• Skip to main content
  • Skip to after header navigation
  • Skip to site footer

Guide to Combating Corruption & Fraud in Infrastructure Development Projects

  • Detection
    • Complaints
      • General initial interview questions
      • How to Generate Complaints and Reports
      • List of fraud reporting sites for Multilateral Development Banks
    • Red Flags
      • Red Flags Listed by Project Cycle
      • “Visible red flags” of Implementation Fraud
      • Proactive Fraud Detection Tests
    • Due Diligence
      • “Top Five” Due Diligence Background Checks
      • Free and Subscription Internet Sites
      • Local and On-Site Due Diligence Checks
      • Due Diligence Service Providers
  • Proof
    • Proving Common Schemes
      • Corruption Schemes
      • Bid Rigging Schemes
      • Collusive Bidding Schemes
      • Fraud Schemes
      • The Basic Steps of a Complex Fraud and Corruption Investigation
    • Elements of Proof for Sanctionable Offenses
      • Elements of Proof of Corrupt Practices
      • Elements of Proof of Obstructive Practices
      • Elements of Proof of Coercive Practices
      • Elements of Proof of Collusive Practices
      • Elements of Proof of Fraudulent Practices
  • Evidence
    • The Basics of Evidence for Investigators
  • Prevention
    • Anti-fraud Resources
Home » Proof » Case Examples » Case Example of False, Inflated and Duplicate Invoices

Case Example of False, Inflated and Duplicate Invoices

South Asia

A former employee of an international consulting firm reported that the company’s South Asian branch agreed to pay a kickback in exchange for a contract award, with the bribe to be financed by the submission on false and inflated invoices. The investigation disclosed the following.

The firm’s contract provided that it was entitled to be reimbursed for the actual costs of certain expenses, such as the purchase of computers and office equipment, up to a stated maximum. The company always invoiced for the maximum allowed and attached receipts and other supporting documents in amounts that matched or exceeded the ceiling amounts.

The purported suppliers said in interviews that most of the receipts the company submitted were forged and inflated. Other receipts were in the names of non-existent companies, suggesting that no items were actually purchased. The investigators then exercised audit rights and discovered two sets of records, one indicating the actual cost of the purchased items and the other the inflated, submitted amounts. The company’s accounting staff admitted in interviews that they prepared and submitted the inflated invoices and forged receipts to support them, claiming that they did so at the direction of the local office manager.

The local manager denied any knowledge of the false invoices, and denied that the firm paid a bribe to obtain the contract. The international donor moved to debar the firm world-wide for fraudulent practices, in the expectation that the company’s senior management would agree to disclose the bribe payments and cooperate in an effort to mitigate its sanctions.

Category: Case Examples

International Anti-Corruption
Resource Center

Washington, DC
info@iacrc.org

IACRC - International Anti-Corruption Resource Center

© 2025 · IACRC · Guide to Combating Corruption & Fraud in Infrastructure Development Projects · All Rights Reserved