Invoice Fraud

Definition

Invoice fraud is a form of financial deception in which criminals manipulate invoicing processes to divert payments, submit falsified invoices, impersonate legitimate suppliers, or alter payment instructions for illicit gain.

In regulated industries and financial institutions, invoice fraud represents a significant financial crime threat, often overlapping with money laundering, trade-based manipulation, procurement corruption, and business email compromise schemes.

In AML/CFT contexts, invoice fraud is considered a high-risk vector because fraudulent invoices are frequently used to justify suspicious fund movements, disguise illegal proceeds as legitimate business expenses, or shift value across borders without raising immediate operational concern.

Criminals exploit weaknesses in procurement processes, supplier verification, accounts payable workflows, and digital communication channels to introduce fraudulent invoices or modify payment details.

Explanation

Invoice fraud affects organisations of all sizes, particularly those with high transaction volumes, decentralised procurement structures, or international supplier networks.

Criminals target gaps in internal controls by impersonating suppliers, creating fabricated companies, tampering with vendor master data, or intercepting legitimate communications between vendors and customers.

The sophistication of invoice fraud schemes varies. Some involve simple email spoofing, while others leverage advanced social engineering, insider collaboration, falsified business records, or shell companies.

In cross-border transactions, criminals may exploit the complexity of supply chains, language barriers, and documentation-heavy trade processes to embed fraudulent invoices into legitimate commercial flows.

In AML/CFT frameworks, invoice fraud is closely linked to trade-based money laundering (TBML), corruption, sanctions evasion, and terrorism financing.

Fraudulent invoices can be used to overstate or understate the value of goods, justify fictitious shipments, disguise payment origins, or move money through jurisdictions with weak oversight.

Financial institutions must assess invoice fraud risk not only from a fraud-prevention standpoint but also as part of holistic AML/CFT exposure due to the potential misuse of invoices as laundering tools.

Invoice Fraud in AML/CFT Frameworks

Invoice fraud intersects with AML/CFT obligations in multiple areas and requires detection, reporting, and mitigation processes aligned with regulatory expectations.

Customer Due Diligence (CDD)

CDD processes help institutions understand the nature of their customers’ business models and invoice-related activities.

Red flags may emerge when:

• Customers generate unusually high or inconsistent invoicing patterns.
  
• Suppliers exhibit opaque ownership structures.
  
• Invoice values differ significantly from industry norms.
  
• Customers operate in high-risk jurisdictions with weak oversight.
  

Enhanced Due Diligence (EDD)

Invoice fraud scenarios often require deeper scrutiny, including:

• Verification of suppliers and beneficial owners.
  
• Validation of goods, services, and business relationships.
  
• Review of contract terms for authenticity and economic substance.
  
• Assessment of intermediaries, brokers, or agents involved in the transaction chain.
  

Trade-Based Money Laundering (TBML) Controls

Fraudulent invoices may be central to TBML typologies, including:

• Over-invoicing to disguise the movement of illicit funds.
  
• Under-invoicing to shift value illicitly across borders.
  
• Phantom shipments where no goods are exchanged.
  
• Multiple invoicing against the same shipment.
  
• Use of unverifiable or fictitious suppliers.
  

Transaction Monitoring

Invoice-related transactions may trigger suspicions when:

• Payments do not align with business profiles.
  
• Payment instructions change unexpectedly.
  
• Multiple payments are made to new or offshore suppliers.
  
• Descriptions of goods or services are vague or inconsistent.
  

Sanctions and Watchlist Screening

Fraudulent invoice schemes may involve:

• Suppliers located in or linked to sanctioned jurisdictions.
  
• Shell companies used to conceal sanctioned beneficiaries.
  
• Procurement schemes designed to acquire dual-use materials.
  

Monitoring supplier lists and payment chains against sanctions lists is essential.

Key Components of Invoice Fraud Schemes

Invoice fraud typically involves several recurring components that help criminals infiltrate procurement and payment workflows.

Supplier Impersonation

Criminals impersonate legitimate vendors by:

• Creating email addresses similar to official supplier domains.
  
• Sending fake invoices requesting updated payment details.
  
• Fabricating letterheads, contact details, or seals.
  
• Intercepting or altering communication between the vendor and customer.
  

Fictitious or Shell Suppliers

Criminals may set up fraudulent entities that appear legitimate on the surface but lack real operations. These entities can:

• Issue false invoices for nonexistent goods or services.
  
• Serve as laundering layers for illicit funds.
  
• Allow criminals to extract funds through rapid transfers or cash withdrawals.
  

Invoice Tampering

Fraudsters intercept legitimate invoices and alter:

• Bank account numbers.
  
• SWIFT details.
  
• Amounts or payment instructions.
  
• Delivery or contract details.
  

Collusion and Insider Abuse

In some cases, employees collaborate with external perpetrators. Common methods include:

• Manipulating vendor master data.
  
• Creating duplicate or fictitious invoices.
  
• Approving fraudulent payments internally.
  
• Destroying or altering internal records.
  

Digital and Cyber-Enabled Manipulation

Cybercriminals exploit digital infrastructure by using:

• Business email compromise (BEC).
  
• Malware or keyloggers to access accounts payable systems.
  
• Spoofed websites or portals.
  
• Fake procurement platforms.
  

Examples of Invoice Fraud Scenarios

Business Email Compromise Leading to Payment Diversion

A fraudster impersonates a long-standing supplier, sends an email requesting updated bank details, and diverts a routine payment to their own account.

Fictitious Vendor Scheme

A corrupt employee creates a fake vendor in the internal procurement system and submits regular invoices for nonexistent services.

Over-Invoicing Linked to TBML

An importer submits an invoice significantly above market value to move illicit funds abroad under the guise of legitimate payments.

Phantom Shipment Scheme

A company pays for goods that are never shipped; the transaction is used to launder money under the cover of trade documentation.

Invoice Redirection After Cyber Breach

Criminals hack into a supplier’s email account and send modified invoices to customers, altering payment instructions without the supplier’s knowledge.

Multiple Invoicing Scheme

The same shipment or service is invoiced multiple times to extract funds from various institutions.

Impact on Financial Institutions

Significant Financial Loss

Institutions may face direct losses through unauthorised payments or by reimbursing affected clients.

Regulatory Exposure

Failure to identify suspicious invoice patterns may lead to:

• Supervisory findings,
  
• Audit penalties,
  
• Remediation directives.
  

Reputational Risk

Being associated with invoice fraud scandals weakens trust with clients, partners, and regulators.

Operational Burden

Invoice fraud investigations may require coordination across:

• Fraud teams,
  
• AML units,
  
• Trade finance desks,
  
• Cyber teams,
  
• Relationship managers.
  

Increased Suspicious Activity Reporting (SAR)

Invoice fraud often leads to suspicious reporting due to:

• Unusual payment chains,
  
• Discrepancies in documentation,
  
• Shell-company involvement.
  

Impact on Correspondent Banking

Invoice fraud linked to cross-border payments raises concerns for correspondent banks, potentially endangering relationships.

Challenges in Managing Invoice Fraud Risk

Document Authenticity Verification

Invoices may appear legitimate even when falsified, especially with high-quality forgery tools.

Complex Supply Chains

Multiple intermediaries, freight agents, and suppliers complicate verification processes.

Globalisation of Procurement

Cross-border purchasing heightens exposure to:

• Weak regulatory jurisdictions,
  
• Sanctions risks,
  
• Shell companies.
  

Digital Vulnerabilities

Increased reliance on email, cloud-based procurement, and digital documentation makes organisations vulnerable to cyber-enabled fraud.

Internal Control Gaps

Weak segregation of duties, inadequate vendor onboarding, and lack of payment verification contribute to exposure.

Evolving Fraud Techniques

Criminals frequently adjust their methods, leveraging emerging technologies and exploiting organisational weaknesses.

Regulatory Oversight & Governance

Financial Action Task Force (FATF)

FATF highlights trade manipulation and invoice-based schemes within its guidance on TBML and financial crime risk assessments.

National Financial Regulators

Regulators expect institutions to conduct:

• Robust supplier verification,
  
• Transaction monitoring,
  
• Documentation checks,
  
• Sanctions screening.
  

Financial Intelligence Units (FIUs)

FIUs analyse suspicious reports involving invoice schemes, especially those linked to cross-border fund flows.

Law Enforcement Agencies

Dedicated financial crime units investigate large-scale invoice fraud, cyber involvement, trade manipulation, and laundering networks.

Internal Governance

Institutions must maintain:

• Strong vendor onboarding controls,
  
• Periodic auditing of accounts payable processes,
  
• Monitoring of internal access rights.
  

Importance of Detecting Invoice Fraud in AML/CFT Compliance

Invoice fraud is not only a fraud risk but also a significant AML/CFT concern. Criminals use fraudulent invoices to disguise illicit proceeds, facilitate trade manipulation, or move funds internationally under the guise of legitimate commerce.

Detecting invoice fraud supports institutions in:

• Preventing financial losses,
  
• Identifying laundering channels,
  
• Strengthening trade finance controls,
  
• Maintaining regulatory compliance,
  
• Protecting clients and supply-chain partners,
  
• Mitigating operational and reputational damage.
  

Integrating invoice fraud detection with intelligence-first AML architectures, such as those championed by IDYC360, reinforces early-warning capabilities, improves cross-functional visibility, and enhances overall financial crime resilience.

Related Terms

• Trade-Based Money Laundering
  
• Business Email Compromise
  
• Procurement Fraud
  
• Vendor Management
  
• Beneficial Ownership
  
• Sanctions Screening
  
• Transaction Monitoring

References

(All URLs below are validated as working at the time of delivery.)

• FATF – Publications and Guidance
  
• Europol – Fraud Crime Area
  
• UK Action Fraud – Invoice Fraud Guidance
  
• National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) – Business Email Compromise
  

Ready to Stay
Compliant—Without Slowing Down?

Move at crypto speed without losing sight of your regulatory obligations.

With IDYC360, you can scale securely, onboard instantly, and monitor risk in real time—without the friction.

Get a Demo