash register files of all 240 franchisees for 2006 and 2007 from Super de Boer Winkels BV. After an analysis thereof, the Tax and Customs Administration concluded that probably 45% of these entrepreneurs skimmed off their turnover in a similar way. Subsequently, after consultation between the Tax and Customs Administration, the FIOD and the Functional Public Prosecutor’s Office, it was decided to criminally investigate the main suspected fraudsters. Ultimately, four people were actually prosecuted and convicted.
See District Court of Gelderland 11 November 2016, ECLI:NL:RBGEL:2016:6163, ECLI:NL:RBGEL:2016:6164 and ECLI:NL:RBGEL:2016:6165
mr. AW Dolphijn – Franchise lawyer
Ludwig & Van Dam Franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice.
Do you want to respond? Go to dolphijn@ludwigvandam.nl
Other messages
Franchisee obliged to cooperate with formula change?
On 24 March 2017, ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2017:1860, the preliminary relief judge of the Amsterdam District Court once again considered the issue in which Intertoys wishes to convert Bart Smit's stores
Delivery stop by franchisor not allowed
On 9 February 2017, the preliminary relief judge of the District Court of Gelderland, ECLI:NL:RBGEL:2017:1372, ruled that a franchisor had not fulfilled its obligation to supply the franchisee
Alex Dolphijn in the Financial Dagblad about the judgment of the Supreme Court regarding Street-One
Franchisors more liable for incorrect forecasts Franchisees can now more easily hold their parent organization liable for incorrect profit and turnover forecasts.
Supermarket letter – 17
Supreme Court: More quickly liable for forecasts
Article in Entrance: “Small print”
“When I do business with a supplier, I never read the fine print. Recently I noticed that there are all kinds of things in it that I actually do not agree with.
Column Franchise+ – mr. Th.R. Ludwig: “Delivery stop by franchisor again not allowed”
Once again, the president in preliminary relief proceedings ruled on the question whether a franchisor's supply stop against the franchisee was permitted, with the franchisee paying a substantial