With just one week to go before the toughest civil-penalty regime in a decade takes effect, legal commentators are warning UK businesses that they can be fined up to £60,000 per illegal worker even when those individuals are hired through labour-supply chains rather than as direct employees. Section 48 of the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Act 2025 expands the right-to-work provisions of the Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006. From 1 October 2026, a company that procures services—cleaning, logistics, construction, gig-economy deliveries, IT contracting—can be held jointly liable if anyone in that chain lacks permission to work, unless its commercial contracts contain robust compliance clauses and the buyer conducts due-diligence audits. Draft Home Office guidance released this month confirms that a statutory excuse will exist only where the “end user” has taken “reasonable steps” to verify its suppliers’ right-to-work procedures. Those steps are expected to include contractual warranties, audit rights, and evidence of suppliers’ use of the Employer Checking Service or digital status share codes. Global-mobility managers face immediate tasks: (1) map every indirect workforce stream (e.g., subcontracted security guards in headquarters, on-demand interpreters, offshore IT developers seconded to the UK), (2) insert back-to-back immigration warranties in master-service agreements, and (3) build incident-response plans in case a supplier is raided by Immigration Enforcement. Multinationals that already apply Modern Slavery Act due-diligence templates can bolt immigration checks onto existing audit cycles. Failure to act carries reputational as well as financial risk. Between July 2025 and June 2026, 4,403 sponsor licences were revoked and £130 million in civil penalties levied, according to fresh Home Office enforcement data published on 23 September. The forthcoming regime is expected to triple that figure within 12 months. International HR directors are therefore urging boards to treat immigration compliance as a supply-chain ESG issue rather than a mere HR formality.
Source: Mondaq
