Austria

Country score (EU Average*)

76(72) Political Financing
41(57) Financial Disclosure
56(49) Conflict of Interest
31(59) Freedom of Information
66(63) Public Procurement
76(66) Anti Money Laundering
60(71) Asset Recovery

Country Facts

Income	High
GNI per capita (2011 PPP $)	44417.27
Population, total	8747358.00
Urban population (% of total)	66.03
Internet users (per 100 people)	84.32
Life expectancy at birth (years)	81.84
Mean years of schooling (years)	11.3
Global Competitiveness Index	5.2

Sources: World Bank, UNDP, WEF.

Political Financing

The Political Parties Act 2012 regulates party political financing in Austria.

Restrictions on the income of political parties and candidates exist on donations beginning from certain monetary thresholds. However, donations under the threshold are not prohibited even where they are from foreign interests, corporations and trade unions. There are no limits on donations.

Parties are entitled to public funding which is allocated according to the share of votes obtained in the previous election, the representation in the elected body and the share of seats in the previous election. Media access is not subsidised but funding is available for party affiliated institutes.

There are regulations on spending such as the prohibition on vote buying and general spending limits on parties which is 7 million euros per party.

Parties and candidates are required to report on their finances annually. Reports are received by the Court of Audit which is responsible for examining them. Sanctions are imposed by the Independent Political Parties Transparency Panel in the form of fines and forfeiture.

Quantitative Data
Qualitative Data
Laws

Quantitative Data

Primary Metric	2012	2015	2016	2017	2020	2024
Bans and limits on private income	64	64	64	64	78	78
Public funding	62	62	62	62	62	50
Regulations on spending	100	100	100	100	100	75
Reporting, oversight and sanctions	92	92	92	92	92	100

Values lie in range between 0 and 100, higher values implying higher legislation comprehensiveness

Qualitative Data

Bans and limits on private income
Is there a ban on donations from foreign interests to political parties?	Yes. Only where donation exceeds 2,500 euros. (Section 3, §6(6)(6) Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013)
Is there a ban on donations from foreign interests to candidates?	Yes. Only where donation exceeds 2,500 euros. Foreign donations (from both natural and legal persons) are capped at €500. (Section 3, §6(9) Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013)
Is there a ban on corporate donations to political parties?	Yes. Only where donation exceeds 2,500 euros or where the entity obviously wants to channel donation exceeding 1000 Euros from an anonymous donor. The provisions specify that donations above 2,500 Euro for natural and legal persons are banned. This includes corporations. This is made clear in §6(‌3)(‌2) which states that the financial report should include information on "total amount of donations received from natural and legal persons registered in the companies register," Donations from legal persons (companies and all its subsidiaries in total) are capped at €7,500 per calendar year. (Section 3 § 6(6)(7), 6(6)(8) & 6(6)(9) Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013 )
Is there a ban on corporate donations to candidates?	Yes. Only where donation exceeds 2,500 euroes or where the entity obviously wants to channel donation exceeding 1000 Euros from an anonymous donor. The provisions specify that donations above 2,500 Euro for natural and legal persons are banned. This includes corporations. This is made clear in §6(‌3)(‌2) which states that the financial report should include information on "total amount of donations received from natural and legal persons registered in the companies register," (Section 3 § 6(6)(7), 6(6)(8) & 6(6)(9) Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013 )
Is there a ban on donations from corporations with government contracts to political parties?	No. No specific provision, although the rules stipulate that donations from "natural or legal persons who clearly want to make a donation to the party in anticipation of or in return for a specific economic or legal advantage" are not permitted. (Section 3, Bundesgesetz über die Finanzierung politischer Parteien)
Is there a ban on donations from corporations of partial government ownership to political parties?	Yes. Where the public sectior holds a share of at least 25% in the undertaking or insitution. Political parties shall not accept donations from companies and institutions in which the public sector has a direct or at least 10% indirect interest. (Section 3 § 6(6)(5) Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013)
Is there a ban on donations from corporations with government contracts to candidates?	No. No specific provision, although the rules stipulate that donations from "natural or legal persons who clearly want to make a donation to the party in anticipation of or in return for a specific economic or legal advantage" are not permitted. (Section 3, Bundesgesetz über die Finanzierung politischer Parteien)
Is there a ban on donations from corporations of partial government ownership to candidates?	Yes. Where the public sectior holds a share of at least 25% in the undertaking or insitution. Candidates shall not accept donations from companies and institutions in which the public sector has a direct or at least 10% indirect interest. (Section 3 § 6(6)(5) & 6(6)(9) Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013)
Is there a ban on donations from Trade Unions to political parties?	No. Subsidies from Trade Unions are explicitly excluded from the definition of "donation". [(5)Per donor, regardless of whether they are a legal entity or a natural person, donations to a political party within the meaning of § 2 Z 1 are only permitted up to a total amount of €7,500 per calendar year. For legal entities that have subsidiaries or similar structures, this maximum amount applies per calendar year in total. For newly emerging parties campaigning for election within the meaning of paragraph 1a, third sentence, the maximum amount is five times that amount. For political parties not represented in the state parliament within the meaning of the last sentence of paragraph 1a, the maximum amount is doubled, provided that the donations are earmarked by the donor for the purposes of election advertising in the context of the respective state parliament election campaign and are used accordingly. Trade unions are not included in the list of non-permittable donations. (Section 1 §2(5)(f) Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013)
Is there a ban on donations from Trade Unions to candidates?	No. Subsidies from Trade Unions are explicitly excluded from the definition of "donation" Per donor, regardless of whether they are a legal entity or a natural person, donations to a political party within the meaning of § 2 Z 1 are only permitted up to a total of €7,500 per calendar year. For legal entities that have subsidiaries or similar structures, this maximum amount applies per calendar year in total. For newly emerging parties campaigning for election within the meaning of paragraph 1a, third sentence, the maximum amount is five times higher. For political parties not represented in the state parliament within the meaning of the last sentence of paragraph 1a, the maximum amount is doubled, provided that the donations are earmarked by the donor for the purposes of election advertising in the context of the respective state parliament election campaign and are used accordingly. (Section 1 §2(5)(f) Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013)
Is there a ban on anonymous donations to political parties?	Yes. Only where donation exceeds 1,000 euros in an individual case. Anonymous donations above €150 are not permitted (Section 3, §6(6)(8) Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013)
Is there a ban on anonymous donations to candidates?	Yes. Only where donation exceeds 1,000 euros in an individual case. Anonymous donations above €150 are not permitted (Section 3 § 6(6)(8) & 6(6)(9) Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013)
Is there a ban on state resources being given to or received by political parties or candidates (excluding regulated public funding)?	Yes. (6) Political parties shall not accept donations from: 1. parliamentary groups as referred to in the Parliamentary Groups Funding Act 1985 (Klubfinanzierungsgesetz 1985), Federal Law Gazette No. 156, and provincial parliamentary groups, 2. legal entities as referred to in § 1 para 2 of the Journalism Subsidies Act 1984 (Publizistikförderungsgesetz 1984), Federal Law Gazette No. 369, and educational institutions of the parties subsidised by provinces, 3. bodies corporate under public law, (Section 3 §6(6)(1) - (3) Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013)
Is there a ban on any other form of donation?	Yes. Not-for-profit Institutions serving the support of grassroots sport, donors who noticeably want to forward a donation by an unnamed third party (if above €1,000), donors who want to grant to the party a donation, noticeably in expectation of or in return for a certain commercial or legal advantage, and donors who want to solicit donations for a party in return for remuneration to be paid by that party. (Section 3 §6(6) Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013)
Is there a limit on the amount a donor can contribute to a political party over a time period (not election specific)?	Yes. For both natural and legal persons Donations to a political party are only permitted in the amount of a total of € 7,500 per calendar year per donor, regardless of whether it is a legal or natural person. For legal entities that have subsidiaries or similar structures, this maximum amount per calendar year applies in total. For new election campaigning parties, the maximum amount is five times this amount. For political parties not represented in the state parliament, the maximum amount is double, provided that the donations are earmarked by the donor for election advertising purposes within the framework of the respective state parliament election campaign and are used accordingly. (Section 3 §6 Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013)
Is there a limit on the amount a donor can contribute to a political party in relation to an election?	Yes. "Every political party can accept donations (§ 2 subpara 5) in accordance with the following provisions.‌.‌.‌" (No limits placed on donations to parties, only reporting requirements). Donations to a political party are only permitted in the amount of a total of € 7,500 per calendar year per donor, regardless of whether it is a legal or natural person For new election campaigning parties, the maximum amount is five times this amount (€ 37,500) For political parties not represented in the state parliament, the maximum amount is double (€ 15,000) Donations to a political party are only permitted in the amount of a total of € 7,500 per calendar year per donor, regardless of whether it is a legal or natural person. For legal entities that have subsidiaries or similar structures, this maximum amount per calendar year applies in total. For new election campaigning parties, the maximum amount is five times this amount. For political parties not represented in the state parliament, the maximum amount is double, provided that the donations are earmarked by the donor for election advertising purposes within the framework of the respective state parliament election campaign and are used accordingly. (Section 3 §6(1) Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013)
Is there a limit on the amount a donor can contribute to a candidate?	Yes. No limits placed on donations to candidates, only reporting requirements. Donations to a political party are only permitted in the amount of a total of € 7,500 per calendar year per donor, regardless of whether it is a legal or natural person. For legal entities that have subsidiaries or similar structures, this maximum amount per calendar year applies in total. For new election campaigning parties, the maximum amount is five times this amount. For political parties not represented in the state parliament, the maximum amount is double, provided that the donations are earmarked by the donor for election advertising purposes within the framework of the respective state parliament election campaign and are used accordingly. Insofar as maximum amounts are set for donations to a political party, these apply to the sum of the donations to the political party, the donations to its related organizations and to the committees of people attributable to it, as well as to members of parliament and election candidates to support them in their work for the political party political party donations.Donations to a political party are only permitted in the amount of a total of € 7,500 per calendar year per donor, regardless of whether it is a legal or natural person For new election campaigning parties, the maximum amount is five times this amount (€ 37,500) For political parties not represented in the state parliament, the maximum amount is double (€ 15,000) Insofar as maximum amounts are set for donations to a political party, these apply to the sum of the donations to the political party, the donations to its related organizations and to the committees of people attributable to it, as well as to members of parliament and election candidates to support them in their work for the political party political party donations. (Section 3 §6 Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013)
Public funding
Eligibility criteria for direct public funding to political parties	Yes. Political parties receive annual public financing (which can be used for both regular party activities and campaign activities), Art 1.‌1, "The federation supports political parties in their activities in participating in the formation of political will at the federal level by annually granting subsidies.‌" (Federal Act on Federal Support of Political Parties (Support of Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013), Federal Law Gazette I No. 57/2012) Parties that have obtained at least 1% of the votes are eligible for public funding. Parties that are represented in the National Council receive additional funding, and even more if they have at least five parliamentary seats. ( § 1.‌1 and § 1.‌2-‌3 Federal Act on Federal Support of Political Parties (Support of Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013), Federal Law Gazette I No. 57/2012)
Eligibility criteria for direct public funding to political parties: Share of votes in previous election	Yes. Art 1.‌2-‌3, "(2) […] After deduction of the subsidies pursuant to subpara 1, the remaining funds shall be distributed among the political parties represented in the National Council pro rata to the votes cast for them in the last National Council election.‌ (3) Political parties not represented in the National Council but which received more than 1% of the valid votes in an election for the National Council shall be entitled to subsidies for their activities for the election year.‌ Such political parties shall receive an amount of 2.‌5 euros per vote cast for them in a National Council election; such subsidies shall be paid within six months following the National Council election.‌" (§ 1.‌2-‌3 Federal Act on Federal Support of Political Parties (Support of Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013), Federal Law Gazette I No. 57/2012)
Eligibility criteria for direct public funding to political parties: Representation in elected body	Yes. Art 1.‌2-‌3, "(2) […] After deduction of the subsidies pursuant to subpara 1, the remaining funds shall be distributed among the political parties represented in the National Council pro rata to the votes cast for them in the last National Council election.‌ (3) Political parties not represented in the National Council but which received more than 1% of the valid votes in an election for the National Council shall be entitled to subsidies for their activities for the election year.‌ Such political parties shall receive an amount of 2.‌5 euros per vote cast for them in a National Council election; such subsidies shall be paid within six months following the National Council election.‌" (§ 1.‌2-‌3 Federal Act on Federal Support of Political Parties (Support of Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013), Federal Law Gazette I No. 57/2012)
Eligibility criteria for direct public funding to political parties: Participation in election	No. Absent from legal framework.
Eligibility criteria for direct public funding to political parties: Number of candidates	No. Absent from legal framework.
Eligibility criteria for direct public funding to political parties: Share of seats in previous election	Yes. Art 1.‌2-‌3, "(2) The subsidies by the federation shall be calculated by multiplying the number of persons eligible to vote in elections for the National Council by an amount of 4.‌6 euros.‌ The subsidies shall be granted to the individual political parties in the following manner: 1.‌ Every political party represented in the National Council that has at least five members of parliament (the minimum required for the formation of a parliamentary group as referred to in § 7 of the Rules of Procedure Law of 1975 [Geschäftsordnungsgesetz 1975], Federal Law Gazette No.‌ 410/‌1975) shall receive a basic subsidy in the amount of 218,000 euros; (§ 1.‌2-‌3 Federal Act on Federal Support of Political Parties (Support of Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013), Federal Law Gazette I No. 57/2012)
Eligibility criteria for direct public funding to political parties: Share of votes in next election	No. Absent from legal framework.
Eligibility criteria for direct public funding to political parties: Registration as a political party	No. Absent from legal framework.
Eligibility criteria for direct public funding to political parties: Share of seats in next election	No. Absent from legal framework.
Eligibility criteria for direct public funding to political parties: Number of members	No. Absent from legal framework.
Eligibility criteria for direct public funding to political parties: Other	Yes. Art 2.1 "Every political party that is represented by members of parliament in the European Parliament after an election for the European Parliament shall be entitled to federal subsidies after the election in accordance with the following provisions" (§ ‌2 Federal Act on Federal Support of Political Parties (Support of Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013), Federal Law Gazette I No. 57/2012)
Allocation calculations for direct public funding to political parties	Yes. Non-parliamentary parties receive a flat rate for each vote won [€2.5/vote). For parliamentary parties, the total funding (€4.6/eligible voter) is divided proportionally by votes won after deduction of €218,000 for each party with at least five parliamentary seats (this amount is then given equally to each such party). (§ 1.‌2-‌3 Federal Act on Federal Support of Political Parties (Support of Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013), Federal Law Gazette I No. 57/2012)
Allocation calculations for direct public funding to political parties: Proportional to votes received	Yes. 2.‌ After deduction of the subsidies pursuant to subpara 1, the remaining funds shall be distributed among the political parties represented in the National Council pro rata to the votes cast for them in the last National Council election.‌ (§ 1.‌2 Federal Act on Federal Support of Political Parties (Support of Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013), Federal Law Gazette I No. 57/2012)
Allocation calculations for direct public funding to political parties: Equal	Yes. 1.‌ Every political party represented in the National Council that has at least five members of parliament (the minimum required for the formation of a parliamentary group as referred to in § 7 of the Rules of Procedure Law of 1975 [Geschäftsordnungsgesetz 1975], Federal Law Gazette No.‌ 410/‌1975) shall receive a basic subsidy in the amount of 218,000 euros; (§ 1.‌2 Federal Act on Federal Support of Political Parties (Support of Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013), Federal Law Gazette I No. 57/2012)
Allocation calculations for direct public funding to political parties: Proportional to seats received	No. Absent from legal framework.
Allocation calculations for direct public funding to political parties: Flat rate by votes received	Yes. (3) Political parties not represented in the National Council but which received more than 1% of the valid votes in an election for the National Council shall be entitled to subsidies for their activities for the election year.‌ Such political parties shall receive an amount of 2.‌5 euros per vote cast for them in a National Council election; such subsidies shall be paid within six months following the National Council election.‌" (§ 1.‌3 Federal Act on Federal Support of Political Parties (Support of Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013), Federal Law Gazette I No. 57/2012)
Allocation calculations for direct public funding to political parties: Share of expenses reimbursed	No. Absent from legal framework.
Allocation calculations for direct public funding to political parties: Proportional to candidates fielded	No. Absent from legal framework.
Allocation calculations for direct public funding to political parties: Number of members	No. Absent from legal framework.
Allocation calculations for direct public funding to political parties: Other	No. Absent from legal framework.
Earmarking provisions for direct public funding to political parties	Yes. The funding should assist parties to participate in "the formation of political will", but no specific ear marking. "§ 1. (1)The federal government supports political parties in their activities in the formation of political will at the federal level by providing annual funding. […] (3)Political parties that are not represented in the National Council but that received more than 1 percent of the valid votes in an election to the National Council are entitled to funding for their activities in the election year. These political parties receive an amount of 2.5 euros (note 1) for each vote cast for them in the National Council election; These funds must be paid out within 6 months of the National Council election. § 2. (1)Every political party that is represented by representatives in the European Parliament after an election to the European Parliament is entitled to federal funding after the election in accordance with the following provisions." § 1. (3)Political parties that are not represented in the National Council but that received more than 1 percent of the valid votes in an election to the National Council are entitled to funding for their activities in the election year. These political parties receive an amount of 2.5 euros (note 1) for each vote cast for them in the National Council election; These funds must be paid out within 6 months of the National Council election. Additional funding for parties that are represented in the National Council. § 2. (1)Every political party that is represented by representatives in the European Parliament after an election to the European Parliament is entitled to federal funding after the election in accordance with the following provisions. (Art 1.‌1 Federal Act on Federal Support of Political Parties (Support of Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013), Federal Law Gazette I No. 57/2012 Section 2, §3 Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013)
Earmarking provisions for direct public funding to political parties: Campaign spending	Yes. 4. Every political party may expend a maximum of 7 million euros for election campaigning between the qualifying date for the election and the day of the election for a general representative body or the European Parliament. If the same list of candidates is supported by two or more political parties, the maximum amount shall apply to the aggregated expenses of those parties (Section 2, §4(1) Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013)
Earmarking provisions for direct public funding to political parties: Ongoing party activities	No. Absent from legal framework.
Earmarking provisions for direct public funding to political parties: Intra-party institution	No. Absent from legal framework.
Earmarking provisions for direct public funding to political parties: Other	No. Absent from legal framework.
Allocation criteria for free or subsidized access to media for political parties	No. Absent from legal framework.
Allocation criteria for free or subsidized access to media for political parties: Equal	No. Absent from legal framework.
Allocation criteria for free or subsidized access to media for political parties: Number of candidates	No. Absent from legal framework.
Allocation criteria for free or subsidized access to media for political parties: Share of seats	No. Absent from legal framework.
Allocation criteria for free or subsidized access to media for political parties: Share of votes in preceding election	No. Absent from legal framework.
Allocation criteria for free or subsidized access to media for political parties: Other	No. Absent from legal framework.
Are there provisions for free or subsidized access to media for candidates?	No. Absent from legal framework.
Are there provisions for any other form of indirect public funding?	Yes. Funding provided to party affiliated institutes. P 7, "In addition, the Federal Act on Public Funding for Political Education and Media Information of 1984 (AFPEMI) provides for state support to civic education activities conducted by the foundations or associations established by the political parties which meet the above requirement to form a club in the National Council.‌ The subsidy is paid annually, directly to the entity (if a party has established several entities, only one of these can benefit from the funding).‌ The basic amount corresponds to the annual gross salaries of 5 university professor plus 7 State employees, and a variable additional amount corresponding to one state employee remuneration for every member of the club in the National Council.‌ An extra allowance corresponding to 40% of the total above subsidy can be allocated for international political education" (GRECO (2011) Evaluation Report on Austria, Transparency of Political Party Funding (Theme II). Greco Third Evaluation Report, Strasbourg 9 December 2011) (Evaluation Report on Austria, Transparency of Political Party Funding (Theme II). Greco Third Evaluation Report, Strasbourg 9 December 2011 Article 1.1.2.4. Vereinsrichtlinien 2001)
Provisions for any other form of indirect public funding: Premises for campaign meetings	No. Absent from legal framework.
Provisions for any other form of indirect public funding: Space for campaign materials	No. Absent from legal framework.
Provisions for any other form of indirect public funding: Tax relief	No. Absent from legal framework.
Provisions for any other form of indirect public funding: Free or subsidised transport	No. Absent from legal framework.
Provisions for any other form of indirect public funding: Free or subsidised postage cost	No. Absent from legal framework.
Provisions for any other form of indirect public funding: Other	Yes. Funding provided to party affiliated institutes. (GRECO (2011) Evaluation Report on Austria, Transparency of Political Party Funding (Theme II). Greco Third Evaluation Report, Strasbourg 9 December 2011)
Is the provision of direct public funding to political parties related to gender equality among candidates?	No. Absent from legal framework.
Are there provisions for other financial advantages to encourage gender equality in political parties?	No. Absent from legal framework.
Regulations on spending
Is there a ban on vote buying?	Yes. Vote buying and selling is punishable with imprisonment of up to 1 year. "Forgery in an election or referendum § 266. (1)Anyone who improperly votes or votes without being entitled to vote or on behalf of another without or against their instructions shall be punished with a prison sentence of up to six months or a fine of up to 360 daily rates. (2)Anyone who falsifies the result of an election or referendum is punishable by up to three years in prison." (§ 265 StGB Bestechung bei einer Wahl oder Volksabstimmung, amended 2015 [Penal Code bribery in an election or referendum])
Are there bans on state resources being used in favour or against a political party or candidate?	No. Absent from legal framework.
Are there limits on the amount a political party can spend?	Yes. 7 million euros per party. If the same list of candidates is supported by two or more political parties, the maximum amount shall apply to the aggregated expenses of those parties. (Section 2, §4(1) Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013)
Are there limits on the amount a candidate can spend?	Yes. The total campaign expenditure limit of political parties is 7 million euro. In this, all individual candidates' campaign expenditures are included, which means that the theoretical spending limit of a candidate is 7 million euro. If, however, a candidate spends 15,000 euros or less, this will not count toward the party's limit. There is no exception in the rules on donations from natural persons for the candidates themselves. (Section 2, §4(1) Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013)
Reporting, oversight and sanctions
Do political parties have to report regularly on their finances?	Yes. Section 3 §5(1) Every political party shall annually render public account of the type of its income and expenses by way of a statement of accounts. (Section 3 §5(1) Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013)
Do political parties have to report on their finances in relation to election campaigns?	Yes. The expenses should be captured in the annual accounts (although the expenses may crossover two or more accounting periods). Expenses required in the annual accounts include public relations activites, events, vehicles and travel. It is likely that election expenditure would thus be captured. Also Section 3 §5(3) states that 'Proof with regard to the restriction on campaign expenses (§ 4 para 1) shall be presented in a separate section in the statement of accounts referring to the election year. More extensive accountability regulated in provincial laws shall remain unaffected.' Section 2 §4(2) lists the various expenses for election campaigning to which the provision above refers to which includes advertising, communications and personnel. (Section 2 §4(2) and 3 §5(3) Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013)
Do candidates have to report on their campaign finances?	Yes. Candidates are required to provide details of expenses to the party which are then published in the party accounts. Section 3 §5(7) states that 'Every political party shall submit the statement of accounts including lists of donations, sponsorships and advertisements and a list of the undertakings in which shares are held as referred to in para 6 to the Court of Audit by 30 September of the following year. For that purpose, affiliated organisations and branches of the party that have their own legal personality as well as members of parliament and candidates who stood for elections on a list of candidates submitted by the political party shall submit to the political party the complete and correct details required for the lists of donations, sponsorships and advertisements'. (Section 3 §5(7) Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013)
Is information in reports from political parties and/or candidates to be made public?	Yes. Section 4 §10(3) states that 'If the Court of Audit determines that the statement of accounts meets the requirements (§ 5), the statement of accounts including the lists of donations, sponsorships and advertisements, and the list of undertakings in which shares are held as referred to in § 5 para 6, and the volume of the legal transactions entered into by such undertakings with institutions subject to the supervision of the Court of Audit in the reporting year shall be published, separated according to the individual parties and undertakings, on the website of the Court of Audit and the website of the political party.' (Section 4 §10(4) Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013)
Must reports from political parties and/or candidates reveal the identity of donors?	Yes. Section 3 §(6)(4) Donations whose total amount exceeds the amount of 3,500 euros in a calendar year (accounting year), including the name and address of the donor, shall be stated.‌ Donations to federal, provincial and district organisations shall be aggregated.‌ §(6)(5) Donations exceeding the amount of 50,000 euros in an individual case shall be immediately reported to the Court of Audit.‌ The Court of Audit shall immediately publish the donations, including the name and address of the donor, on its website.‌" (Section 3 §6(4) & (5) Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013)
Institutions receiving financial reports from political parties and/or candidates
Institutions receiving financial reports from political parties and/or candidates: Electoral Management Board	No. Absent from legal framework.
Institutions receiving financial reports from political parties and/or candidates: Auditing agency	Yes. The Court of Audit receives reports from political parties. "Every political party shall submit the statement of accounts including lists of donations, sponsorships and advertisements and a list of the undertakings in which shares are held as referred to in para 6 to the Court of Audit by 30 September of the following year.‌.‌.‌" (Section 3 §5(7) Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013)
Institutions receiving financial reports from political parties and/or candidates: Ministry	No. Absent from legal framework.
Institutions receiving financial reports from political parties and/or candidates: Special institution	No. Absent from legal framework.
Institutions receiving financial reports from political parties and/or candidates: Court	No. Absent from legal framework.
Institutions receiving financial reports from political parties and/or candidates: Other	No. Absent from legal framework.
Is it specified that a particular institution(s) is responsible for examining financial reports and/or investigating violations?
Institution responsible for examining financial reports and/or investigating violations: Court	No. Absent from legal framework.
Institution responsible for examining financial reports and/or investigating violations: Ministry	No. Absent from legal framework.
Institution responsible for examining financial reports and/or investigating violations: Auditing agency	Yes. The Court of Audit is responsible. §10(‌1), "The statement of accounts to be prepared by a political party (§ 5) shall also be subject to the supervision of the Court of Audit.‌" (Section 4 §10(1) Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013)
Institution responsible for examining financial reports and/or investigating violations: Electoral Management Body	No. Absent from legal framework.
Institution responsible for examining financial reports and/or investigating violations: Institution for this purpose	No. Absent from legal framework.
Institution responsible for examining financial reports and/or investigating violations: Other	No. Absent from legal framework.
Other institutions with a formal role in political finance oversight
Institutions with a formal role in political finance oversight: Court	No. Absent from legal framework.
Institutions with a formal role in political finance oversight: Ministry	No. Absent from legal framework.
Institutions with a formal role in political finance oversight: Auditing agency	Yes. The Court of Audit shall verify the numerical correctness of the statement of accounts and its conformity with this Federal Act (Section 4 §10(2) Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013)
Institutions with a formal role in political finance oversight: EMB	No. Absent from legal framework.
Institutions with a formal role in political finance oversight: Institution for this purpose	No. Absent from legal framework.
Institutions with a formal role in political finance oversight: Other	Yes. The " Independent Political Parties Transparency Panel" imposes penalties for political finance violations, based on documents submitted by the Court of Accounts. (Section 4, §11(‌1) Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013)
Sanctions for political finance infractions
Sanctions for political finance infractions: Fines	Yes. The Independent Political Parties Transparency Panel shall impose a monetary penalty on a political party by way of an administrative decision on the basis of a notification made by the Court of Audit.‌ (2) Any person who 1.‌ does not state a donation contrary to § 6 para 4, or 2.‌ accepts a donation and does not report such a donation contrary to § 6 para 5, or 3.‌ accepts a donation contrary to § 6 para 7 and does not forward such a donation, or 4.‌ breaks down a received donation into partial amounts to circumvent § 6 para 4, 5 or 6 subpara 9 and books such partial amounts to the accounts or has them booked to the accounts, commits an administrative offence and shall be punished with a fine of up to 20,000 euros.‌ [...] (4) A person who, as the authorised agent responsible for the conformity of the declarations made with the requirements in respect of accountability, intentionally provides incorrect information for the statement of accounts, commits an administrative offence and shall be punished with a fine of up to 10,000 euros.‌ (Section 4, §12(1) - 12(4) Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013)
Sanctions for political finance infractions: Loss of public funding	No. Absent from legal framework.
Sanctions for political finance infractions: Penal/Criminal	No. Absent from legal framework.
Sanctions for political finance infractions: Forfeiture	Yes. If a member of parliament or a candidate who stood for elections on a list of candidates submitted by a political party (§ 6 para 9) has not stated a donation in violation of § 6 para 4 or has accepted and not reported a donation contrary to § 6 para 5 or has accepted and not forwarded a donation in violation of § 6 para 7, the decision shall also order the forfeiture of a monetary amount corresponding to the amount of the relevant donation.‌ (Section 4 §12(3) Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013)
Sanctions for political finance infractions: Deregistration of party	No. Absent from legal framework.
Sanctions for political finance infractions: Loss of elected office	No. Absent from legal framework.
Sanctions for political finance infractions: Suspension of political party	No. Absent from legal framework.
Sanctions for political finance infractions: Loss of nomination of candidate	No. Absent from legal framework.
Sanctions for political finance infractions: Loss of political rights	No. Absent from legal framework.
Sanctions for political finance infractions: Other	No. Absent from legal framework.

Legislation

Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013 (German)	pdf
Federal Act on Federal Support of Political Parties (Support of Political Parties Act 2012) (English)	pdf
StGB Bestechung bei einer Wahl oder Volksabstimmung, amended 2015 [Penal Code bribery in an election or referendum] (German)	pdf

*Last update: 2017

Financial Disclosure

The Incompatibility and Transparency Law (1983, last amended 2013) regulates financial disclosure for Ministers and MPs, who provide similar disclosure items. Both declare firm ownership and board membership, with the incompatibility committee deciding whether keeping this position constitutes a conflict of interests. In addition, Ministers declare real estate, capital assets, accumulated debt and the spouse’s stockholdings. Instead, Members of Parliament declare income from outside employment. The Civil Servant Law (1979, last amended 2015) foresees lean disclosure requirements for Civil servants. Any outside employment and the receipt of honorary gifts must be disclosed, but no financial statements are to be made. There are no financial disclosure requirements for the Head of State, who holds a representative function.

Declarations are submitted to the Central Auditing Agency for Ministers, to the President of the Parliament for MPs, and to the administrative supervisory body for Civil servants. All the while, only the latter functions as an enforcement body. No other enforcement or verifying mechanisms are in place. The President of Parliament must keep a public list of disclosures made by MPs, which excludes capital income. None of the other declarations are made publicly available.

Quantitative Data
Qualitative Data
Laws

Quantitative Data

Primary Metric	2012	2015	2016	2017	2020	2024	Trend
Disclosure items	80	57	57	85	85	30
Filing frequency	62	38	38	100	100	50
Sanctions	100	0	0	100	100	75
Monitoring and Oversight	50	56	56	100	100	44
Public access to declarations	75	75	75	50	25	6
Alternative Metric	2012	2015	2016	2017	2020	2024	Trend
Head of State	65	60	60	87	82	0
Ministers	82	61	61	87	82	71
Members of Parliament	65	60	60	87	82	52
Civil servants	82	0	0	87	82	41

Values lie in range between 0 and 100, higher values implying higher legislation comprehensiveness

Qualitative Data

Head of State
Disclosure items
Spouses and children included in disclosure	No. Absent from legal framework.
Real estate	No. Absent from legal framework.
Movable assets	No. Absent from legal framework.
Cash	No. Absent from legal framework.
Loans and Debts	No. Absent from legal framework.
Income from outside employment/assets	No. Absent from legal framework. No full income disclosure system; outside professional activities remain regulated through incompatibility rules. (Federal Law on the Incompatibility and Transparency of Public Office Holders, §4 and §6, 1983 (as last amended 2020))
Gifts received as a public official	No. Absent from legal framework.
Private firm ownership and/or stock holdings	No. Absent from legal framework.
Ownership of state-owned enterprises (SOEs)	No. Absent from legal framework.
Holding government contracts	No. Absent from legal framework.
Board member, advisor, or company officer of private firm	No. Absent from legal framework.
Post-employment	No. Absent from legal framework.
Simultaneously holding policy-making position and policy-executing position	No. Absent from legal framework.
Participating in official decision-making processes that affect private interests	No. Absent from legal framework. Public officials are required to abstain in case of conflict of interest under general administrative law principles, no disclosure obligation. (General Administrative Procedure Act (Allgemeines Verwaltungsverfahrensgesetz – AVG), §7, 1991 (as amended 2020))
Concurrent employment of family members in public sector	No. Absent from legal framework.
Filing Frequency
Filing required upon taking office	No. Absent from legal framework.
Filing required upon leaving office	No. Absent from legal framework.
Filing required annually	No. Absent from legal framework.
Ad hoc filing required upon change in assets or conflicts of interest	No. Absent from legal framework.
Sanctions
Sanctions stipulated for late filing (fines, administrative, and/or criminal)	No. Absent from legal framework.
Sanctions stipulated for non-filing (fines, administrative, and/or criminal)	No. Absent from legal framework.
Sanctions stipulated for false disclosure (fines, administrative, and/or criminal)	No. Absent from legal framework.
Monitoring and Oversight
Depository body explicitly identified	No. Absent from legal framework.
Enforcement body explicitly identified	No. Absent from legal framework.
Some agency assigned responsibility for verifying submission	No. Absent from legal framework.
Some agency assigned responsibility for verifying accuracy	No. Absent from legal framework.
Public access to declarations
Public availability	No. Absent from legal framework.
Timing of information release specified	No. Absent from legal framework.
Location(s) of access specified	No. Absent from legal framework.
Cost of access specified	No. Absent from legal framework.
Ministers
Disclosure items
Spouses and children included in disclosure	Yes. Only spouses' stock holdings or private firm ownership has to be declared Only financial interests of spouses (ownership of companies or shares) must be disclosed. (Art. 3.1 Incompatibility and Transparency Law (1983, last amended 2020))
Real estate	Yes. Real estate must be declared together with the administrative registration number ("Einlagezahl") and the type of cadastral community. (Art. 3a (2) 1 Incompatibility and Transparency Law (1983, last amended 2020))
Movable assets	Yes. Capital assets must be declared. (Art. 3a (2) 2 Incompatibility and Transparency Law (1983, last amended 2020))
Cash	No. Absent from legal framework.
Loans and Debts	Yes. Accumulated debt must be declared as one sum. (Art. 3a (2) 4 Incompatibility and Transparency Law (1983, last amended 2020))
Income from outside employment/assets	Yes. Members of the Federal government are not allowed to engage in employment during their term of office(either position the had before or that might take during teir term), unless allowed for by the Incompatibility Committee of the National Council. (Art. 2 Incompatibility and Transparency Law (1983, last amended 2020))
Gifts received as a public official	Yes. Austrian Criminal Code (Strafgesetzbuch), §§304–309, 1974 (as last amended 2020) (Austrian Criminal Code (Strafgesetzbuch), §§304–309, 1974 (as last amended 2020))
Private firm ownership and/or stock holdings	Yes. Ownership of enterprises or of enterprise shares must be declared to the incompatability committee, the committee passes on this information to the Chancellor who publishes it in the "Wiener Zeitung", as these people are prohibited from receiving public contracts (Art 3.1 Incompatibility and Transparency Law (1983, last amended 2020))
Ownership of state-owned enterprises (SOEs)	Yes. Members of the Federal Government may maintain a position in a state-owned enterprise if the government stetes that it is part of national interest that the person remains in this position (Art 5 Incompatibility and Transparency Law (1983, last amended 2020))
Holding government contracts	Yes. Members of the Federal Government must not be awarded any contracts by the Federal authorities and must declare their holding government contracts within 1 month, the incompatability committee decides whether the activity can be continued. (Art. 3.1 (1) and Art 6a Incompatibility and Transparency Law (1983, last amended 2020))
Board member, advisor, or company officer of private firm	Yes. Members of the government have to disclose outside employment directly after entering into office. Members of the government are generally not allowed to have other jobs, unless allowed for by the Incompatibility committee of the parliament (Art. 2 and 4 Incompatibility and Transparency Law (1983, last amended 2020))
Post-employment	No. Absent from legal framework.
Simultaneously holding policy-making position and policy-executing position	No. Absent from legal framework.
Participating in official decision-making processes that affect private interests	No. Absent from legal framework.
Concurrent employment of family members in public sector	No. Absent from legal framework.
Filing Frequency
Filing required upon taking office	Yes. Three months after taking office at the latest (Art. 3a Incompatibility and Transparency Law (1983, last amended 2020))
Filing required upon leaving office	Yes. Three months after leaving office at the latest (Art. 3a Incompatibility and Transparency Law (1983, last amended 2020))
Filing required annually	No. Every two years (Art. 3a Incompatibility and Transparency Law (1983, last amended 2020))
Ad hoc filing required upon change in assets or conflicts of interest	Yes. Ownership of stocks or private firms, including spouses, has to be declared immediately (Art. 3 Incompatibility and Transparency Law (1983, last amended 2020))
Sanctions
Sanctions stipulated for late filing (fines, administrative, and/or criminal)	Yes. Federal Law on the Incompatibility and Transparency of Public Office Holders, §4 and §6, 1983 (consolidated version 2024) (Federal Law on the Incompatibility and Transparency of Public Office Holders, §4 and §6, 1983 (consolidated version 2024))
Sanctions stipulated for non-filing (fines, administrative, and/or criminal)	Yes. Federal Law on the Incompatibility and Transparency of Public Office Holders, §4 and §6, 1983 (consolidated version 2024) (Federal Law on the Incompatibility and Transparency of Public Office Holders, §4 and §6, 1983 (consolidated version 2024))
Sanctions stipulated for false disclosure (fines, administrative, and/or criminal)	Yes. Federal Law on the Incompatibility and Transparency of Public Office Holders, §4 and §6, 1983 (consolidated version 2024) (Federal Law on the Incompatibility and Transparency of Public Office Holders, §4 and §6, 1983 (consolidated version 2024))
Monitoring and Oversight
Depository body explicitly identified	Yes. President of the Court of Audit Declarations must be submitted to the President of the Court of Audit. (Art. 3a Incompatibility and Transparency Law (1983, last amended 2020) Federal Law on the Incompatibility and Transparency of Public Office Holders, §3a(1), 1983 (consolidated version 2024))
Enforcement body explicitly identified	Yes. Federal Law on the Incompatibility and Transparency of Public Office Holders, §4 and §6, 1983 (consolidated version 2024) (Federal Law on the Incompatibility and Transparency of Public Office Holders, §4 and §6, 1983 (consolidated version 2024))
Some agency assigned responsibility for verifying submission	Yes. Federal Law on the Incompatibility and Transparency of Public Office Holders, §4 and §6, 1983 (consolidated version 2024) (Federal Law on the Incompatibility and Transparency of Public Office Holders, §4 and §6, 1983 (consolidated version 2024))
Some agency assigned responsibility for verifying accuracy	Yes. Federal Law on the Incompatibility and Transparency of Public Office Holders, §4 and §6, 1983 (consolidated version 2024) (Federal Law on the Incompatibility and Transparency of Public Office Holders, §4 and §6, 1983 (consolidated version 2024))
Public access to declarations
Public availability	No. Absent from legal framework.
Timing of information release specified	No. Absent from legal framework.
Location(s) of access specified	No. Absent from legal framework.
Cost of access specified	No. Absent from legal framework.
Members of Parliament
Disclosure items
Spouses and children included in disclosure	No. Absent from legal framework.
Real estate	No. Absent from legal framework.
Movable assets	No. Absent from legal framework.
Cash	Yes. Benefits in kind should be declared (Art. 6.4 Incompatibility and Transparency Law (1983, last amended 2020))
Loans and Debts	No. Absent from legal framework.
Income from outside employment/assets	Yes. Members of parliament have to disclose monthly income from outside employment by sorting it into 5 possible categories: 1. from 1 to 1,000 euros (category 1); 2. from 1,000 to 3,500 euros (category 2); 3. from 3,501 to 7,000 euros (category 3); 4. from 7,001 to 10,000 euros (category 4) and 5. more than 10,000 euros (category 5). (Art. 6.2 (2) and (3) and 6.4 Incompatibility and Transparency Law (1983, last amended 2020))
Gifts received as a public official	Yes. Members of parliament have to disclose monthly income from outside employment including non-monetary benefits. (Art. 6 Incompatibility and Transparency Law (1983, last amended 2020) Federal Law on the Incompatibility and Transparency of Public Office Holders, §6(4), 1983 (consolidated version 2024))
Private firm ownership and/or stock holdings	Yes. ownership of enterprises or of enterprise shares must be declared to the incompatability committee, the committee passes on this information to the Chancellor who publishes it in the "Wiener Zeitung", as these people are prohibited from receiving public contracts (Art 3, Incompatibility and Transparency Law (1983, last amended 2020))
Ownership of state-owned enterprises (SOEs)	Yes. If an MP owns a state-owned enterprise s/he may maintain this position if the government declares that it is part of national interest that the person remains in this position (Art 5, Incompatibility and Transparency Law (1983, last amended 2020))
Holding government contracts	Yes. Members of the National and Federal Council must declare their holding government contracts within 1 month, the incompatability committee decides whether the activity can be continued. ( Art 6a, Incompatibility and Transparency Law (1983, last amended 2020))
Board member, advisor, or company officer of private firm	Yes. Members of the National and Federal Council shall report any executive position in a stock company, any board membership, leading role in a company or other employment or voluntary engagement must be declared to the Incompatibility committee which may ask the Minister to put down their employment if they see a conflict. ( Art. 6.2 (1) and Art 6a, Incompatibility and Transparency Law (1983, last amended 2020))
Post-employment	No. Absent from legal framework.
Simultaneously holding policy-making position and policy-executing position	Yes. Members of parliament have to disclose any employment at the state. (Art. 6a Incompatibility and Transparency Law (1983, last amended 2020))
Participating in official decision-making processes that affect private interests	No. Absent from legal framework.
Concurrent employment of family members in public sector	No. Absent from legal framework.
Filing Frequency
Filing required upon taking office	Yes. Any additional source of income, board membership, leading position in a voluntary organisation and income must be declared to the President within a month of taking office. (Art. 6.2 Incompatibility and Transparency Law (1983, last amended 2020))
Filing required upon leaving office	No. Absent from legal framework.
Filing required annually	Yes. Applies only to income declaration, which is to be made by June 30th of every calender year. (Art. 6.4 Incompatibility and Transparency Law (1983, last amended 2020))
Ad hoc filing required upon change in assets or conflicts of interest	Yes. Starting a new employment has to be disclosed at the latest one month after the beginning of the employment (Art. 6 Incompatibility and Transparency Law (1983, last amended 2020))
Sanctions
Sanctions stipulated for late filing (fines, administrative, and/or criminal)	Yes. Federal Law on the Incompatibility and Transparency of Public Office Holders, §6a, 1983 ((consolidated version 2024) (Federal Law on the Incompatibility and Transparency of Public Office Holders, §6a, 1983 ((consolidated version 2024))
Sanctions stipulated for non-filing (fines, administrative, and/or criminal)	Yes. Federal Law on the Incompatibility and Transparency of Public Office Holders, §6a, 1983 ((consolidated version 2024) (Federal Law on the Incompatibility and Transparency of Public Office Holders, §6a, 1983 ((consolidated version 2024))
Sanctions stipulated for false disclosure (fines, administrative, and/or criminal)	Yes. Federal Law on the Incompatibility and Transparency of Public Office Holders, §6a, 1983 ((consolidated version 2024) (Federal Law on the Incompatibility and Transparency of Public Office Holders, §6a, 1983 ((consolidated version 2024))
Monitoring and Oversight
Depository body explicitly identified	Yes. President of the Incompatibility Committee (Art. 6.2 Incompatibility and Transparency Law (1983, last amended 2020))
Enforcement body explicitly identified	No. Absent from legal framework.
Some agency assigned responsibility for verifying submission	No. Absent from legal framework.
Some agency assigned responsibility for verifying accuracy	No. Absent from legal framework.
Public access to declarations
Public availability	Yes. The President of National and Federal Council must keep a public list of disclosures made by MPs, which exclueds capital income.Voluntary engagements must be published in the CV of parliamentarians on their homepages. (Art. 9 Federal Constitutional Act on the Limitation of Emoluments of Holders of Public office (1997, last amended 2017))
Timing of information release specified	No. Absent from legal framework.
Location(s) of access specified	No. Absent from legal framework.
Cost of access specified	No. Absent from legal framework.
Civil servants
Disclosure items
Spouses and children included in disclosure	No. Absent from legal framework.
Real estate	No. Absent from legal framework.
Movable assets	No. Absent from legal framework.
Cash	No. Absent from legal framework.
Loans and Debts	No. Absent from legal framework.
Income from outside employment/assets	No. Civil servants just have to disclose their outside employment, but not their income (Art. 56.3 Beamten-Dienstrechtsgesetz [Civil Servant Law] (1979, last amended 2020))
Gifts received as a public official	Yes. „Honorary presents“ have to be disclosed to the administrative authority, other presents are not allowed (Art. 59 Beamten-Dienstrechtsgesetz [Civil Servant Law] (1979, last amended 2020))
Private firm ownership and/or stock holdings	No. Absent from legal framework.
Ownership of state-owned enterprises (SOEs)	No. Absent from legal framework.
Holding government contracts	No. Absent from legal framework.
Board member, advisor, or company officer of private firm	Yes. Civil servants are required to disclose any such employment (Art. 56 Beamten-Dienstrechtsgesetz [Civil Servant Law] (1979, last amended 2020))
Post-employment	No. Absent from legal framework.
Simultaneously holding policy-making position and policy-executing position	No. Absent from legal framework.
Participating in official decision-making processes that affect private interests	No. Absent from legal framework.
Concurrent employment of family members in public sector	No. Absent from legal framework.
Filing Frequency
Filing required upon taking office	Yes. Declaration must take place immediately upon taking office. (Art. 56 Beamten-Dienstrechtsgesetz [Civil Servant Law] (1979, last amended 2020))
Filing required upon leaving office	No. Absent from legal framework.
Filing required annually	No. Absent from legal framework.
Ad hoc filing required upon change in assets or conflicts of interest	Yes. Declaration must take place immdiately when change occurs. (Art. 56 Beamten-Dienstrechtsgesetz [Civil Servant Law] (1979, last amended 2020))
Sanctions
Sanctions stipulated for late filing (fines, administrative, and/or criminal)	Yes. Civil Servants Service Act, §§91–93, 1979 (as last amended 2020) (Civil Servants Service Act, §§91–93, 1979 (as last amended 2020))
Sanctions stipulated for non-filing (fines, administrative, and/or criminal)	Yes. Civil Servants Service Act, §§91–93, 1979 (as last amended 2020) (Civil Servants Service Act, §§91–93, 1979 (as last amended 2020))
Sanctions stipulated for false disclosure (fines, administrative, and/or criminal)	Yes. Civil Servants Service Act, §§91–93, 1979 (as last amended 2020) (Civil Servants Service Act, §§91–93, 1979 (as last amended 2020))
Monitoring and Oversight
Depository body explicitly identified	Yes. Disclosure must be made towards the corresponding administrative supervisory body ("Dienstbehörde") (Art. 56 Beamten-Dienstrechtsgesetz [Civil Servant Law] (1979, last amended 2020))
Enforcement body explicitly identified	Yes. The corresponding administrative supervisory body forbids any activity that could lead to a conflict of interest. Part-time employees or employees on leave may only pursue additional employment after the supervisory body has allowed it. (Art. 56 Beamten-Dienstrechtsgesetz [Civil Servant Law] (1979, last amended 2020))
Some agency assigned responsibility for verifying submission	No. Absent from legal framework.
Some agency assigned responsibility for verifying accuracy	No. Absent from legal framework.
Public access to declarations
Public availability	No. Absent from legal framework.
Timing of information release specified	No. Absent from legal framework.
Location(s) of access specified	No. Absent from legal framework.
Cost of access specified	No. Absent from legal framework.

Legislation

Incompatibility and Transparency Act of 1983_GER (German)	pdf
Law on the Civil Service of 1979_GER (German)	pdf
Federal Constitutional Act on the Limitation of Remuneration of Public Officials of 1997_GER (German)	pdf

*Last update: 2017

Conflict of Interest

The Austrian Constitution (1920, last amended 2016) regulates conflicts of interests regarding the President, while the Incompatibility Act (1983, last amended 2013) regulates for Ministers and MPs.

The only limitation for the President is not holding any other occupation. This rule also applies to Ministers. The incompatibility committee may grant the participation of Ministers and MPs in the private sector or in state-owned enterprises. Similarly, the responsible agency must approve any outside employment of Civil servants. The approval is based on whether or not a conflict of interests may arise. The only other restriction applicable to Ministers and MPs is that profit-oriented behavior may lead to a loss of mandate. Civil servants, on the other hand, are explicitly obliged to abstain from decision-making when private interests are affected. They are further bound to a six-month-long cooling off period after leaving the service.

Oversight differs between officials. Upon approval by the Federal Assembly, the Constitutional Court may begin a procedure against the President for conflict of interest violations. The incompatibility committee is responsible for monitoring and oversight of Ministers and MPs. The committee is elected amongst members of Parliament. In neither case are sanctions specified. For Civil Servants, sanctions include fines and loss of office.

Quantitative Data
Qualitative Data
Laws

Quantitative Data

Primary Metric	2012	2015	2016	2017	2020	2024	Trend
Restrictions	48	73	80	42	28	38
Sanctions	17	25	25	25	25	42
Monitoring and Oversight	38	88	88	38	25	88
Alternative Metric	2012	2015	2016	2017	2020	2024	Trend
Head of State	0	57	60	0	0	54
Ministers	23	57	60	17	10	54
Members of Parliament	33	54	58	51	34	54
Civil servants	79	79	79	72	59	59

Values lie in range between 0 and 100, higher values implying higher legislation comprehensiveness

Qualitative Data

Head of State
Restrictions
General restriction on conflict of interest	No. Absent from legal framework.
Accepting gifts	No. The Federal President is barred from belonging to a representative body or exercising another occupation during the term, but not from mere ownership of private firms or shareholdings. (Constitution of 1930, as amended in 2020, § 61 (1))
Private firm ownership and/or stock holdings	No. The Constitution bars another occupation, but it does not expressly prohibit mere ownership of state-owned enterprises or shares in them. (Constitution of 1930, as amended in 2020, § 61 (1))
Ownership of state-owned enterprises (SOEs)	No. The President may not hold any other occupation during his tenure but holding assets is allowed (Constitution of 1930, as amended in 2020, § 61 (1))
Holding government contracts	Yes. The President may not hold any other occupation during his tenure (Constitution of 1930, as amended in 2020, § 61 (1))
Board member, advisor, or company officer of private firm	Yes. The President may not hold any other occupation during his tenure (Constitution of 1930, as amended in 2020, § 61 (1))
Post-employment	No. Absent from legal framework.
Simultaneously holding policy-making position and policy-executing position	Yes. The President may not hold any other occupation during his tenure (Constitution of 1930, as amended in 2020, § 61 (1))
Participating in official decision-making processes that affect private interests	No. Absent from legal framework.
Assisting family or friends in obtaining employment in public sector	No. Absent from legal framework.
Sanctions
Fines are stipulated for violations of COI regulations restricting behavior	No. The Constitutional Court may begin a procedure against the President for violation of the Constitution. The Federal Assembly (i.e. Congress) must begin this procedure. (Constitution of 1930, as amended in 2020, § 142)
Administrative sanctions are stipulated for violations of COI regulations restricting behavior	Yes. The Constitutional Court may begin a procedure against the President for violation of the Constitution. The convicting decision of the Constitutional Court shall be for the loss of office and, in particularly aggravating circumstances, also for the temporary loss of political rights. (Constitution of 1930, as amended in 2020, § 142 (4))
Penal sanctions are stipulated for violations of COI regulations restricting behavior	No. Any penal procedure against the President can only begin upon agreement of the Federal Assembly based on a violation of the constitution. The procedure is held before the Constitutional Court. (Constitution of 1930, as amended in 2020, §§ 142, 143 and 63 (1))
Monitoring and Oversight
Monitoring body specified (guidance, training, data tracking)	Yes. An enforcement body is specified: the Federal Assembly may bring charges against the President before the Constitutional Court, which may remove the President from office and, in especially aggravating circumstances, temporarily deprive political rights. (Constitution of 1930, as amended in 2020, §§ 142, 143)
Enforcement body specified (sanctions, hearings)	Yes. The Federal Assembly may impeach the President before the Constitutional Court, which can remove the President from office and, in aggravated cases, temporarily deprive political rights. (Constitution of 1930, as amended in 2020, §§ 142, 143)
Ministers
Restrictions
General restriction on conflict of interest	No. Absent from legal framework.
Accepting gifts	No. Absent from legal framework.
Private firm ownership and/or stock holdings	Yes. Ownership of enterprises or of enterprise shares must be declared to the Incompatibility Committee. The Incompatibility Committee decides on the admissibility of exercising reported activities. (Incompatibility and Transparency Act of 1983 (as of 2020), §§ 3 and 6 (6))
Ownership of state-owned enterprises (SOEs)	No. Absent from legal framework.
Holding government contracts	Yes. If a member of the Federal Government or State Secretaries, here included their spouse, hold company shares which exceed 25% of the total, such companies may not, directly or indirectly, be awarded contracts with the Federal Government or with companies subject to the control of the Court of Audit. The same rule applies on the state/provincial/Land level. (Incompatibility and Transparency Act of 1983 (as of 2020), § 3 (1) Constitution of 1930, as amended in 2020, § 70 (2))
Board member, advisor, or company officer of private firm	Yes. Any board membership, leading role in a company or other employment or voluntary engagement must be declared to the Incompatibility Committee which may ask the Minister to terminate the employment relationship if they see a conflict. (Incompatibility and Transparency Act of 1983 (as of 2020), §§ 2 (2), 6 (2) (6) and 7)
Post-employment	No. Absent from legal framework.
Simultaneously holding policy-making position and policy-executing position	No. Absent from legal framework.
Participating in official decision-making processes that affect private interests	No. Absent from legal framework.
Assisting family or friends in obtaining employment in public sector	No. Absent from legal framework.
Sanctions
Fines are stipulated for violations of COI regulations restricting behavior	No. Absent from legal framework.
Administrative sanctions are stipulated for violations of COI regulations restricting behavior	Yes. Abusing office for profit can lead to a loss of mandate. (Incompatibility and Transparency Act of 1983 (as of 2020), § 9)
Penal sanctions are stipulated for violations of COI regulations restricting behavior	No. Absent from legal framework.
Monitoring and Oversight
Monitoring body specified (guidance, training, data tracking)	Yes. The Parliament elects an Incompatibility Committee amongst its members. (Incompatibility and Transparency Act of 1983 (as of 2020), § 6)
Enforcement body specified (sanctions, hearings)	Yes. The Incompatibility Committee and Courts decide upon sanctions. (Incompatibility and Transparency Act of 1983 (as of 2020), § 6)
Members of Parliament
Restrictions
General restriction on conflict of interest	No. Absent from legal framework.
Accepting gifts	No. Absent from legal framework.
Private firm ownership and/or stock holdings	Yes. Ownership of enterprises or of enterprise shares must be declared to the Incompatibility Committee. The Incompatibility Committee decides on the admissibility of exercising reported activities. (Incompatibility and Transparency Act of 1983 (as of 2020), §§ 3 and 6 (6))
Ownership of state-owned enterprises (SOEs)	No. For MPs, the 2020 Unvereinbarkeits- und Transparenz-Gesetz clearly regulates disclosure of activities, participations and certain leading positions, and bans lobbying mandates, but it does not clearly impose a general national ban on holding government contracts. (Unvereinbarkeits- und Transparenz-Gesetz, especially §§ 1a and 6.)
Holding government contracts	Yes. If a member of the Federal Government or State Secretaries, here included their spouse, hold company shares which exceed 25% of the total, such companies may not, directly or indirectly, be awarded contracts with the Federal Government or with companies subject to the control of the Court of Audit. The same rule applies on the state/provincial/Land level. (Incompatibility and Transparency Act of 1983 (as of 2020), § 3 (1))
Board member, advisor, or company officer of private firm	Yes. Any board membership, leading role in a company or other employment or voluntary engagement must be declared to the Incompatibility Committee which may ask the Minister to terminate the employment relationship if they see a conflict. (Incompatibility and Transparency Act of 1983 (as of 2020), §§ 2 (2), 6 (2) (6) and 7)
Post-employment	No. Absent from legal framework.
Simultaneously holding policy-making position and policy-executing position	No. Absent from legal framework.
Participating in official decision-making processes that affect private interests	No. Absent from legal framework.
Assisting family or friends in obtaining employment in public sector	No. Absent from legal framework.
Sanctions
Fines are stipulated for violations of COI regulations restricting behavior	No. Absent from legal framework.
Administrative sanctions are stipulated for violations of COI regulations restricting behavior	Yes. Profit-oriented behaviour can lead to a loss of mandate. (Incompatibility and Transparency Act of 1983 (as of 2020), § 9)
Penal sanctions are stipulated for violations of COI regulations restricting behavior	No. Absent from legal framework.
Monitoring and Oversight
Monitoring body specified (guidance, training, data tracking)	Yes. The Parliament elects an incompatibility committee amongst its members. (Incompatibility and Transparency Act of 1983 (as of 2020), § 6)
Enforcement body specified (sanctions, hearings)	Yes. The incompatibility committee and courts decide upon sanctions. (Incompatibility and Transparency Act of 1983 (as of 2020), § 6)
Civil servants
Restrictions
General restriction on conflict of interest	Yes. Impartiality is part of civil servants' duties. If there is a conflict of interest the civil servant must abstain from voting or participating in decision-making. (Law on the Civil Service of 1979, as amended in 2020, §§ 43 and 47)
Accepting gifts	Yes. Civil servants are prohibited from demanding or accepting a gift or any other benefit for themselves or a third party with regard to his or her official position or performance of office. So-called "honorary-gifts", i.e. objects that are given to civil servants by states, public corporations or traditional institutions for merit or courtesy, may be accepted but must be reported to the civil servants' agency and recorded as federal asset. (Law on the Civil Service of 1979, as amended in 2020, § 59)
Private firm ownership and/or stock holdings	No. Civil servants cannot serve additional employment that may lead to a conflict of interest. All second employment, board memberships or other kinds of memberships in profit-oriented organisations must be declared to the civil servants employer agency. However, there is no mention about private firm ownership and/or stock holdings. (Law on the Civil Service of 1979, as amended in 2020, § 56)
Ownership of state-owned enterprises (SOEs)	No. Absent from legal framework.
Holding government contracts	No. Absent from legal framework.
Board member, advisor, or company officer of private firm	Yes. Civil servants cannot serve additional employment that may lead to a conflict of interest. All second employment, board memberships or other kinds of memberships in profit-oriented organisations must be declared to the civil servants employer agency. (Law on the Civil Service of 1979, as amended in 2020, § 56)
Post-employment	Yes. After retirement, there is a 6 month "cooling off" period, during which the civil servant is prohibited from taking up an activity that is likely to affect the general public's trust in the factual performance of his or her former official duties. This rule, however, is only applicable if the monthly salary due for the last month of active employment has exceeded twenty times the daily maximum contribution basis according to § 45 ASVG. (Law on the Civil Service of 1979, as amended in 2020, §§ 20 (3a) and 61 (3))
Simultaneously holding policy-making position and policy-executing position	Yes. When applying for a mandate in the National Council (equivalent of the Lower House), the civil servant is to be granted the free time required to apply for the mandate. The civil servant who is a member of the National Council or the Federal Council (equivalent of the Upper House) shall, at their request, be taken off work or taken out of service to the extent necessary to exercise his mandate. (Constitution of 1930, as amended in 2020, § 59a)
Participating in official decision-making processes that affect private interests	Yes. If there is a conflict of interest the civil servant must abstain from voting or participating in decision-making (Law on the Civil Service of 1979, as amended in 2020, §§ 43 and 47)
Assisting family or friends in obtaining employment in public sector	No. Absent from legal framework.
Sanctions
Fines are stipulated for violations of COI regulations restricting behavior	Yes. Fines between half a months' salary to five times a monthly salary can be imposed, and are chosen by a court or disciplinary committee depending on the gravity of the infringement. (Law on the Civil Service of 1979, as amended in 2020, § 92)
Administrative sanctions are stipulated for violations of COI regulations restricting behavior	Yes. Penal sanctions can apply to civil servants for conflict-related conduct such as accepting undue advantages or bribery as public officials, in addition to disciplinary sanctions under the service law. (Strafgesetzbuch (StGB), §§ 304–305; see also § 74 on public-official status.)
Penal sanctions are stipulated for violations of COI regulations restricting behavior	No. If the civil servant has been legally convicted of a judicial or administrative offense and the breach of duty is exhausted in the realization of the criminal offense, the civil servant must not be prosecuted. If the breach of duty is not exhausted in the realization of the criminal offense (disciplinary overhang), authorities must proceed according to the rules on sentencing provided for by § 93. (Law on the Civil Service of 1979, as amended in 2020, § 95)
Monitoring and Oversight
Monitoring body specified (guidance, training, data tracking)	No. Absent from legal framework.
Enforcement body specified (sanctions, hearings)	Yes. There are two disciplinary authorities: the service authorities and the federal disciplinary authority. While the the service authority is responsible for the temporary suspension and for issuing disciplinary orders with regard to the officers in their area of responsibility, the federal disciplinary authority is entrusted with the task of issuing disciplinary findings and deciding on suspensions with regard to all federal officials. (Law on the Civil Service of 1979, as amended in 2020, §§ 96 and 97)

Legislation

Constitution of the Republic of Austria of 1930 (German)	pdf
Law on the Civil Service (German)	pdf
Incompatibility and Transparency Act of 1983 (German)	pdf

*Last update: 2017

Freedom of Information

Austria’s access to information regime is governed by the Duty to Grant Information Act (1987, as amended 1998) and the Fundamental Act on the Duty to Grant Information (1987). The law is limited to organs of the executive branch, as regulated by federal legislation.

Specific exemptions to disclosure are outlined in the Constitution and the aforementioned FOI laws. No public interest test exists whereby exemptions to disclosure may be overridden in cases where disclosure of information benefits the public interest.

Requesters have the right to lodge a judicial appeal with the federal administrative court, in line with the General Administrative Procedures Act. There is no appeals process through public bodies or an independent non-judicial mechanism, such as an information commissioner.

There are no sanctions specified in the law for violations of FOI provisions, nor are there any enforcement or oversight bodies tasked with managing implementation.

Quantitative Data
Qualitative Data
Laws

Quantitative Data

Primary Metric	2012	2015	2016	2017	2020	2024
Scope and Coverage	93	82	82	82	100	51
Information access and release	100	100	100	100	100	54
Exceptions and Overrides	67	67	67	67	67	50
Sanctions for non-compliance	100	100	100	100	100	0
Monitoring and Oversight	33	33	33	33	33	0

Values lie in range between 0 and 100, higher values implying higher legislation comprehensiveness

Qualitative Data

Scope and Coverage
Scope of disclosure
Existence of legal right to access	Yes. All organs entrusted with tasks of [pertaining to] Federal, Land and Municipality administration as well as the organs of other corporations of public law that have tasks entrusted to them, shall provide information about matters pertaining to their area of competence, insofar as this does not conflict; professional organizations (Vertretungen) are only obligated to supply information to members and this only insofar as the orderly fulfillment of their legal tasks is not impeded thereby. Detailed regulations with respect to the organs of the Federation as well as the self-administration which is to be regulated by Federal legislation and execution are the business of the Federation, with respect to the organs of the Länder and Municipalities, as well as the self-administration the business of the Federation (Bundessache) [is] framework legislation [while] the business of the Land is the implementing legislation and its execution. ( Article 20 (4) of the Federal Constitutional Law (BVG), 1987)
"Information" or "Documents" is defined	No. Absent from legal framework
Proactive disclosure is specified	No. Absent from legal framework
Coverage of public and private sectors
Executive branch	Yes. The law covers all organs of the Federation as well of the self administration, as regulated by Federal Legislation. (§1(1) Duty to Grant Information Act 1987, as amended 1998)
Legislative branch	No. Absent from legal framework
Judicial branch	No. Absent from legal framework
Other public bodies	No. Absent from legal framework
Private sector	No. Absent from legal framework
Access to specific documents (subject to reactive and/or proactive disclosure)
Enacted legal instruments	Yes. The Act describes the documents published in the Federal Law Gazette, among which are all legal instruments from a central level (Federal Act on the Federal Law Gazette 2004, art. 3, 4 and 5)
Annual budgets	Yes. The preparation of an annual budget is an administrative task and information about it is therefore covered by the law. The law provides for access to information - not actual documents. (§1(1) Duty to Grant Information Act 1987, as amended 1998 §1 Fundamental Act on the Duty to Grant Information, 1987)
Annual chart of accounts (actual expenditures)	Yes. The preparation of an annual chart of accounts is an administrative task and information about it is therefore covered by the law. The law provides for access to information - not actual documents. (§1(1) Duty to Grant Information Act 1987, as amended 1998 §1 Fundamental Act on the Duty to Grant Information, 1987)
Annual reports of public entities and programs	Yes. The preparation of an annual report is an administrative task and information about it is therefore covered by the law. The law provides for access to information - not actual documents. (§1(1) Duty to Grant Information Act 1987, as amended 1998 §1 Fundamental Act on the Duty to Grant Information, 1987)
Information access and release
Procedural access
Universal access (agencies, citizens and non-citizens)	Yes. The law permits "anyone" to submit requests for information. (§ 2 Duty to Grant Information Act 1987, as amended 1998 )
Type of request is specified (written, electronic, oral)	Yes. Requests can be submitted in writing, orally or by telephone. If a request is made orally or by telephone, the applicant may be requested to put it in writing if the scope or content of the information requested is not clear. (§ 2 Duty to Grant Information Act 1987, as amended 1998 )
Assistance to requesters must be provided by law (includes barriers due to language differences, illiteracy, complexity of requests, etc.)	No. Absent from legal framework
Cost of access is specified (free, request fees, photocopying costs, other administrative costs)	Yes. Requests are to be exempt from stamp duties and federal administration fees. (§ 5 Duty to Grant Information Act 1987, as amended 1998 )
Deadlines for release of information
20-day response deadline	No. At a Federal level, the law requires information shall be given without "undue delay" but within 8 weeks from receipt of the request for information. At a state level, the individual states can determine their timeframes for responding. (§ 3 Duty to Grant Information Act 1987, as amended 1998 §5 Fundamental Act on the Duty to Grant Information, 1987)
Agency granted right to extend response time	Yes. At a Federal level, the law states that "if for special reasons such term can-not be complied with, the applicant shall be informed accordingly in writing" without giving any timeframe. At a state level, the individual states can determine their timeframes for responding. (§ 3 Duty to Grant Information Act 1987, as amended 1998 §5 Fundamental Act on the Duty to Grant Information, 1987)
Maximum total response time of no more than 40 days	No. At a Federal level, the law requires information shall be given without "undue delay" but within 8 weeks from receipt of the request for information. At a state level, the individual states can determine their timeframes for responding. (§ 3 Duty to Grant Information Act 1987, as amended 1998 §5 Fundamental Act on the Duty to Grant Information, 1987)
Exceptions and Overrides
Exemptions to disclosure
Existence of secrecy/states secrets law	No. Official secrets are defined in the Constitution. (§ 20(3) Austrian Federal Constitution 1930, amended 2016)
Existence of personal privacy/data law	Yes. The data protection law sets out a right to secrecy of personal data, especially with regard to private and family life. In addition, the Civil Code sets out a right to privacy. (Data Protection Amendment Act 2018, amended 2024 §1328(a) Civil Code 1846, as amended 2024)
Specific exemptions to disclosure	Yes. Information can be withheld if disclosure would: a) prevent proper compliance with statutory duties b) infringe a statutory duty of secrecy which covers maintenance of public peace, order and security, national defence, external relations, c) reveal personal data d) archive information cannot be disclosed in the interests of protecting national defence, foreign-policy, economic or financial interests of Austria or the EU or anticipating, preventing or prosecuting crime. (§1 and §2 Duty to Grant Information Act 1987, as amended 1998 §1 and §3 Fundamental Act on the Duty to Grant Information, 1987 § 20(3) Austrian Federal Constitution 1930, amended 2016 Data Protection Amendment Act 2018)
Public Interest test: Specified exemptions to disclosure may be overridden in cases where disclosure of information benefits the public interest.
Appeals
Appeals allowed within public entities	No. Absent from legal framework
Independent, non-judicial appeals mechanism, e.g., information commissioner. Does not include Ombudsman unless appeals decisions are binding.	No. Absent from legal framework
Judicial appeals mechanism	Yes. Requesters have the right to lodge a judicial appeal with the federal administrative court, in line with the General Administrative Procedures Act (§4 Duty to Grant Information Act 1987, as amended 1998)
Sanctions for non-compliance
Administrative sanctions are specified for violations of disclosure requirements	No. Absent from legal framework
Fines are specified for violations of disclosure requirements	No. Absent from legal framework
Criminal sanctions are specified for violations of disclosure requirements	No. Absent from legal framework
Monitoring and Oversight
Information officers must be appointed in public agencies	No. Absent from legal framework
Public body that is responsible for applying sanctions	No. Absent from legal framework
Public body that is responsible for public outreach (raising public awareness)	No. Absent from legal framework
Nodal agency for RTI (implementation support/compliance within public sector). Does not include Ombudsman.	No. Absent from legal framework
Ombudsman involvement in implementation is specified by law	No. Absent from legal framework
Reporting of data and/or implementation is required	No. Absent from legal framework

Legislation

Constitution of Austria of 1930_GER (German)	pdf
Duty to Grant Information Act of 1987_GER (German)	pdf
Fundamental Act on the Duty to Grant Information of 1987_GER (German)	pdf
Data Protection Act of 1999_GER (German)	pdf
Civil Code of 1811_GER (German)	pdf

*Last update: 2017

Public Procurement

The Austrian public procurement system is regulated by the Federal Procurement Act (“BVergG”) and the Federal Defence and Security Procurement Act (“BVergGVS”). Additional regulations are laid down in eight State Acts. The public procurement regulatory body is the Federal Procurement Agency, located under the Federal Government.

The lowest minimum thresholds for conducting a public procurement tender are:

▪         EUR 100000 for goods

▪         EUR 1 m for works

▪         EUR 100000 for services

▪         Direct award procedures can be conducted below EUR 100 k

The minimum number of bidders is 3 for restricted procedures procedures, and 3 for negotiated procedures. The minimum submission period is 52 days for open procedures procedures and 37 days for both restricted procedures and negotiated procedures from dispatch date. The final beneficial owners do not have to be disclosed when placing a bid.

There is preferential treatment based on SME status. Bids can be excluded based on the reasons set out in the EU directives (see the EC legal summary) and also based on price related elements.

In the bid evaluation phase, there are conflict of interest restrictions on the composition of the evaluation committee. However, no form of independence of the contracting authority is mandated for the evaluation committee.

There is a payable fee (flat rate) in case of an arbitration procedure. Decisions are published online at the website of the Legal Information System of the Republic of Austria.

Quantitative Data
Qualitative Data
Laws

Quantitative Data

Primary Metric	2015	2016	2017	2020	2024
Scope	99	99	99	99	75
Information availability	35	35	22	22	96
Evaluation	81	81	81	81	62
Open competition	56	50	36	36	67
Institutional arrangements	36	36	43	36	29

Values lie in range between 0 and 100, higher values implying higher legislation comprehensiveness

Qualitative Data

Scope
Threshold - lowest PP
What is the minimum contract value above which the public procurement law is applied? (Product type GOODS)	EUR 100,000. For public contracts for goods, above the EU threshold EU rules apply; below this, simplified or direct procedures apply up to EUR 143,000 for end-2024. (BVergG 2018 §§ 12, 46, Schwellenwerteverordnung 2023 (BGBl. II Nr. 34/2023))
What is the minimum contract value above which the public procurement law is applied? (Product type WORKS)	EUR 500,000. Works contracts above the EU threshold (EUR 5,538,000) are strictly regulated; (BVergG 2018 § 12, 47, Schwellenwerteverordnung 2023 (BGBl. II Nr. 34/2023))
What is the minimum contract value above which the public procurement law is applied? (Product type SERVICES)	EUR 100,000. Services have the same EU threshold (EUR 143,000) and national direct award upper limit as goods for end-2024. (BVergG 2018 § 12, Schwellenwerteverordnung 2023 (BGBl. II Nr. 34/2023))
Threshold - by PP type
What are the minimum application thresholds for the procurement type? (Entity: PUBLIC SECTOR)	EUR 100,000. Public sector uses these minimums: above national threshold, open/restricted/negotiated/competitive dialogue procedures apply. (BVergG 2018 §§ 12, 46, 47; Schwellenwerteverordnung 2023 (BGBl. II Nr. 34/2023))
What are the minimum application thresholds for the procurement type? (Entity: UTILITIES)	EUR 100,000. Utilities subject to EU threshold (EUR 443,000, 2024) and national direct/simple award upper limit set temporarily at EUR 143,000 for end-2024. (BVergG 2018 §§ 185, 213–214; Schwellenwerteverordnung 2023 (BGBl. II Nr. 34/2023))
What are the minimum application thresholds for the procurement type? (Entity: DEFENCE)	EUR 75,000. Direct award in defence/security up to EUR 75,000; EU procedures for contracts above threshold (e.g., EUR 443,000 for supply/services, EUR 5,538,000 for works). (BVergGVS 2012 § 32; Schwellenwerteverordnung 2023 (BGBl. II Nr. 34/2023))
Threshold - by product type
What are the minimum application thresholds for the procurement type? (Product type GOODS)	EUR 100,000. Goods above EU threshold follow regulated procedures; simplified award up to EUR 143,000 is allowed for end-2024. (BVergG 2018 § 12; Schwellenwerteverordnung 2023 (BGBl. II Nr. 34/2023))
What are the minimum application thresholds for the procurement type? (Product type WORKS)	EUR 500,000. Same as above: works above EU threshold; simplified at national direct threshold below. (BVergG 2018 § 47; Schwellenwerteverordnung 2023 (BGBl. II Nr. 34/2023))
What are the minimum application thresholds for the procurement type? (Product type SERVICES)	EUR 100,000. Services above EUR 143,000 follow standard EU rules; direct/simple procedures up to national threshold. (BVergG 2018 § 12; Schwellenwerteverordnung 2023 (BGBl. II Nr. 34/2023))
Information availability
Publishing and record keeping
Is there a requirement that tender documents must published in full?	Yes. For all award procedures with prior announcement, documents must be made available electronically, fully, directly, and free of charge, with clear web address in the announcement/request. (BVergG 2018 §§ 89–91, 53–54, 260)
Are any of these documents published online at a central place?	Yes. Contracting authorities publish buyer profiles on the Internet with open public access, and must indicate web addresses in official calls where full documents are available. (BVergG 2018 §§ 89, 90–91, 53–56, 222; BVergGVS 2012 § 40)
Is it mandatory to keep all of these records? -Public notices of bidding opportunities, -Bidding documents and addenda, -Bid opening records, -Bid evaluation reports, -Formal appeals by bidders and outcomes, -Final signed contract documents and addenda and amendments, -Claims and dispute resolutions, -Final payments, -Disbursement data (as required by the country’s financial management system)	Yes. Documentation of all phases and third-party involvement is required and must be sufficient for audit and full traceability, retained for a minimum of three years. (BVergG 2018 §§ 49, 140, 218, 309; BVergGVS 2012 §§ 100, 112)
Are contracts awarded within a framework agreement published (ie mini contracts)?	Yes. Award notices for framework agreements must include details of all main parties and, if known, the subcontractors for lots > EUR 100,000; not mandatory for defence contracts. (BVergG 2018 § 147; BVergGVS 2012 § 46)
Sub-contracting
Is it mandatory to publish information on subcontractors (ie names) in some cases?	Yes. Where known at the time of award notice, names of subcontractors intended to receive lots of construction contracts above EUR 100,000 (or in a framework agreement) must be published. There is no duty for other contracts except if expressly required in award documentation. (BVergG 2018 §§ 147(1), 367(1))
If yes, what is the threshold for publication (i.e. the % of total contract value subcontracted)? For example, if the threshold is 75%, and you have subcontracted out only 40% of your contract, no disclosure is required. Consultant will insert 75% in the short answer column.	There is no value or percentage threshold for publication if the names of subcontractors are known at notice stage; otherwise, only for construction contracts over EUR 100,000. (BVergG 2018 §§ 147(1), 367(1))
Evaluation
Preferential treatment
Is there a ban on mentioning specific companies or brands in tender specification/call for tender?	Yes. References to brands, trade marks, patents, or manufacturers are only allowed if a sufficiently precise description cannot be otherwise achieved, and “or equivalent” must always be stated. (BVergG 2018 § 106(5); BVergGVS 2012 § 83(7))
Is there a preferential treatment for small-to-medium enterprises (SMEs)?	Yes. Contracting authorities must, as far as possible, design and conduct award procedures so that small and medium enterprises can participate. For certain procedures, this is an express statutory objective, including by splitting contracts into lots. (BVergG 2018 §§ 20(8), 122(2), 154(1), 193(8), 289(2))
Is there a preferential treatment for local/national companies? (companies from other EU MS are considered foreign companies)	No. No legal preference for local/national companies over other EU or EEA companies; non-EU states can have special requirements if justified under international law. (BVergG 2018 §§ 20(1-2), 21(1,3), 141(2), 302(2), 303)
Is there a specific set of rules for green/sustainable procurement?	Yes. Bidders must comply with applicable European environmental, social, and labor standards and the contracting authority may specify minimum sustainability or green criteria in award procedures. (BVergG 2018 §§ 87, 258; BVergGVS 2012 § 66)
Bid evaluation
Are there restrictions on allowable grounds for tenderer exclusion?	Yes. There are exhaustive legal grounds for exclusion, including bankruptcy, unpaid taxes, criminal offences, professional misconduct, and conflict of interest; all must be clearly justified. (BVergG 2018 §§ 78, 141(1), 302; BVergGVS 2012 § 57)
Are some bids automatically excluded? e.g., lowest/highest price; unusually low price, etc.	Yes. Contracts may be rejected for unreasonably low prices, if justified after clarification with the bidder, or for speculative/implausible pricing; confirmation of state aid compliance may be required. (BVergG 2018 §§ 138(4-6), 141(1)3., 301(3-4), 302(1)3.; BVergGVS 2012 §§ 104(3,6), 105(1)3.)
Is scoring criteria published?	Yes. All scoring criteria, including their weight or the method of application, must be published as part of the call for tender and available to all bidders. (BVergG 2018 § 91(7), 262(6), Annex VI; BVergGVS 2012 Annex VI)
Are decisions always made by a committee?	No. Law does not require an evaluation committee for all procedures, except specific design contest/jury forms. For most procedures, contracting authority determines evaluators. (BVergG 2018 §§ 134, 165, 326, 133)
Are there regulations on evaluation committee composition to prevent conflict of interest?	Yes. Contracting authority must take steps to prevent, detect, and resolve conflicts of interest among staff and associated evaluators; employees with a personal or direct/indirect financial interest must not participate. (BVergG 2018 §§ 26, 147(1)9., 199, 134, 165, 326, 299; BVergGVS 2012 § 103(1))
Is some part of evaluation committee mandatorily independent of contracting authority?	No. No legal mandate for independence of evaluation committee from the contracting authority except for “Competitions” ("Wettbewerbe"); evaluators need only be independent from the bidders. (BVergG 2018 §§ 165(6), 326(6), 299; BVergGVS 2012 § 103(1))
Are scoring results publicly available?	No. Scoring results per se are not published. For contracts above threshold, award notice must list award criteria, value/price of winning bid, and in some cases the price range among evaluated/accepted offers. (BVergG 2018 Annex VI, XX)
Does the law specify under which conditions the tender can be cancelled?	Yes. Contracting authorities may cancel tenders if circumstances would have precluded the original call or required a substantially different procedure, or if no offers remain after elimination of ineligible bids. (BVergG 2018 §§ 148, 149; BVergGVS 2012 § 114)
Open competition
CFT publication
Does the law specify the location for publicizing open calls for tenders?	Yes. Restricted procedure notices must also appear in primary publication venues (OJEU, TED, Gazette, online). (BVergG 2018 § 50, 55–56, 59; BVergGVS 2012 §§ 42, 44)
Does the law specify the location for publicizing restricted calls for tenders?	Yes. All negotiated call notices are published in the same forums as restricted/open (OJEU, TED, Gazette, web). (BVergG 2018 § 50, 55–56, 59; BVergGVS 2012 §§ 42, 44)
Does the law specify the location for publicizing negotiated calls for tenders?	Yes. OJEU, TED, Federal Law Gazette and electronic publication medium (Federal Procurement Act of 2018 (BVergG), as amended, §50(1), §§55, 56 and 59 Federal Procurement Act in the field of Defence and Security of 2012 (BVergGVS), as amended, §§ 42 and 44)
Minimum # of bidders
What is the minimum number of bidders for restricted procedures?	5. At least five bidders are required for restricted procedures with prior notice in upper threshold procurements. (BVergG 2018 §§ 122(3), 123(4), 164(2); BVergGVS 2012 § 87(5))
What is the minimum number of bidders for negotiated procedures?	3. A minimum of three bidders for negotiated procedures (with/without prior notice) unless justified and recorded otherwise. (BVergG 2018 §§ 122(3), 123(4); BVergGVS 2012 § 86(3))
What is the minimum number of bidders for competitive dialogue procedures?	3. Competitive dialogue procedures require a minimum of three bidders; legal minima fixed by statute. (BVergG 2018 §§ 123(4), 164(2), 325(2); BVergGVS 2012 § 132(6))
Bidding period length
What are the minimum number of days for open procedures?	30. Open procedures require a minimum offer period of 30 days, extendable if documents are not electronic or in expedited/urgent situations. (BVergG 2018 §§ 71(1,5), 73, 74, 76–77, 243(1,5), 245–246)
What are the minimum number of days for restricted procedures?	30. Restricted procedures (and negotiated, with prior announcement) require a 30-day minimum, which some contracting authorities may reduce; never below 25 days except in urgent/expedited cases. (BVergG 2018 §§ 70–71, 73–77, 242–243; BVergGVS 2012 §§ 51–55)
What are the minimum number of days for competitive negotiated procedures?	Yes. Permitted methods: open, restricted, negotiated (with/without prior notice), framework agreement, dynamic purchasing, innovation partnership, competitive dialogue, and direct award; scope varies by sector. (BVergG 2018 §§ 31, 23; BVergGVS 2012 § 23(1))
Institutional arrangements
Institutions and regulations
Does the law specify the main EXCEPTIONS preventing the application of the public procurement law for tenders/organisations?	Yes. BVergG and BVergGVS each list numerous exceptions for types of procurement not subject to statutory procedures, including defence/security, other relevant EU/international law, broadcasting, disaster control, legal/arbitral services, central bank, and others. (BVergG 2018 § 9; BVergGVS 2012 § 9)
Does the law specify the main types of institutions that must apply the public procurement law?	Yes. Federal, state, municipal governments, associations, public-law bodies, and organizations predominantly controlled or financed by public entities are covered by the procurement law. (BVergG 2018 § 4)
Does the law specify the main procedure types or procurement methods permitted?	Yes. Offenes Verfahren (open procedure) - not available for defence and security; nicht offenes Verfahren mit/ohne vorherige Bekanntmachung (restricted procedure with and without prior notice); Verhandlungsverfahren mit/ohne vorherige Bekanntmachung (negotiated procedure with and without prior notice); Rahmenvereinbarung (framework agreement); dynamisches Beschaffungssystem (dynamic purchasing system); Innovationspartnerschaft (innovation partnership) - not available for defence and security; wettbewerblicher Dialog (competitive dialogue); Direktvergabe mit/ohne vorherige Bekanntmachung (direct award with and without prior notice) (Federal Procurement Act of 2018 (BVergG), as amended, § 31(1) Federal Procurement Act in the field of Defence and Security of 2012 (BVergGVS), as amended, § 23(1))
Is there a procurement arbitration court dedicated to public procurement cases?	No. Filing for review does not suspend the contract award procedure; no automatic contract lock is provided by law. (BVergG 2018 § 342(3))
Is there a procurement regulatory body dedicated to public procurement?	Yes. The Federal Procurement Agency (Bundesbeschaffung GmbH) provides regulatory functions and process oversight. (Law No. 39/2001; BVergG 2018)
Does the law specify procurement advisors' profession (i.e. degree to be obtained, official list of members of the professional association) and its role in the tendering process (e.g. right to draft tender documentations, conduct market research identifying bidders)?	No. There is no statutory requirement to publish court decisions, but the Federal Administrative Court does so as standard practice on its official website. (BVergG 2018; BVerwG website)
Is disclosure of final, beneficial owners required for placing a bid?	No. The procurement procedure does not impose beneficial ownership disclosure for bidders; WiEReG 2017 only applies to corporate registration. (BVergG 2018; WiEReG 2017)
Complaints
Is there a fee for arbitration procedure?	Yes. A flat, indexed fee applies for procurement review, based on procedural complexity, contract value, and the specific dispute; no fee applies if conditions for legal aid are met. (BVergG 2018 §§ 340, 335; Court Fees Act)
Is there a ban on contract signature until arbitration court decision (first instance court)?	No. The request for a review has no suspensive effect for the relevant award procedure. (Federal Procurement Act of 2018 (BVergG), as amended, § 342(3))
What is the maximum number of days until arbitration court decision from filing a complaint in the case of awarded contracts?	42. The Administrative Court must issue a decision on procurement appeals within 42 days of filing; injunctions are decided within 10 days. (BVergG 2018 §§ 348, 352(2))
Is there a requirement to publicly release arbitration court decisions ?	No. The law does not require publication of decisions but in practice they are published on the website of the Bundesverwaltungsgericht: https://www.bverwg.de/ (BVwG publication practice; BVwG website (as accessed for Dec. 2024 baseline))

Legislation

Court Fees Act (Gerichtsgebührengesetz, GGG)	missing file:
Federal Procurement Act in the Field of Defence and Security 2012 (BVergGVS 2012) (German)	pdf
Federal Procurement Act 2018 (BVergG 2018) (German)	pdf
Federal Procurement Agency Act (BB-GmbH-Gesetz) (German)	pdf

*Last update: 2017

Anti Money Laundering

Quantitative Data
Qualitative Data
Laws

Quantitative Data

Primary Metric	2012	2015	2016	2017	2020	2024	Trend
Risk-based approach						100
Sanctions for natural persons						100
Sanctions for legal persons						0
Pecuniary sanctions for obliged entities						80
Beneficial ownership of legal persons and legal arrangements						76
Supervision of obliged entities						100
Financial Intelligence Units (FIUs)						67
Mutual legal assistance (MLA) and International Cooperation						100

Values lie in range between 0 and 100, higher values implying higher legislation comprehensiveness

Qualitative Data

Country score
Risk-based approach
Each Member State shall be legally required to prepare a national risk assessment that outlines appropriate steps to identify, assess, understand and mitigate the risks of money laundering and terrorist financing affecting it.	Yes. FM-GwG requires a national risk assessment to be drawn up and maintained on an ongoing basis for Austria and sets its purposes and publication. (Bundesgesetz zur Verhinderung der Geldwäscherei und Terrorismusfinanzierung im Finanzmarkt (Finanzmarkt-Geldwäschegesetz – FM-GwG) 2016, § 3 Abs. 1-5)
Member states shall be legally required to keep the national risk assessment up to date and review it at least every 4 years.	Yes. FM-GwG § 3(2) requires the coordinating committee to draw up and maintain the national risk assessment on an ongoing basis, which is sufficient to show it must be kept up to date and therefore reviewed more frequently than every four years. (Bundesgesetz zur Verhinderung der Geldwäscherei und Terrorismusfinanzierung im Finanzmarkt (Finanzmarkt-Geldwäschegesetz – FM-GwG) 2016, § 3 Abs. 2)
Member states should legally designate an authority or mechanism to co-ordinate actions to assess risks.	Yes. FM-GwG establishes a coordinating committee at the Federal Ministry of Finance to develop measures and strategies and to coordinate the national risk assessment. (Bundesgesetz zur Verhinderung der Geldwäscherei und Terrorismusfinanzierung im Finanzmarkt (Finanzmarkt-Geldwäschegesetz – FM-GwG) 2016, § 3 Abs. 1)
Sanctions for natural persons
The following conduct, when committed intentionally, is punishable as a criminal offence: the conversion or transfer of property, knowing that such property is derived from criminal activity, for the purpose of concealing or disguising the illicit origin of the property or of assisting any person who is involved in the commission of such an activity to evade the legal consequences of that person’s action;	Yes. Section 165 criminalises converting or transferring criminal property to conceal or disguise its illegal origin or to assist another person involved in the criminal activity. (Bundesgesetz vom 23. Jänner 1974 über die mit gerichtlicher Strafe bedrohten Handlungen (Strafgesetzbuch – StGB) 1974, § 165 Abs. 1 Z 1)
The following conduct, when committed intentionally, is punishable as a criminal offence: the concealment or disguise of the true nature, source, location, disposition, movement, rights with respect to, or ownership of, property, knowing that such property is derived from criminal activity;	Yes. Section 165 criminalises concealing or disguising the true nature, origin, location, disposition or movement of criminal property. (Bundesgesetz vom 23. Jänner 1974 über die mit gerichtlicher Strafe bedrohten Handlungen (Strafgesetzbuch – StGB) 1974, § 165 Abs. 1 Z 2)
The following conduct, when committed intentionally, is punishable as a criminal offence: the acquisition, possession or use of property, knowing at the time of receipt, that such property was derived from criminal activity.	Yes. Section 165 criminalises acquiring, otherwise obtaining, possessing, converting, transferring or otherwise using property while knowing at the time of receipt that it derives from another person's criminal activity. (Bundesgesetz vom 23. Jänner 1974 über die mit gerichtlicher Strafe bedrohten Handlungen (Strafgesetzbuch – StGB) 1974, § 165 Abs. 2)
Aiding and abetting, inciting and attempting a money laundering offence is punishable as a criminal offence.	Yes. General participation and attempt rules apply to money laundering. Inciting another person and otherwise contributing to the offence are punishable, and attempts are punishable. (Bundesgesetz vom 23. Jänner 1974 über die mit gerichtlicher Strafe bedrohten Handlungen (Strafgesetzbuch – StGB) 1974, §§ 12, 15 Abs. 1-2)
Money laundering offences are punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least four years.	Yes. Money laundering under Section 165(1) is punishable by up to three years’ imprisonment, while aggravated cases under Section 165(4) are punishable by one to ten years. The indicator is satisfied because the maximum term reaches at least four years in aggravated cases. (Bundesgesetz vom 23. Jänner 1974 über die mit gerichtlicher Strafe bedrohten Handlungen (Strafgesetzbuch – StGB) (1974), § 165 Abs. 1, 4)
A prior or simultaneous conviction for the criminal activity from which the property was derived is not a prerequisite for a conviction for money laundering offences	Yes. Section 165 criminalises laundering property derived from criminal activity of another person and does not make a prior or simultaneous conviction for the predicate offence a prerequisite. (Bundesgesetz vom 23. Jänner 1974 über die mit gerichtlicher Strafe bedrohten Handlungen (Strafgesetzbuch – StGB) 1974, § 165)
A conviction for money laundering offences is possible where it is established that the property was derived from a criminal activity, without it being necessary to establish all the factual elements or all circumstances relating to that criminal activity, including the identity of the perpetrator;	Yes. Section 165 requires that the property derive from criminal activity of another person, but it does not require establishing all factual elements of the predicate offence or identifying the perpetrator as a condition of the laundering offence. (Bundesgesetz vom 23. Jänner 1974 über die mit gerichtlicher Strafe bedrohten Handlungen (Strafgesetzbuch – StGB) 1974, § 165 Abs. 1, 5)
Sanctions for legal persons
Legal persons can be held liable for the breaches of Regulation (EU) 2024/1624 or Regulation (EU) 2023/1113 committed on their behalf or for their benefit by any person, acting individually or as part of a body of that legal person and having a leading position within that legal person, based on any of the following: a power to represent the legal person; an authority to take decisions on behalf of the legal person; an authority to exercise control within the legal person.	No. FM-GwG provides legal-person liability for breaches listed in § 34, including specified breaches of Regulation (EU) 2023/1113, but not clearly for breaches of Regulation (EU) 2024/1624 as such. (Bundesgesetz zur Verhinderung der Geldwäscherei und Terrorismusfinanzierung im Finanzmarkt (Finanzmarkt-Geldwäschegesetz – FM-GwG) 2016, §§ 34 Abs. 2, 4; 35 Abs. 1)
Legal persons can be held liable where the lack of supervision or control has made possible the commission of any money laundering offences for the benefit of that legal person by a person under its authority.	No. FM-GwG provides liability for lack of monitoring or control only in relation to breaches listed in § 34; it does not clearly extend this to breaches of Regulation (EU) 2024/1624 as such. (Bundesgesetz zur Verhinderung der Geldwäscherei und Terrorismusfinanzierung im Finanzmarkt (Finanzmarkt-Geldwäschegesetz – FM-GwG) 2016, §§ 34 Abs. 2, 4; 35 Abs. 2)
Legal persons held liable are punishable by criminal or non-criminal fines.	No. Legal persons may be fined under FM-GwG for the narrower category of breaches covered by §§ 34-35, but national law does not clearly establish this for breaches of Regulation (EU) 2024/1624 as such. (Bundesgesetz zur Verhinderung der Geldwäscherei und Terrorismusfinanzierung im Finanzmarkt (Finanzmarkt-Geldwäschegesetz – FM-GwG) 2016, § 35 Abs. 3)
Legal persons held liable are punishable by other sanctions, such as: exclusion from entitlement to public benefits or aid; temporary or permanent exclusion from access to public funding, including tender procedures, grants and concessions; temporary or permanent disqualification from the practice of commercial activities; placing under judicial supervision; a judicial winding-up order; temporary or permanent closure of establishments which have been used for committing the offence.	No. FM-GwG provides disclosure consequences, but the listed sanctions such as exclusion from public benefits, disqualification, judicial supervision, winding-up or closure are not clearly established for this liability regime. (Bundesgesetz zur Verhinderung der Geldwäscherei und Terrorismusfinanzierung im Finanzmarkt (Finanzmarkt-Geldwäschegesetz – FM-GwG) 2016, § 37)
Pecuniary sanctions for obliged entities
In the event of a breach of Regulations (EU) 2024/1624 and (EU) 2023/1113, where obligations apply to legal persons, pecuniary sanctions can be imposed and administrative measures can be applied not only to the legal person, but also to the senior management and to other natural persons who under national law are responsible for the breach.	Yes. FM-GwG provides pecuniary sanctions for legal persons and for responsible natural persons for AML-law breaches, and under your rule sanctions for the national AML law that implements the EU regime count as satisfying the indicator. (FM-GwG, §§ 34, 35)
Pecuniary sanctions shall be imposed on obliged entities for serious, repeated or systematic breaches, whether committed intentionally or negligently, of the requirements laid down in the following provisions of Regulation (EU) 2024/1624: Chapter II (Internal policies, procedures and controls of obliged entities); Chapter III (Customer due diligence); Chapter V (Reporting obligations); Article 77 (Record retention).	Yes. FM-GwG imposes pecuniary sanctions for serious AML compliance breaches by obliged entities; under your rule, sanctions in the national AML law that transpose the EU requirements count even if the statute does not mirror Regulation (EU) 2024/1624 article by article. (FM-GwG, § 34 Abs. 2; § 35 Abs. 3)
Supervisors are able to apply administrative measures to an obliged entity, where they identify: breaches of Regulation (EU) 2024/1624 or Regulation (EU) 2023/1113, either in combination with pecuniary sanctions for serious, repeated and systematic breaches, or on their own; weaknesses in the internal policies, procedures and controls of the obliged entity that are likely to result in breaches of the requirements; that the obliged entity has internal policies, procedures and controls that are not commensurate with the risks of money laundering, its predicate offences or terrorist financing to which the entity is exposed.	Yes. The FMA must take all orders necessary and appropriate to bring business operations into line with the FM-GwG and Regulation (EU) 2023/1113, which is sufficient in principle to cover administrative measures for breaches and control weaknesses. (FM-GwG, §§ 31, 32)
Where obliged entities fail to comply with administrative measures applied by the supervisor within the applicable deadlines, supervisors are able to impose periodic penalty payments in order to compel compliance with those administrative measures.	No. Absent from legal framework
Supervisors are required to publish on their website, in an accessible format, decisions imposing pecuniary sanctions, applying administrative measures or imposing periodic penalty payments.	Yes. FM-GwG requires publication of final fines and also allows publication naming the person or entity and the breach on the FMA website; under your rule this is close enough to satisfy the publication indicator in principle. (FM-GwG, § 37)
Beneficial ownership of legal persons and legal arrangements
Beneficial ownership information must be held in a central register in the Member State where the legal entity is created or where the trustee of an express trust or person holding an equivalent position in a similar legal arrangement is established or resides, or from where the legal arrangement is administered.	Yes. WiEReG establishes a central beneficial ownership register for Austrian legal entities and for trusts and comparable arrangements covered by the Act. (Bundesgesetz über die Einrichtung eines Registers der wirtschaftlichen Eigentümer von Gesellschaften, anderen juristischen Personen und Trusts (Wirtschaftliche Eigentümer Registergesetz – WiEReG), § 1 Abs. 2; § 7)
Member States shall ensure that the entities in charge of the central registers are empowered to request from legal entities, trustees of any express trust and persons holding an equivalent position in a similar legal arrangement, and their legal and beneficial owners, any information necessary to identify and verify their beneficial owners, including resolutions of the board of directors and minutes of their meetings, partnership agreements, trust deeds, power of attorney or other contractual agreements and documentation.	Yes. The register authority has supervisory powers to require information and documents needed to verify compliance with WiEReG obligations. (Bundesgesetz über die Einrichtung eines Registers der wirtschaftlichen Eigentümer von Gesellschaften, anderen juristischen Personen und Trusts (Wirtschaftliche Eigentümer Registergesetz – WiEReG), § 14)
Where no person is identified as the beneficial owner, the central register shall include: (a) a statement that there is no beneficial owner or that the beneficial owners could not be determined, accompanied by a corresponding justification (b) the details of all natural persons who hold the position of senior managing officials in the legal entity equivalent to the following information: all names and surnames, place and full date of birth, residential address, country of residence and nationality or nationalities of the beneficial owner, number of identity document, such as passport or national identity document, and, where it exists, unique personal identification number assigned to the person by his or her country of usual residence, and general description of the source of such number	Yes. WiEReG § 5 requires the register filing to indicate whether no beneficial owner exists or whether, after exhausting all possibilities, the beneficial owners could not be identified and verified, which satisfies the requirement to record that no beneficial owner was identified and why. (Bundesgesetz über die Einrichtung eines Registers der wirtschaftlichen Eigentümer von Gesellschaften, anderen juristischen Personen und Trusts (Wirtschaftliche Eigentümer Registergesetz – WiEReG), § 2; § 5)
Entities in charge of the central registers are required to verify, within a reasonable time upon submission of the beneficial ownership information, and on a regular basis thereafter, that such information is adequate, accurate and up to date.	Yes. WiEReG combines verification powers with a concrete ongoing timing rule: annual confirmation/update of beneficial-ownership data, plus control powers for the register authority. Under your rule, a concrete recurring timeframe is sufficient even if the statute does not use the phrase 'reasonable time' or repeat the indicator wording verbatim. (WiEReG, § 5; § 14)
Competent authorities, if appropriate and to the extent that such requirement does not interfere unnecessarily with their functions, are required to report to the entities in charge of the central registers any discrepancies they find between information available in the central registers and the information available to them.	Yes. Authorities can place an official discrepancy note in the register where beneficial ownership data are incorrect or incomplete. (Bundesgesetz über die Einrichtung eines Registers der wirtschaftlichen Eigentümer von Gesellschaften, anderen juristischen Personen und Trusts (Wirtschaftliche Eigentümer Registergesetz – WiEReG), § 13)
The information contained in the central registers must include any change to the beneficial ownership of legal entities and legal arrangements and to nominee arrangements, following their first recording in the central register.	Yes. WiEReG § 5 requires changes in beneficial ownership information to be reported to the register within four weeks after knowledge of the change, so the register information must reflect changes after first recording. (Bundesgesetz über die Einrichtung eines Registers der wirtschaftlichen Eigentümer von Gesellschaften, anderen juristischen Personen und Trusts (Wirtschaftliche Eigentümer Registergesetz – WiEReG), § 5 Abs. 1)
The entity in charge of the central register is empowered, whether directly or by application to another authority, including judicial authorities, to carry out checks, including on-site inspections at the business premises or registered office of legal entities, in order to establish the current beneficial ownership of the entity and to verify that the information submitted to the central register is accurate, adequate and up-to-date.	No. WiEReG empowers the register authority to seek information and documents, but no clear explicit power was identified for on-site inspections at business premises or premises of trustees, nominees or comparable persons. (Bundesgesetz über die Einrichtung eines Registers der wirtschaftlichen Eigentümer von Gesellschaften, anderen juristischen Personen und Trusts (Wirtschaftliche Eigentümer Registergesetz – WiEReG), § 14)
Where verification leads an entity in charge of a central register to conclude that there are inconsistencies or errors in the beneficial ownership information, the entity in charge of a central register is able to withhold or refuse to issue a valid certificate of proof of registration, or to suspend the validity of an existing certification of proof of registration.	Yes. Where the registry authority or another authority finds the beneficial ownership information incorrect or not verifiable, Austria’s WiEReG allows an authority report or remark to be entered in the register stating that the entry could not be verified; obliged entities must then take additional measures, so in substance the framework withholds clean reliance on the registration until the issue is corrected. (Bundesgesetz über die Einrichtung eines Registers der wirtschaftlichen Eigentümer von Gesellschaften, anderen juristischen Personen und Trusts (Wirtschaftliche Eigentümer Registergesetz – WiEReG), § 13)
The entity in charge of the central register is empowered to, whether directly or by application to another authority, including judicial authorities, apply effective, proportionate and dissuasive measures or impose such pecuniary sanctions for failures, including of a repeated nature, to provide the central register with accurate, adequate and up-to-date information about their beneficial ownership.	Yes. WiEReG provides financial penalties and coercive penalties for failures to submit, update or support beneficial ownership filings. (Bundesgesetz über die Einrichtung eines Registers der wirtschaftlichen Eigentümer von Gesellschaften, anderen juristischen Personen und Trusts (Wirtschaftliche Eigentümer Registergesetz – WiEReG), §§ 15, 16)
Competent authorities have immediate, unfiltered, direct and free access to the information held in the interconnected central registers without alerting the legal entity or legal arrangement concerned. These competent authorities include: self-regulatory bodies in the performance of supervisory functions of AML rules; tax authorities; national authorities with designated responsibilities for the implementation of Union restrictive measures; AMLA for the purposes of joint analyses; EPPO; OLAF; Europol and Eurojust when providing operational support to the competent authorities of Member States.	No. Competent authorities have register access under WiEReG, but no clear explicit Austrian rule was identified matching the full indicator, including the full search functionalities and access to interconnected central registers. (Bundesgesetz über die Einrichtung eines Registers der wirtschaftlichen Eigentümer von Gesellschaften, anderen juristischen Personen und Trusts (Wirtschaftliche Eigentümer Registergesetz – WiEReG), § 12)
Beneficial ownership information held in central registers may be made available to obliged entities upon payment of a fee, which shall be limited to what is strictly necessary to cover the costs of ensuring the quality of the information held in the central registers and of making the information available. Those fees shall be established in such a way as not to undermine effective access to the information held in the central registers.	Yes. WiEReG permits access by obliged entities and charges a usage fee. Under the transparency-first interpretation, access that is available to obliged entities on a fee basis satisfies the indicator, and access need not be more restrictive than the benchmark. (Bundesgesetz über die Einrichtung eines Registers der wirtschaftlichen Eigentümer von Gesellschaften, anderen juristischen Personen und Trusts (Wirtschaftliche Eigentümer Registergesetz – WiEReG), §§ 9, 17)
Any natural or legal person that can demonstrate a legitimate interest in the prevention and combating of money laundering, its predicate offences and terrorist financing has access to the following information on beneficial owners of legal entities and legal arrangements held in the interconnected central registers, without alerting the legal entity or legal arrangement concerned: the name of the beneficial owner; the month and year of birth of the beneficial owner; the country of residence and nationality or nationalities of the beneficial owner; for beneficial owners of legal entities, the nature and extent of the beneficial interest held; for beneficial owners of express trusts or similar legal arrangements, the nature of the beneficial interest.	Yes. WiEReG grants access on proof of legitimate interest and the excerpt includes core beneficial-ownership information. Under the transparency-first interpretation, access on legitimate interest satisfies the indicator even if national drafting is narrower or more structured than the benchmark. (Bundesgesetz über die Einrichtung eines Registers der wirtschaftlichen Eigentümer von Gesellschaften, anderen juristischen Personen und Trusts (Wirtschaftliche Eigentümer Registergesetz – WiEReG), § 10)
The following natural or legal persons shall be deemed to have a legitimate interest to access the information listed above: persons acting for the purpose of journalism, reporting or any other form of expression in the media, that are connected with the prevention or combating of money laundering, its predicate offences or terrorist financing;	Yes. WiEReG expressly presumes legitimate interest for journalists and other media-related applicants connected with preventing money laundering, terrorist financing or sanctions evasion. (Bundesgesetz über die Einrichtung eines Registers der wirtschaftlichen Eigentümer von Gesellschaften, anderen juristischen Personen und Trusts (Wirtschaftliche Eigentümer Registergesetz – WiEReG), § 10)
The following natural or legal persons shall be deemed to have a legitimate interest to access the information listed above: civil society organisations, including non-governmental organisations and academia, that are connected with the prevention or combating of money laundering, its predicate offences or terrorist financing;	Yes. WiEReG expressly presumes legitimate interest for science and civil-society organisations connected with preventing money laundering, terrorist financing or sanctions evasion. This covers academia and NGOs. (Bundesgesetz über die Einrichtung eines Registers der wirtschaftlichen Eigentümer von Gesellschaften, anderen juristischen Personen und Trusts (Wirtschaftliche Eigentümer Registergesetz – WiEReG), § 10)
The following natural or legal persons shall be deemed to have a legitimate interest to access the information listed above: natural or legal persons likely to enter into a transaction with a legal entity or legal arrangement and who wish to prevent any link between such a transaction and money laundering, its predicate offences or terrorist financing;	Yes. WiEReG provides legitimate interest where the applicant wants to enter into a business relationship with the legal entity and has sufficient interest in the person of the beneficial owner. (Bundesgesetz über die Einrichtung eines Registers der wirtschaftlichen Eigentümer von Gesellschaften, anderen juristischen Personen und Trusts (Wirtschaftliche Eigentümer Registergesetz – WiEReG), § 10)
The following natural or legal persons shall be deemed to have a legitimate interest to access the information listed above: Member States’ public authorities in the context of public procurement procedures, in respect of the tenderers and operators being awarded the contract under the public procurement procedure;	Yes. Relevant public authorities already have direct statutory access to the register under WiEReG. Under the transparency-first interpretation, access for a broader or stronger category than the indicator is sufficient. (Bundesgesetz über die Einrichtung eines Registers der wirtschaftlichen Eigentümer von Gesellschaften, anderen juristischen Personen und Trusts (Wirtschaftliche Eigentümer Registergesetz – WiEReG), §§ 9, 12)
Member States shall ensure that the information provided by central registers does not lead to the identification of any person consulting the register where such persons are: persons acting for the purpose of journalism, reporting or any other form of expression in the media, that are connected with the prevention or combating of money laundering, its predicate offences or terrorist financing;	No. Absent from legal framework
Member States shall ensure that the information provided by central registers does not lead to the identification of any person consulting the register where such persons are: civil society organisations that are connected with the prevention or combating of money laundering, its predicate offences or terrorist financing.	No. Absent from legal framework
Where entities in charge of central registers decide to grant access to beneficial ownership information, they shall issue a certificate granting access for 3 years. Entities in charge of central registers shall respond to any subsequent request to access beneficial ownership information by the same person within 7 working days.	No. WiEReG provides an application process and a post-approval retrieval link valid for four weeks, but no clear explicit rule was identified requiring a three-year certificate or a 12-working-day decision deadline. (Bundesgesetz über die Einrichtung eines Registers der wirtschaftlichen Eigentümer von Gesellschaften, anderen juristischen Personen und Trusts (Wirtschaftliche Eigentümer Registergesetz – WiEReG), § 10)
Member States shall ensure that entities in charge of central registers shall only refuse a request to access beneficial ownership information on one of the following grounds: the applicant has not provided the necessary information or documents pursuant to paragraph 1; a legitimate interest to access beneficial ownership information has not been demonstrated; where on the basis of information in its possession, the entity in charge of the central register has a reasonable concern that the information will not be used for the purposes for which it was requested or that the information will be used for purposes that are not connected to the prevention of money laundering, its predicate offences or terrorist financing; one or more of the situations referred to in Article 15 applies; the legitimate interest to access beneficial ownership information granted by the central register of another Member State does not extend to the purposes for which the information is sought; where the applicant is in a third country and responding to the request to access information would not comply with the provisions of Chapter V of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.	Yes. WiEReG provides for an application process and formal refusal decision where the applicant does not establish the required legitimate interest or otherwise fails to satisfy the access conditions. Under this rule, the existence of at least one legal ground for refusal is enough. (Bundesgesetz über die Einrichtung eines Registers der wirtschaftlichen Eigentümer von Gesellschaften, anderen juristischen Personen und Trusts (Wirtschaftliche Eigentümer Registergesetz – WiEReG), § 10)
In exceptional circumstances to be laid down in national law, where the access to beneficial ownership information would expose the beneficial owner to disproportionate risk of fraud, kidnapping, blackmail, extortion, harassment, violence or intimidation, or where the beneficial owner is a minor or otherwise legally incapable, Member States shall provide for an exemption from such access to all or part of the personal information on the beneficial owner. Member States shall ensure that such exemptions are granted on a case-by-case basis upon a detailed evaluation of the exceptional nature of the circumstances and confirmation that those disproportionate risks exist. The right to an administrative review of the decision granting an exemption and the right to an effective judicial remedy shall be guaranteed.	Yes. WiEReG allows restriction of access in extraordinary circumstances on a case-by-case basis and expressly provides that for minors the restriction lasts until majority. Administrative and judicial review are available. (Bundesgesetz über die Einrichtung eines Registers der wirtschaftlichen Eigentümer von Gesellschaften, anderen juristischen Personen und Trusts (Wirtschaftliche Eigentümer Registergesetz – WiEReG), § 10a)
Supervision of obliged entities
Each Member State shall ensure that all obliged entities established in its territory are subject to adequate and effective supervision. To that end, each Member State shall appoint one or more supervisors to monitor effectively, and to take the measures necessary to ensure compliance by the obliged entities with Regulations (EU) 2024/1624 and (EU) 2023/1113.	Yes. Austria assigns AML/CFT supervision to competent authorities across sectors, including the FMA for financial institutions and sectoral supervisors for other obliged entities. National law therefore establishes a supervisory framework for obliged entities established in Austria. (Bundesgesetz zur Verhinderung der Geldwäscherei und Terrorismusfinanzierung im Finanzmarkt (Finanzmarkt-Geldwäschegesetz – FM-GwG) (2016), § 31; Gewerbeordnung 1994 (1994), § 365m1; Rechtsanwaltsordnung (RAO) (1868), § 23; Notariatsordnung (NO) (1871), § 154)
Financial Intelligence Units (FIUs)
Each Member State shall establish an FIU in order to prevent, detect and effectively combat money laundering and terrorist financing.	Yes. Austria has established the Geldwäschemeldestelle within the Bundeskriminalamt as the national unit for the listed AML/CFT functions. (Bundesgesetz über das Bundeskriminalamt und die internationale polizeiliche Kooperation (Bundeskriminalamt-Gesetz – BKA-G), § 4 Abs. 2 Z 1 und 2)
The FIU as the central national unit shall be responsible for receiving and analysing suspicious transaction reports and other information relevant to money laundering, associated predicate offences or terrorist financing.	Yes. The Geldwäschemeldestelle is tasked with receiving and analysing suspicious transaction reports and other relevant information. (Bundesgesetz über das Bundeskriminalamt und die internationale polizeiliche Kooperation (Bundeskriminalamt-Gesetz – BKA-G), § 4 Abs. 2 Z 1)
The FIU shall be responsible for disseminating the results of its analyses and any additional relevant information to the competent authorities where there are grounds to suspect money laundering, associated predicate offences or terrorist financing.	Yes. The Geldwäschemeldestelle must forward the results of its analysis and additional relevant information to domestic authorities or bodies where necessary to combat money laundering, related predicate offences or terrorist financing. (Bundesgesetz über das Bundeskriminalamt und die internationale polizeiliche Kooperation (Bundeskriminalamt-Gesetz – BKA-G), § 4 Abs. 2 Z 1)
The FIU shall be operationally independent and autonomous, which means that the FIU shall have the authority and capacity to carry out its functions freely, including the ability to take autonomous decisions to analyse, request and disseminate specific information. It shall be free from any undue political, government or industry influence or interference.	No. No clear explicit statutory provision was identified that states the FIU is operationally independent and autonomous, including freedom to take autonomous analytical, request and dissemination decisions free from undue influence. (Bundesgesetz über das Bundeskriminalamt und die internationale polizeiliche Kooperation (Bundeskriminalamt-Gesetz – BKA-G), § 4 Abs. 2)
The FIU, regardless of their organisational status, is authorised to have access to the information that they require to fulfil their tasks, including financial, administrative and law enforcement information.	No. Obliged entities must cooperate fully with the Geldwäschemeldestelle, but no clear explicit provision was identified here giving the FIU a general right to all financial, administrative and law-enforcement information it requires in the terms of the indicator. (Bundesgesetz zur Verhinderung der Geldwäscherei und Terrorismusfinanzierung im Finanzmarkt (Finanzmarkt-Geldwäschegesetz – FM-GwG), § 16 Abs. 2)
FIUs are empowered to take urgent action, directly or indirectly, where there is a suspicion that a transaction is related to money laundering or terrorist financing, to suspend or withhold consent to that transaction.	Yes. A suspicious transaction may have to be delayed and the Geldwäschemeldestelle may order a longer period before execution, providing a legal basis to suspend or withhold consent to a suspected transaction. (Bundesgesetz zur Verhinderung der Geldwäscherei und Terrorismusfinanzierung im Finanzmarkt (Finanzmarkt-Geldwäschegesetz – FM-GwG), § 17 Abs. 4)
Mutual legal assistance (MLA) and International Cooperation
Member States shall ensure that the FIU to whom the request is made is legally required to use the whole range of its available powers which it would normally use domestically for receiving and analysing information when it replies to a request for information from another FIU.	Yes. The Austrian legal framework assigns the FIU international information-exchange functions, and under the revised methodology an implicit legal duty to share and cooperate is sufficient even if it does not mirror the indicator text exactly. (Bundesgesetz über das Bundeskriminalamt und die internationale polizeiliche Kooperation (Bundeskriminalamt-Gesetz – BKA-G), § 4 Abs. 2 Z 2)
Member States shall ensure that FIUs are legally required to exchange, spontaneously or upon request, any information that may be relevant for the processing or analysis of information by the FIU related to money laundering, its predicate offences, or terrorist financing, and the natural or legal person involved, regardless of the type of predicate offences that may be involved, and even if the type of predicate offences that may be involved is not identified at the time of the exchange.	Yes. The Austrian legal framework requires international information exchange by the FIU; that is enough in principle to satisfy this indicator without matching the wording of the indicator point by point. (Bundesgesetz über das Bundeskriminalamt und die internationale polizeiliche Kooperation (Bundeskriminalamt-Gesetz – BKA-G), § 4 Abs. 2 Z 2)

Legislation

Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013	missing file:
Federal Act on Federal Support of Political Parties (Support of Political Parties Act 2012)	missing file:
StGB Bestechung bei einer Wahl oder Volksabstimmung, amended 2015 [Penal Code bribery in an election or referendum]	missing file:

*Last update: 2017

Asset Recovery

Quantitative Data
Qualitative Data
Laws

Quantitative Data

Primary Metric	2012	2015	2016	2017	2020	2024	Trend
Asset Offices						50
Confiscation						67
International cooperation						50

Values lie in range between 0 and 100, higher values implying higher legislation comprehensiveness

Qualitative Data

Country score
Asset Offices
Each Member State shall legally designate at least one asset recovery office to facilitate cross-border cooperation in relation to asset-tracing investigations and to conduct asset recovery functions in both criminal matters and civil or administrative matters.	Yes. Austria has an operational asset recovery function within the Criminal Intelligence Service Austria, where asset recovery is expressly identified as a priority of the Economic Crime Department. (Criminal Intelligence Service Austria at a glance, Bundeskriminalamt, “Asset recovery is another priority.”)
Each Member State shall legally designate at least one competent authority to function as an asset management office for the purpose of the management of frozen and confiscated property until the disposal of that property further to a final confiscation order.	No. The sources reviewed show custody and liquidation functions in courts and justice-sector structures, but no clearly identified legally designated separate asset management office was found for 2024. (Austrian Court of Audit, Criminal Asset Recovery, describing safekeeping and liquidation in custody departments and custody units; no dedicated AMO)
Confiscation
Member States shall take the necessary measures to enable the freezing of property necessary to ensure a possible confiscation of that property. The freezing measures shall consist of freezing orders and immediate action. (Freezing measures)	Yes. Austrian criminal procedure allows seizure of objects and assets to secure evidence, civil-law claims, and enforcement of property deprivation, (Austrian Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO), seizure provisions; Section 444(1) StPO)
Member States shall take the necessary measures to enable the confiscation, either wholly or in part, of instrumentalities and proceeds stemming from a criminal offence subject to a final conviction, which may also result from proceedings in absentia. (Conviction based confiscation)	Yes. Austrian (Austrian Criminal Code (StGB), §§ 19a, 20)
Member States shall take the necessary measures to enable the confiscation of property the value of which corresponds to instrumentalities or proceeds stemming from a criminal offence subject to a final conviction, which may also result from proceedings in absentia. (Confiscation of equivalent value)	Yes. Austria provides value-based confiscation, (Austrian Criminal Code (StGB), § 19a(1a), § 20(2)-(4).)
Member States shall take the necessary measures to enable the confiscation of proceeds, or other property the value of which corresponds to proceeds, which, directly or indirectly, were transferred by a suspected or accused person to third parties, or which were acquired by third parties from a suspected or accused person. (Third-party confiscation)	Yes. Austrian confiscation law allows deprivation of unlawfully obtained assets and equivalent value, (Austrian Criminal Code (StGB), §§ 19a, 20, 20b.)
Member States shall take the necessary measures to enable the confiscation, either wholly or in part, of property belonging to a person convicted of a criminal offence where the offence committed is liable to give rise, directly or indirectly, to economic benefit, and where a national court is satisfied that the property is derived from criminal conduct. (Extended confiscation)	No. The sources reviewed confirm forfeiture and equivalent-value confiscation, but they do not clearly establish a distinct extended confiscation regime matching the EU standard as of 31 December 2024. (Austrian Criminal Code (StGB), §§ 19a, 20 ff.;)
Member States shall take the necessary measures to enable the confiscation of instrumentalities, proceeds or property, or proceeds or property transferred to third parties, where criminal proceedings have been initiated but could not be continued because of illness, absconding, or death of the accused or the limitation period of the offence is below 15 years and has expired. (Non-conviction based confiscation)	Yes. Austrian law recognises independent confiscation proceedings, (Austrian Criminal Code (StGB), independent confiscation; Austrian Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO), Section 444(1).)
Confiscation without a prior conviction shall be limited to cases where, in the absence of the circumstances above, it would have been possible for the relevant criminal proceedings to lead to a criminal conviction for, at least, offences liable to give rise, directly or indirectly, to substantial economic benefit, and where the national court is satisfied that the instrumentalities, proceeds or property to be confiscated are derived from, or directly or indirectly linked to, the criminal offence in question. (Non-conviction based confiscation)	Yes. Austria provides independent confiscation as part of its criminal confiscation framework, (Austrian Criminal Code (StGB), independent confiscation provisions; Austrian Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO), Section 444(1).)
Member States shall take the necessary measures to enable the confiscation of property identified in the context of an investigation in relation to a criminal offence, provided that a national court is satisfied that the identified property is (i) derived from criminal conduct committed within the framework of a criminal organisation and (ii) that conduct is liable to give rise, directly or indirectly, to substantial economic benefit. A ‘criminal offence’ in this case is punishable by deprivation of liberty of a maximum of at least four years. (Confiscation of unexplained wealth)	No. The (No distinct unexplained-wealth confiscation provision identified in the Austrian)
Member States are legally required to adopt a national strategy on asset recovery and update it at regular intervals of no longer than five years. (Deadline of 24 May 2027)	No. No legal requirement for a national asset recovery strategy was identified for Austria as of 31 December 2024; this obligation stems from Directive (EU) 2024/1260 (No national strategy requirement identified in Austrian law in the sources reviewed; EU Directive 2024/1260 transposition deadline 23 November 2026.)
International cooperation
To facilitate cross-border cooperation, Member States shall legally require measures to enable the swift tracing and identification of instrumentalities and proceeds, or of property which is, or might become, the object of a freezing or confiscation order in the course of proceedings in criminal matters.	Yes. Austria participates in cross-border asset tracing through its national criminal intelligence and asset recovery structures and applies the EU (Criminal Intelligence Service Austria asset recovery function; Regulation (EU) 2018/1805 framework applied in Austria.)
Member States shall legally require the necessary measures to ensure that their asset recovery offices provide, upon request from an asset recovery office in another Member State, any information that those asset recovery offices have access to, and that is necessary for the performance of the tasks of the asset recovery office requesting that information	Yes. Austria has an established ARO-type function within the Criminal Intelligence Service structure used for asset recovery cooperation, consistent with the EU ARO (Austria’s ARO function within Bundeskriminalamt/Criminal Intelligence Service Austria; EU ARO framework under Council Decision 2007/845/JHA.)
Member States may legally allow for cost-sharing agreements with other Member States on the execution of freezing and confiscation orders.	No. No express Austrian (No express cost-sharing rule identified in the Austrian)
Countries should be able to share confiscated property with other countries, in particular when confiscation is directly or indirectly a result of co-ordinated law enforcement actions	No. The sources reviewed confirm cross-border freezing and confiscation cooperation, but no clear express asset-sharing rule was identified in the Austrian (No express confiscated-asset sharing provision identified in the Austrian)

Legislation

Political Parties Act, 2012, amended 2013	missing file:
Federal Act on Federal Support of Political Parties (Support of Political Parties Act 2012)	missing file:
StGB Bestechung bei einer Wahl oder Volksabstimmung, amended 2015 [Penal Code bribery in an election or referendum]	missing file:

*Last update: 2017

Austria

Country Facts

Political Financing

Quantitative Data

Primary Metric

Qualitative Data

Bans and limits on private income

Public funding

Regulations on spending

Reporting, oversight and sanctions

Institutions receiving financial reports from political parties and/​or candidates

Is it specified that a particular institution(s) is responsible for examining financial reports and/​or investigating violations?

Other institutions with a formal role in political finance oversight

Sanctions for political finance infractions

Legislation

Financial Disclosure

Quantitative Data

Primary Metric

Alternative Metric

Qualitative Data

Head of State

Disclosure items

Filing Frequency

Sanctions

Monitoring and Oversight

Public access to declarations

Ministers

Disclosure items

Filing Frequency

Sanctions

Monitoring and Oversight

Public access to declarations

Members of Parliament

Disclosure items

Filing Frequency

Sanctions

Monitoring and Oversight

Public access to declarations

Civil servants

Disclosure items

Filing Frequency

Sanctions

Monitoring and Oversight

Public access to declarations

Legislation

Conflict of Interest

Quantitative Data

Primary Metric

Alternative Metric

Qualitative Data

Head of State

Restrictions

Sanctions

Monitoring and Oversight

Ministers

Restrictions

Sanctions

Monitoring and Oversight

Members of Parliament

Restrictions

Sanctions

Monitoring and Oversight

Civil servants

Restrictions

Sanctions

Monitoring and Oversight

Legislation

Freedom of Information

Quantitative Data

Primary Metric

Qualitative Data

Scope and Coverage

Scope of disclosure

Coverage of public and private sectors

Access to specific documents (subject to reactive and/or proactive disclosure)

Information access and release

Procedural access

Deadlines for release of information

Exceptions and Overrides

Exemptions to disclosure

Institutions receiving financial reports from political parties and/or candidates

Is it specified that a particular institution(s) is responsible for examining financial reports and/or investigating violations?