Section 22 no 3 EStG
Article · Legal position 11/2026
Wallet hacked: tax treatment and what the report does not show
A typical case: an investor's CoinTracking report is reconciled and shows no error. The blockchain shows that most of the holdings across several chains were drained in a single night. A summary of the German article.
Key points
- A report without warnings does not mean the records are complete. A hack appears as ordinary withdrawals, not as a loss.
- The on-chain pattern: the same collecting addresses, a fixed split between two recipients, unlimited approvals to drainer contracts, gas paid by the attacker and transactions signed with the victim's own keys.
- Not every outflow is theft. Own transactions must be separated before anything is booked.
- Section 23: no loss, because theft is not a disposal (BMF circular of 6 March 2025, para. 54; Federal Fiscal Court IX R 28/18; Nuremberg Tax Court 3 K 760/22).
- Our route: income-related expenses under section 22 no 3 for stolen rewards, carried back to the previous year under section 10d. The Federal Fiscal Court accepts involuntary losses only in exceptional cases (VI B 7/13) and has not ruled on crypto theft.
Questions and answers
Can I deduct stolen crypto assets?
Not as a disposal loss under section 23 of the Income Tax Act, because theft is not a disposal. For holdings received as staking or lending rewards that kept earning income, we claim the loss as income-related expenses under section 22 no 3. The Federal Fiscal Court has not ruled on this for crypto; we state the position in the return and pursue it in an objection.
Does CoinTracking flag a hack?
No. Outflows to third-party addresses are imported as ordinary withdrawals. A fully reconciled report can show no warning at all although the holdings were stolen. The hack only becomes visible on the blockchain: recipients, approvals and signatures.
Does the lending case VIII R 22/25 help?
Not for the theft itself. It decides whether lending income is capital income or other income. It matters for losses only where genuine capital claims exist, for example against a platform. Tokens drained from your own wallet are no such claim.
Responsible for content: Matthias Steger, German certified tax advisor (Steuerberater), nine years as a tax auditor.
Legal position: 14 November 2026. Sources: sections 9, 10d, 20, 22 no 3 and 23 of the Income Tax Act; section 363(2) sentence 2 of the Fiscal Code; BMF circular of 6 March 2025, paras. 53, 54 and 65; Federal Fiscal Court IX R 3/22, IX R 28/18, VI B 7/13, VI R 26/95, IX R 26/14, VIII R 13/15, VIII R 28/18; Nuremberg Tax Court of 22 January 2025, 3 K 760/22.
Deducting stolen crypto under section 22 no 3 is our legal view and has not been decided by the highest court. This article is not advice on an individual case. Where this English text and the German version differ, the German version governs.
Legal position: 14 November 2026. Sources: sections 9, 10d, 20, 22 no 3 and 23 of the Income Tax Act; section 363(2) sentence 2 of the Fiscal Code; BMF circular of 6 March 2025, paras. 53, 54 and 65; Federal Fiscal Court IX R 3/22, IX R 28/18, VI B 7/13, VI R 26/95, IX R 26/14, VIII R 13/15, VIII R 28/18; Nuremberg Tax Court of 22 January 2025, 3 K 760/22.
Deducting stolen crypto under section 22 no 3 is our legal view and has not been decided by the highest court. This article is not advice on an individual case. Where this English text and the German version differ, the German version governs.
Still have a question on this topic?
TaxTobi is our AI assistant for crypto tax under German law. It answers from a reviewed knowledge base with the legal basis and date, one question free. It does not give individual advice; for your own case, talk to us.
Ask TaxTobi about this topic What TaxTobi can and cannot do →