Criminal Defence Lawyer for Visa Fraud Cases in Germany

Yes. False or incomplete statements are among the most common forms of visa fraud.

Typical examples include inaccurate information provided to embassies, consulates, or immigration authorities about the purpose of travel (for example, applying for a tourist visa while intending to work), the intention to return, family circumstances, or previous stays in the Schengen Area.

The intentional omission of criminal convictions or previous deportations can also be relevant under criminal law. However, intent is always required. A person acts intentionally if they know that the information provided is false or incomplete.

A classic form of visa and immigration fraud involves sham marriages or sham civil partnerships entered into solely for the purpose of obtaining a residence permit.

Investigations often target not only the foreign applicant, but also the German or lawfully resident partner, as well as any intermediaries involved.

In addition to criminal penalties, these cases frequently lead to the revocation of residence status and deportation or removal orders.

Another common allegation concerns the misuse of an issued visa, for example where a Schengen visa is used for short-term entry, while the actual intention is to establish a permanent stay.

An unauthorized change of purpose without approval from the immigration authorities may also be treated as visa fraud.

In many cases, the allegations are based on the use of forged or improperly obtained documents, such as employment contracts, declarations of commitment, salary statements, bank statements, tenancy agreements, or invitation letters.

In addition to offences under German immigration law, these cases often also involve forgery of documents under Section 267 of the German Criminal Code, which can significantly increase the potential penalties.

One of the most common allegations in visa fraud cases involves stating a false purpose of travel, for example where a tourist visa, visitor visa, or student visa is applied for even though employment in Germany was planned from the outset.

Even entering Germany on a visa that does not permit employment may constitute a criminal offence if the true purpose of entry was intentionally concealed.

The same applies where a person works without the required authorization during their stay or deliberately uses a residence permit for a purpose other than the one for which it was granted.

Yes. Employers, intermediaries, and hosts can also face criminal liability.

This is particularly common in cases where a visa is formally obtained for training, study, or visitor purposes, while unauthorized employment was planned from the outset. In such situations, employers, intermediaries, or sham companies may also become the subject of criminal investigations, for example for aiding and abetting or for offences related to migrant smuggling under German law.

In many proceedings, the authorities focus not only on the visa holder, but also on third parties who obtained false documents, confirmed false information, or organized the application. Hosts, employers, or intermediaries may be held liable for aiding and abetting, incitement, or separate criminal offences of their own. This includes, in particular, the withholding and misappropriation of social security contributions under Section 266a of the German Criminal Code. Criminal liability for migrant smuggling offences is also possible.

If false or incomplete information is discovered during the visa process, the application will usually be refused.

It is not necessary that the false statements would actually have been decisive for the grant of the visa. A breach of duties to cooperate and provide truthful information may already be sufficient. A visa that has already been issued can also later be revoked or cancelled if it turns out that it was based on false information.

If a visa is retroactively revoked because of intentional deception, the entry may be treated as unlawful.

In such cases, the border authorities are generally required to refuse entry or turn the person back at the border. This usually requires proof that the visa was obtained by deception, meaning that false or incomplete information was provided intentionally.

Visa fraud can also constitute an independent ground for expulsion even after a person has already entered Germany (Section 54(2) no. 8 of the German Residence Act).

Even the attempt to obtain a residence permit or visa through false statements or by breaching duties to cooperate may trigger a serious public interest in expulsion.

It does not matter whether the deception was ultimately successful. What matters is the wrongful conduct itself, which may lead the authorities to question the foreign national’s willingness to comply with the law. This also applies to false statements made to the authorities of other Schengen states.

In addition to expulsion and deportation, further immigration measures are often possible:

Existing residence permits may be revoked, future visa applications may be refused because of a lack of credibility, and entry bans or residence bans may be imposed for Germany or the entire Schengen Area.

Acts of deception are often recorded in official databases. Such a database entry can make future visa applications and border crossings significantly more difficult.

Whether and which legal steps make sense depends largely on the individual case.

In cases involving unintentional errors or misunderstandings, it may be possible to challenge a visa refusal in time or to correct the information provided to the authorities at an early stage.

Where false statements were made intentionally, the room for manoeuvre is more limited. Even so, an early legal defence strategy can often help reduce the longer-term consequences, particularly with regard to the duration of entry bans or residence bans.