A facilitation payment is a small, unofficial payment made to a foreign official to speed up a routine action they already owe you, such as clearing customs or processing a visa. The US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act carves out a narrow exception for these payments. The UK Bribery Act 2010 has no such exception. It treats every facilitation payment as bribery.
Key takeaways
- A facilitation payment (or grease payment) only speeds up an official action you were already owed.
- The US FCPA’s exception, 15 U.S.C. § 78dd-1(b), covers only narrow, non-discretionary “routine governmental action.”
- The UK Bribery Act 2010 has no exception at all; the Serious Fraud Office treats every facilitation payment as bribery.
- Payment size never decides legality. Purpose does.
- Most multinational compliance programmes ban them outright, regardless of which country’s law permits an exception.
- The risk sits inside the wider anti-bribery and corruption cluster screened for in third-party due diligence.
On this page
What counts as a facilitation paymentFacilitation payment vs bribeThe US position: a narrow FCPA exceptionThe UK position: no exception at allWhy global compliance programmes ban them anywayWhere facilitation payment risk shows up in due diligenceFAQsRead more
What counts as a facilitation payment
A facilitation payment, sometimes called a grease payment, is money handed to a low or mid-level official to get them to do something they are already obligated to do. It doesn’t change the outcome. It just changes the timing.
Common examples: paying a customs officer to clear a shipment on schedule instead of letting it sit for weeks, or paying a clerk to process a visa application without delay. The official was always going to approve the shipment or the visa. The payment just moves the queue.
Facilitation payment vs bribe
The line between the two comes down to purpose, not size. A facilitation payment only speeds up something you were already entitled to receive. A bribe changes the outcome of a decision the official had discretion over, such as winning a contract, passing an inspection that should have failed, or avoiding a fine that was actually owed.
US enforcement guidance is explicit on this point: a large payment naturally looks more suspicious, but even a small payment made to influence a discretionary decision is a bribe. Size is not the test.
The US position: a narrow FCPA exception
The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act excepts payments made to expedite a “routine governmental action,” defined under 15 U.S.C. § 78dd-1(b) as a function a foreign official ordinarily and commonly performs. The statute lists examples: processing permits, visas and work orders, providing police protection or mail delivery, and scheduling inspections tied to contract performance.
Courts have read this narrowly. In United States v. Kay, the Fifth Circuit described routine governmental action as covering only “very narrow categories of largely non-discretionary, ministerial activities” performed by junior officials. Awarding new business, renewing a contract, or influencing any outcome falls outside the exception entirely, no matter how the payment is labelled in a company’s books.
The UK position: no exception at all
The UK Bribery Act 2010 incorporated OECD guidance and dropped the facilitation payment exception altogether. The Serious Fraud Office treats every facilitation payment as a form of bribery, regardless of size or frequency. Whether the SFO actually prosecutes depends on the Full Code Test and the joint prosecution guidance it shares with the Director of Public Prosecutions, which weighs the seriousness of the harm and the public interest.
The UK Ministry of Justice’s own guidance to the Act puts it plainly: there was no exemption for these payments before the Bribery Act, and there is none under it.
Why global compliance programmes ban them anyway
Most multinational firms now apply a zero-tolerance policy regardless of which country’s law technically permits an exception. Three reasons come up repeatedly in compliance guidance: the FCPA exception is interpreted narrowly enough that it offers little practical defence, a company operating across jurisdictions is bound by whichever regime is strictest, and a facilitation payment that gets mislabelled in the books becomes an accounting and internal-controls problem on top of a bribery one.
Transparency International goes further and avoids the term “facilitation payment” in its own guidance, preferring “small bribes” because it says that phrase better reflects what the payment actually is.
Where facilitation payment risk shows up in due diligence
Facilitation payment risk sits inside the broader anti-bribery and corruption cluster that due diligence teams screen for. It comes up most often in third-party risk assessments for agents and distributors operating in jurisdictions with weak governance, where “facilitation fee” or “expediting fee” line items in an intermediary’s invoices are a recognised red flag. It also overlaps with politically exposed person screening, since demands for these payments are frequently made by officials connected to broader grand corruption or petty corruption networks, not isolated individuals.
Screen third parties for corruption risk
Run sanctions, PEP and adverse media checks in one search before a relationship is onboarded.
Frequently asked questions
Are facilitation payments legal in the United States?
In narrow circumstances, yes. The FCPA excepts payments made only to expedite a “routine governmental action” the official already owes you, such as processing a visa, under 15 U.S.C. § 78dd-1(b). The exception never covers payments that influence a discretionary decision, and the Department of Justice interprets it narrowly.
Are facilitation payments illegal in the UK?
Yes, always. The UK Bribery Act 2010 has no facilitation payment exception. The Serious Fraud Office treats every facilitation payment as bribery, though it weighs public interest factors before deciding whether to prosecute.
What’s the difference between a facilitation payment and a bribe?
A facilitation payment only speeds up something an official already owes you. A bribe changes the outcome of a discretionary decision, such as winning a contract or clearing a shipment that should have failed inspection. The purpose of the payment decides which one it is, not the amount.
Does the size of the payment matter?
No. US authorities have said classification depends on purpose, not size. Even a small payment made to influence a discretionary decision is a bribe.
Should a company ever make a facilitation payment?
Most multinational compliance programmes prohibit them outright, even where local law allows an exception, because the line between a facilitation payment and a bribe is hard to defend after the fact, and the FCPA exception is read narrowly by regulators and courts.
Read more: our ultimate guides, whitepapers and templates
Related guides and resources to help you act on what you just read.
Last reviewed July 19, 2026 · 5 min read · Written for compliance and risk professionals · By the WhoWiki editorial team
Key takeaway: A facilitation payment is a small, unofficial payment made to a foreign official to speed up a routine action they already owe you, such as clearing customs or processing a visa. The US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act carves out a narrow exception for these payments. The UK Bribery Act 2010 has no such exception. It treats every facilitation payment as bribery.