Offering Advantages in Relation to Funding Application
Tony, an operations manager of a technology consultancy firm, actively promoted his firm’s services to SMEs, offering to manage the entire application process for government technology funding schemes which support SMEs in adopting digital solutions. He assured his clients that the application would be “hassle‑free” and that his company would arrange the required documentation including vendor quotations for digital solutions.
Tony, an operations manager of a technology consultancy firm, actively promoted his firm’s services to SMEs, offering to manage the entire application process for government technology funding schemes which support SMEs in adopting digital solutions. He assured his clients that the application would be “hassle‑free” and that his company would arrange the required documentation including vendor quotations for digital solutions.
Behind the scenes, Tony colluded with several vendors to submit inflated quotations for digital solutions, such as cloud systems, cybersecurity upgrades and e‑commerce platforms. Although the funding application guidelines required SMEs to contribute a specified proportion of project costs, Tony secretly arranged for the SMEs’ contribution to be temporarily financed or rebated after approval, thereby creating the false impression of genuine cost‑sharing by the applicants.
To facilitate approval, Tony offered a bribe to a government official responsible for processing applications under the scheme and requested that the vetting process be expedited. The government official refused the offer and immediately reported the matter to ICAC.
Case Analysis
Tony may have committed fraud by submitting false quotations to inflate the costs of digital solutions and falsely representing that the applicants had borne the required portion of project costs under the scheme. Even if the applications were submitted by Tony on behalf of his clients, the SME clients may also incur criminal liability if they knowingly allowed the use of false quotations and supporting documents with the intent of securing approval of the subsidies.
On the other hand, Tony’s attempt to bribe a government official responsible for processing the applications may constitute an offence under Section 4 of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance. Section 4 prohibits any person from offering an advantage to a public servant as an inducement to or reward for that public servant’s performing or abstaining from performing any act in his or her official capacity.
To prevent, detect and deter similar malpractices, grantors and applicants of funding schemes are advised to adopt adequate corruption prevention measures in their operations.
