The Bribery Act 2010 and corporate hospitality, gifts and travel

Flying a client to see a factory, putting a delegation up in a hotel, taking a buyer to a match: all of it is travel and hospitality, and all of it is booked through the same channels as ordinary business trips. The Bribery Act 2010 does not ban any of it. What it does is make the purpose of the spending the question, and the Ministry of Justice’s statutory guidance spends several paragraphs on how travel, accommodation and entertainment are judged. This page quotes the Act and those paragraphs, sets six travel scenarios against them, and lists what an organisation can record to show its procedures are adequate.

The offences in one table

The general offence in s.1 is committed where a person offers or gives an advantage and intends it to induce or reward improper performance: “P offers, promises or gives a financial or other advantage to another person, and b P intends the advantage— i to induce a person to perform improperly a relevant function or activity, or ii to reward a person for the improper performance of such a function or activity.” The foreign public official offence in s.6 is narrower in one way and wider in another. It needs an intention to obtain or retain business, and its text does not mention improper performance: “A person (“P”) who bribes a foreign public official (“F”) is guilty of an offence if P's intention is to influence F in F's capacity as a foreign public official.” It does not apply where the official is permitted or required by the written law applicable to them to be influenced by the offer.

Hospitality is not banned

The Ministry of Justice published its guidance under s.9 of the Act, and its quick start guide puts the position in six words: “Hospitality is not prohibited by the Act”. The full guidance explains why:

The same paragraph closes with the qualification: “It is, however, clear that hospitality and promotional or other similar business expenditure can be employed as bribes.” Paragraphs 27 to 30 then deal with how a court would tell the two apart, and they are written largely in terms of travel and accommodation.

How the guidance judges travel and accommodation

Paragraph 27: sometimes it is not an advantage at all

For a foreign public official, paying for travel can simply relieve their government of a cost: “it may be in some circumstances that hospitality or promotional expenditure in the form of travel and accommodation costs does not even amount to ‘a financial or other advantage’ to the relevant official because it is a cost that would otherwise be borne by the relevant foreign Government rather than the official him or herself.” Where that is the case, there is no “financial or other advantage” to the official, and so no s.6 offence.

Paragraph 28: the more lavish, the stronger the inference

The guidance names the factors alongside the level of spending: the type and level of advantage, the manner and form in which it is given, and the influence the official has over awarding the business. Class of travel, the standard of hotel, the number of nights and whether partners are included are the variables a travel booking actually controls.

Paragraph 29: sector norms help, but only so far

“simply providing hospitality or promotional, or other similar business expenditure which is commensurate with such norms is not, of itself, evidence that no bribe was paid if there is other evidence to the contrary; particularly if the norms in question are extravagant.” An industry where first-class travel for clients is customary does not make it safe; it makes it common.

Paragraph 30: routine courtesies

Without other evidence, “it is unlikely, for example, that incidental provision of a routine business courtesy will raise the inference that it was intended to have a direct impact on decision making, particularly where such hospitality is commensurate with the reasonable and proportionate norms for the particular industry; e.g. the provision of airport to hotel transfer services to facilitate an on-site visit, or dining and tickets to an event.”

Paragraphs 31 and 32: the worked examples

The guidance gives two travel examples. In the first, a UK mining company pays reasonable travel and accommodation for foreign officials to visit its operations so they can see the standard and safety of its installations; the guidance places this outside the intended scope of the offence. In the second, a UK company flies officials to New York to meet senior executives, with reasonable hospitality for them and their partners such as fine dining and a baseball match. On its own that is unlikely to raise the inference — but it might if New York was doubtful as the most convenient venue, because the executives could easily have met the official in the official’s own country the week before. Paragraph 32 adds that it is for organisations, or business representative bodies, to set and publish appropriate standards for hospitality.

Six travel scenarios against the guidance

None of these is a ruling. The guidance describes how a prosecutor would look for the connection between the advantage and the intention; the facts of each case decide it.

Section 7: the corporate offence

The offence that changes how companies organise hospitality is in s.7: “A relevant commercial organisation (“C”) is guilty of an offence under this section if a person (“A”) associated with C bribes another person intending— a to obtain or retain business for C, or b to obtain or retain an advantage in the conduct of business for C.” The organisation has one defence:

Who counts as “associated” is in s.8: someone who performs services for or on behalf of the organisation. “Accordingly A may (for example) be C's employee, agent or subsidiary.” The quick start guide narrows it from the other side: “It is very unlikely therefore that you will be liable for the actions of someone who simply supplies goods to you”. A sales agent who arranges a client trip is performing services; the hotel that sells the room is supplying them.

What adequate procedures cover

The guidance sets out six principles — proportionate procedures, top-level commitment, risk assessment, due diligence, communication and training, and monitoring and review. Among the topics it expects a policy to address is “The provision of gifts, hospitality and promotional expenditure; charitable and political donations; or demands for facilitation payments.” The quick start guide adds a limit: “There is a full defence if you can show you had adequate procedures in place to prevent bribery.” but no procedures are needed where there is no risk of bribery on the organisation’s behalf.

Case study 4: a hospitality programme

Appendix A of the guidance includes a case study built around hospitality travel: “A firm of engineers (‘F’) maintains a programme of annual events providing entertainment, quality dining and attendance at various sporting occasions, as an expression of appreciation of its long association with its business partners. Private bodies and individuals are happy to meet their own travel and accommodation costs associated with attending these events. The costs of the travel and accommodation of any foreign public officials attending are, however, met by F.” The measures the guidance suggests for F include a bribery risk assessment of the hospitality programme, a published policy statement committing to transparent, proportionate, reasonable and bona fide hospitality, and internal guidance that covers the criteria for appropriate levels of hospitality, clearing hospitality for public officials with the relevant public body “so that it is clear who and what the hospitality is for”, and senior approval for expenditure over set limits. It closes with regular monitoring, review and training.

What a travel and hospitality record can show

The guidance does not prescribe a register or a spending limit. The list below is our suggestion of what records an organisation could keep so that the questions in paragraphs 27 to 31 can be answered after the event:

• Who and why: the guest, their employer, whether they are a public official, and the business reason for the trip.
• Venue choice: why this city and this date — the New York example turns on it.
• Class and standard: cabin class, hotel standard and number of nights, against the organisation’s own travel policy for its staff.
• Extras: partners, side trips and entertainment, recorded separately from the business programme.
• Who paid: where an official’s government or employer would otherwise have paid (para 27).
• Approval: who signed it off, before booking.

Booking guest travel through the same programme as staff travel gives most of these fields automatically: the booking record shows the traveller, the dates, the fare class and the hotel. A corporate card receipt shows only the amount.

The tax side is separate

Whether hospitality is lawful under the Bribery Act and whether it is deductible for tax are different questions. Business entertainment of clients is generally not deductible for corporation tax and the VAT on it is generally blocked; the detail is on staff parties and client entertainment and gifts to clients. In regulated sectors there is a further code on top — for medicines, the hospitality rules covered on life sciences travel management.

This page quotes the Act and the Ministry of Justice guidance as read on 2026-10-02; it is not legal advice.

Common questions