ECCTA failure to prevent fraud for defence and aerospace companies
Defence and aerospace groups operate through long and complex supply chains — subcontractors, offset partners, export agents, and technology transfer intermediaries — where fraud committed for the group's benefit carries significant ECCTA exposure. DefenceFile organises the evidence that fraud-prevention procedures existed and operated at each tier of that chain, so primes and their advisers can demonstrate documented procedures at audit.
Not sure if you are in scope? Most defence, aerospace, and advanced manufacturing that meet the large-organisation size test are in scope — check the size test or the scope Q&A.
The sample board pack opens in your browser — no email, no form. 90-day pilots are £950/month; the setup fee is waived if the first working session does not produce the agreed artifacts.
Why defence, aerospace, and advanced manufacturing tend to be in scope
Major defence and aerospace primes, systems integrators, and their holding companies typically meet the large-organisation size thresholds. UK prime contracts, domestic manufacturing, and licensed export arrangements create UK-nexus conditions that broaden both the scope and the associated-person questions worth working through.
Scope is a legal assessment that turns on your group size and facts. See the UK-nexus and scope Q&A and reserve the conclusion for qualified reviewers.
Associated persons to map in defence and aerospace
An associated person is wider than payroll. These are the relationships worth organising evidence around for this sector.
- Tier-1 and tier-2 subcontractors performing work packages under prime contracts
- Offset and industrial participation partners in international programmes
- Export agents and country representatives handling overseas sales
- Technology transfer and licensed manufacturing partners
- Procurement and supply-chain management intermediaries
Fraud scenarios and the evidence to capture
Illustrative scenarios where a listed base fraud offence could be committed to benefit the organisation. They are prompts for human review, not findings.
A subcontractor submits falsified test or inspection records to pass components that do not meet contract specifications, creating liability and cost for the prime.
Evidence focus: Inspection records, quality audit trails, third-party test certifications, and non-conformance tracking.
An export agent inflates or fabricates commissions or consultant fees to disguise payments that benefit the group in winning foreign contracts.
Evidence focus: Agent due-diligence records, commission agreements, payment approval trails, and anti-bribery monitoring outputs.
An offset or industrial participation partner misreports qualifying activity to meet programme thresholds on the group's behalf.
Evidence focus: Offset agreement terms, qualifying activity evidence, verification records, and programme review sign-offs.
What the defence file should prioritise
- Supply-chain due-diligence records for subcontractors and tier-2 partners
- Export agent and intermediary due-diligence and payment trails
- Quality and inspection audit trails with named reviewer decisions
- Offset, industrial participation verification, and anti-bribery monitoring outputs
Defence and Aerospace ECCTA fraud questions
- Are offset and industrial participation partners associated persons?
- An offset partner performing services for or on behalf of the prime — for example contributing qualifying activity to meet a government requirement — may be an associated person. This is a legal assessment; the platform helps structure the evidence for qualified review.
- Does ECCTA apply to overseas defence contracts?
- The ECCTA failure-to-prevent-fraud offence has an extraterritorial reach where there is a UK nexus. Whether a particular overseas contract engagement is captured is a legal determination that depends on the specific facts.
- Can the platform confirm we are in scope?
- No. Scope depends on the size test and the facts of your group. DefenceFile structures the scope-screening inputs and reserves the conclusion for qualified reviewers.
Related sectors
- ManufacturingHow manufacturers organise ECCTA failure-to-prevent-fraud evidence across distributors, agents, and suppliers — scope, risks, and a defence file.
- Professional servicesConsultancies, accountants, and advisory firms carry ECCTA fraud exposure through associates and referral partners. Organise scope, risks, and a defence file.
- LogisticsHow haulage firms organise ECCTA failure-to-prevent-fraud evidence across carriers, brokers, and customs agents — scope, risks, and a defence file.
Keep going
- Failure to prevent fraud: the offence explainedThe statutory offence, the size test, and what a defence file is for.
- Reasonable proceduresHow the six principles map to evidence you can organise and review.
- Failure to prevent fraud: straight answersDirect, sourced answers on scope, penalties, the deadline, and the defence.
- Pricing and pilotsHow a structured pilot review of your evidence works.
DefenceFile organises evidence for legal and compliance review. It does not provide legal advice, create privilege, certify scope, certify reasonable procedures, or guarantee that a statutory defence will succeed.