Anti-Fraud Law
Relevant operations are kept in a tamper-evident history with integrity sealing: who did what and when, with no way to change it afterwards.
Spain's anti-fraud law bans software that allows parallel books or lets records be altered without a trace. What it requires in practice is that the program prevents deleting or modifying what is already recorded, and that this can be proven.
Here that is not a module you switch on: it lives in the system's engine. Every relevant operation generates its sealed record, and the seal is what lets anyone verify from outside that the chain is intact. Altering a record breaks that verification and it shows.
The day-to-day consequence is simple: issued documents are not edited, they are corrected. And in exchange, any question about what happened and who did it has an answer with a date and a user, both for an inspection and for an internal disagreement.
What it bans
The law does not regulate your company: it regulates your software
This is the most common misunderstanding. Spain's anti-fraud law bans the use (and also the making and selling) of programs that allow parallel books or let records be altered without a trace. What it requires, in practical terms, is that the program prevents deleting or modifying what is already recorded.
That means compliance is not achieved with an internal policy or good practice: it is achieved, or not, depending on what the software allows. Which is why the relevant question when choosing a management system is not whether your company complies, but whether the program lets you fail to.
Here it is not a module you switch on: it lives in the system's engine and applies equally to every area that records relevant operations.
Integrity sealing
Being able to verify from outside that nothing has been touched
Keeping a history is not enough: a history that can be edited proves nothing. What gives the record its value is integrity sealing, which allows verifying that its content is the same as when it was created.
Every relevant operation generates its sealed record with its date and its user. If somebody altered one, the check would fail and it would show, which is exactly the effect the law is after.
The same principle sits behind Verifactu and TicketBAI in invoicing: chained records where altering one breaks the chain from that point onwards.
Day to day
What changes for whoever does the work: one thing
Issued documents are not edited, they are corrected. That is the only real change of habit, and it is not new: invoicing rules already required it. What changes is that the program no longer allows any other route.
In exchange comes a benefit that is appreciated more than expected and has nothing to do with the tax authority: any question about what happened and who did it has an answer with a date and a user.
- Who changed a line's price before invoicing.
- When that delivery note was voided and why.
- Which user modified a customer's terms.
Those internal arguments, which normally end in "it wasn't me", get settled by looking. Compliance was the obligation; this is what you end up using every week.
Clearing things up
Frequently asked questions
Answers to what we get asked most.
Who exactly does the anti-fraud law regulate?
The software, not your company. It bans using, making or selling programs that allow parallel books or let records be altered without a trace. So the question when choosing a system is not whether your company complies, but whether the program lets you fail to.
What is integrity sealing?
What allows anyone to verify from outside that a record has not been touched since it was created. Keeping a history is not enough: an editable history proves nothing. If somebody altered a sealed record, the check would fail and it would show.
What changes in daily work?
One thing only: issued documents are not edited, they are corrected. That is not new, invoicing rules already required it; what changes is that the program no longer allows any other route.
Is it useful beyond compliance?
Yes, and it usually ends up being what gets used most: any question about what happened and who did it has an answer with a date and a user. Who changed a line's price, when a delivery note was voided, or who modified a customer's terms.
Compliance and documents
An anonymous whistleblowing channel, a harassment protocol, coordination with your contractors, a document manager with expiry alerts, document signing and a visitor log.
Whistleblowing Portal
An internal reporting channel with its own address, where anyone can report without giving their name and then follow the case with a reference and a PIN.
View moduleWorkplace Harassment Protocol
A structured, numbered case file for harassment reports, with the reporter's signature, submitted files stored separately and access restricted to administration.
View moduleCAE · Activity Coordination
Each contractor uploads their documentation to their own space (the company's, that of every worker who will access the site, machinery and vehicles) and the system tracks expiry dates and validations.
View moduleDocument Manager
Company documentation classified by type and attached to what it belongs to (an employee, a customer, a vehicle, a site) with its expiry date, alerts and permissions.
View moduleDocument Signing
Documents are sent and signed digitally from the employee portal, with a record of who signed, which document and when.
View moduleVisitor Log
A digital record of who enters your premises, who they are visiting, why, and their entry and exit times.
View module