The Bribery Act 2010 creates four offences: bribing, being bribed, bribing a foreign public official and, for companies, LLPs and partnerships, failing to prevent bribery by people who act for them. The corporate offence is the one most practices overlook, and the only defence is to show that the firm had adequate procedures in place to prevent bribery.

What are the main offences under the Bribery Act?

The Act came fully into force on 1 July 2011. It has four core offences:

  • Section 1, bribing another person. Offering, promising or giving a financial or other advantage intending to induce or reward improper performance of a relevant function, or knowing that accepting it would itself be improper. It does not matter whether the advantage is given directly or through a third party.
  • Section 2, being bribed. Requesting, agreeing to receive or accepting an advantage in connection with improper performance. In most of the cases in section 2 it does not matter whether the recipient knows or believes the performance is improper.
  • Section 6, bribing a foreign public official with the intention of influencing the official and obtaining or retaining business or a business advantage.
  • Section 7, failure of a commercial organisation to prevent bribery by a person associated with it.

“Improper” is defined in sections 3 to 5. A function is relevant if it is connected with a business, employment or a public function and the person performing it is expected to act in good faith, impartially or is in a position of trust. Performance is improper if it breaches that expectation, judged by what a reasonable person in the United Kingdom would expect. Local custom abroad is disregarded unless written local law permits or requires it.

Does the failure to prevent offence apply to my practice?

Section 7 applies to a “relevant commercial organisation”. That covers a body incorporated in the UK which carries on a business, any other body corporate carrying on business in the UK, and partnerships formed in the UK or carrying on business here. The Act states expressly that a trade or profession is a business, so an accountancy company, LLP or partnership is within scope. An LLP is a body corporate under section 1 of the Limited Liability Partnerships Act 2000.

A sole practitioner trading as an individual is not a body corporate or partnership, so section 7 does not bite on them. They remain personally exposed to the section 1, 2 and 6 offences, as is every partner, director and member of staff in a larger firm.

The section 7 offence is committed wherever in the world the bribery happens (section 12(5)). Separately, under section 14, where a body corporate commits a section 1, 2 or 6 offence with the consent or connivance of a senior officer, that director, manager, secretary or similar officer is also guilty.

Who counts as an associated person?

Under section 8, a person is associated with the firm if they perform services for or on its behalf. The capacity does not matter: employees, agents and subsidiaries are given as examples, and employees are presumed to be associated unless the contrary is shown. The question is decided on all the circumstances, not just the label on the contract.

For a practice this can include:

  • partners, directors, employees and subcontracted bookkeepers or payroll staff;
  • introducers and agents who bring in work on the firm’s behalf;
  • consultants who represent the firm to clients or public bodies.

The firm is liable only where the associated person bribes intending to obtain or retain business, or an advantage in the conduct of business, for the firm. A bribe paid purely for the individual’s own benefit is a section 1 matter for that individual, though the facts may still show weaknesses in the firm’s controls.

What are adequate procedures?

Section 7(2) gives a full defence if the firm proves it had adequate procedures designed to prevent associated persons from bribing. The Ministry of Justice guidance issued under section 9 says the standard of proof for the defence is the balance of probabilities. It sets out six principles:

  1. Proportionate procedures, matched to the bribery risks the firm faces and the nature, scale and complexity of its activities.
  2. Top level commitment from the partners or board to a culture in which bribery is never acceptable.
  3. Risk assessment, periodic, informed and documented.
  4. Due diligence on people who perform services for or on behalf of the firm.
  5. Communication, including training, so that policies are understood throughout the firm.
  6. Monitoring and review, with improvements made where necessary.

The guidance accepts that small organisations are unlikely to need procedures as extensive as a large multinational, but says size is not the only factor and some small organisations face significant risks.

Where are the bribery risks in an accountancy firm?

Most practices are low risk, but the risk points are predictable:

  • Winning work. Hospitality or favours for a finance director, trustee or public sector officer who decides who gets an engagement.
  • Referral arrangements. Payments to or from introducers, IFAs and lenders. These need to be transparent and disclosed under the professional rules; see fees, commissions and referrals.
  • Gifts to staff. A supplier or client rewarding a staff member for steering work or overlooking something.
  • Overseas work. Clients or offices in jurisdictions where small payments to officials are expected.

The guidance says bona fide hospitality which seeks to improve a firm’s image or establish cordial relations is an established part of doing business and the Act is not intended to criminalise reasonable and proportionate hospitality. It also says hospitality can be used as a bribe. The ethical rules on inducements are stricter in places; see gifts and hospitality from clients. Facilitation payments, small payments to speed up routine government action, are not exempt and can trigger the section 6 or section 1 offence.

What does a proportionate approach look like for a small practice?

Illustration only. A 15 person LLP prepares accounts and tax returns for owner managed businesses and a few charities. It has no overseas offices. A sensible approach would be:

  • a short anti bribery policy approved by the members, stating zero tolerance and naming a responsible partner;
  • a documented risk assessment, reviewed annually alongside the firm wide AML risk assessment;
  • a gifts and hospitality register with a value threshold for pre approval;
  • written terms for introducers and subcontractors that prohibit bribery, plus basic due diligence on who they are;
  • induction and refresher training, with a clear route for raising concerns under the firm’s whistleblowing arrangements.

The test is whether the procedures were adequate when the bribe happened, so the firm needs evidence that they were operating: register entries, training records and review notes.

What are the penalties?

Under section 11, an individual convicted on indictment of a section 1, 2 or 6 offence faces up to 10 years’ imprisonment, a fine, or both. An organisation convicted of a section 7 offence is liable on conviction on indictment to a fine, and the Act sets no upper limit. A conviction would also have obvious regulatory consequences for a member firm.

Bribe money and contracts won through bribery are the benefit of criminal conduct, so they are criminal property for money laundering purposes under section 340 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. That brings in the reporting duties covered in Proceeds of Crime Act offences, including where you see bribery in a client’s business.

What mistakes do firms make?

  • Assuming a policy is enough. A policy nobody has read or applied will not show adequate procedures.
  • Ignoring introducers. People who win work for the firm are often the highest risk associated persons.
  • Treating hospitality as harmless by default. The question is intent, but hospitality given while a tender is open is hard to defend.
  • Running separate, inconsistent registers for ethics and bribery purposes instead of one record.
  • Forgetting related offences. The same procedures can be extended to cover the failure to prevent facilitation of tax evasion and the failure to prevent fraud offence.

Solar Protect runs fee protection schemes for accountancy and bookkeeping practices. See how our accountant schemes work or read fee protection schemes for accountants.

Related Accountapedia entries

Sources

Reviewed by Christine Anderson, Broker, Solar Protect. Last reviewed 8 October 2026. Part of Accountapedia, the Solar Protect guide to UK tax and accounting. This page is general information, not personalised advice.