On 18 December 2024, the Westminster Magistrates’ Court, following an application by the Devon and Cornwall Police ordered the forfeiture of over £2,000,000, held by Andrew Tate and his brother Tristan. The sum is made up of funds held in several bank accounts, together with cryptocurrency. Account Forfeiture Orders (AFOs) can only be made when the Court determines - on the balance of probabilities - that the funds represent criminal property, or are intended for use in unlawful conduct.
The Court found that the funds and cryptocurrency held by the Tate brothers are the proceeds of a deliberate and dishonest cheat of the revenue (HMRC).
Despite there being on-going criminal proceedings in Romania following allegations of human trafficking and rape, the Court was not required to determine whether the income itself represented the proceeds of crime. The Police advanced their case that, irrespective of the source of the income, neither Andrew or Tristan Tate had registered for tax purposes in either the UK or Romania. No tax returns were made in respect of their income, and no tax had been paid, despite appearing to earn in the region of £21m between 2014 and 2022.
Devon and Cornwall Police relied on several claims by Andrew Tate in YouTube videos, where he confirms that he refuses to pay tax, and advocates an approach of ignoring the HMRC until the authorities feel they’re wasting their time. Neither Tate brother served any evidence in rebuttal of the Police’s application, and although the Court ultimately declined to do so, it could have drawn an inference from their failure to do so. Undoubtedly, careful consideration would have been given by the Tate brothers, given their impending criminal trial in Romania. There still remains the possibility of similar criminal charges in the United Kingdom.
In their initial application for an Account Freezing Order, the Police sought to freeze cryptocurrency and made an application pursuant to section 303Z14(4) of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (PoCA). However, this section allows the Court to grant an Account Freezing Order over fiat funds, not cryptocurrency. This led to the Court granting an unlawful Order. Upon the error being identified, the Police returned to Court to ask that the unlawful Order be set aside, and that a further order be granted to freeze the cryptocurrency. This case serves as a reminder that even where there are inadvertent procedural or legal failings by an Applicant, such as seeking to freeze cryptocurrency as fiat currency, they will often be cured where the Court has determined that there is an arguable case that the asset subject to the applicant represents criminal property.
Need Legal Assistance?
If you have a personal or business account that is currently subject to an Account Freezing Order (AFO) or you have been notified of an impending AFO application, you should seek immediate legal advice.
Our expert guidance can be instrumental in navigating the legal and procedural complexities of AFOs and in accessing and recovering your funds and protecting your financial interests. We have decades of experience in successfully challenging AFOs throughout the UK.
Initial Discussion – Call Now
Contact our lawyers (James O'Hara & Paul O'Donnell) by calling us on +44 (0)203 987 0222 or complete our enquiry form and one of our team will call you back.
