The company was declared bankrupt, the tax debt increased to 1.2 billion tenge, and its manager received a guilty verdict. This story shows that bankruptcy does not nullify the consequences of violations and does not exempt the guilty parties from liability.
Sometimes unscrupulous entrepreneurs hope that declaring a company bankrupt will allow them to get rid of accumulated obligations and avoid the consequences of previously committed actions. However, the legislation provides for the possibility of reviewing the company’s activities even after the bankruptcy procedure has been initiated.
A telling case involved one of the partnerships, which was declared bankrupt by court decision in 2024.
During the analysis of the company’s activities over the three years preceding the bankruptcy, state revenue authorities identified circumstances that required additional verification.
In particular, the head repeatedly changed the location of the partnership’s registration.
In addition, funds exceeding 1 billion tenge were withdrawn from the company’s accounts.
Later, the head submitted additional tax returns for previous periods. As a result, a tax debt of 19 million tenge initially accumulated.
Since the company had no assets that could be used to settle the debt, the partnership was declared bankrupt. But the story did not end there.
During further tax control, additional circumstances were identified, as a result of which the amount of the tax debt increased to 1.2 billion tenge.
Bankruptcy did not serve as a basis for terminating liability.
In 2026, the court found the manager guilty of intentional bankruptcy and tax evasion. The verdict has entered into legal force.
In addition, a claim by the bankruptcy administrator to hold the director liable for the partnership’s debts is currently under consideration.
That is, the bankruptcy procedure does not mean that the company’s director is automatically exempt from liability for their own actions.
This case clearly demonstrates why it is important for managers and founders to conduct business in good faith and comply with tax legislation.
Bankruptcy in itself is not a violation. The company’s financial difficulties also do not automatically mean that an offence has been committed.However, if an audit revealsthewithdrawalofassets,concealmentofproperty,distortionoftax reporting,or other unlawful actions,they may entail liability as providedfor bylaw.
Dependingon thecircumstances,thismay resultin administrativeliability,criminalliability, anincreasein theamountof taxdebt,holding to subsidiaryliability, or therecoveryof debt in accordance with theprocedureestablished by law.
Therefore, anattempttowithdrawassets inadvance,conceal transactions, orartificially createtheinsolvencyof a company doesnot solvetheproblem butmayleadtoadditional legal consequences.
State revenue authorities analyze the financial and economic activities of enterprises, the movement of funds, changes in registration data, tax reporting, and other information.
The use of automated analytical tools makes it possible to identify inconsistencies and suspicious transactions, establish the relationship between various actions, and promptly transmit information for the adoption of measures provided for by law.
Between 2025 and September 2026, law enforcement agencies initiated 18 criminal cases on the grounds of deliberate bankruptcy and other unlawful actions, and state revenue authorities initiated 51 administrative proceedings. The court has held 19 officials of the bankrupt company to subsidiary liability; materials are being prepared against another 23 individuals.
Bankruptcy is a legal procedure, not a way to evade obligations.
Bankruptcy is provided for by law to resolve a situation where a company is objectively unable to fulfill its obligations.
However, declaring a company bankrupt does not eliminate the need to review previously committed actions and does not absolve the guilty parties from liability if violations have been established.
