The Government’s move would bring Britain closer to the US model, where financial incentives are used to encourage whistleblowers who provide evidence that helps uncover wrongdoing. The plans are being developed by the Serious Fraud Office as part of the whistleblowing framework in the Employment Rights Act 1996, which applies in Scotland, England and Wales.

However, the SFO has jurisdiction only in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, not Scotland. Under the proposed incentive scheme, though, individuals could be eligible for a financial reward regardless of where they are located or where the information originated, provided they meet the scheme’s eligibility criteria.

The UK has debated for a long time whether whistleblowers should be paid for information. Last year, the tax authority HM Revenue & Customs offered informants up to 30% of the tax recovered in major tax cases for speaking out, as part of the country’s first US-style reward scheme.

Under the proposals set out in its public consultation, whistleblowers would receive a reward only if the information they provide is significant and original, and leads to a conviction or enforcement action. The Government has proposed that rewards be funded from the penalties imposed on companies and calculated as a percentage of the amount recovered. The consultation will close on January 8, 2027.

It comes after a July 2026 review of fraud prosecutions, led by Jonathan Fisher KC, which warned that Britain was losing valuable intelligence because whistleblowers were choosing to report wrongdoing to US authorities, where they could be financially rewarded.

A spokesperson for the SFO said: “We welcome this consultation, having long called for the introduction of a scheme to incentivise whistleblowers. We encourage all those with a view to contribute to the consultation and we look forward to working with our government partners on next steps.”

Robert Holland, partner and head of employment law at Aberdein Considine LLP, said: “Given that the Serious Fraud Office doesn’t have jurisdiction in Scotland, any proposals to financially reward whistleblowers will not apply north of the border. However, financial award is fraught with difficulty around someone’s motivation to disclose information. 

“That said, we do see a real need to support whistleblowers in terms of who they can make a disclosure to, with the current regime usually limiting it to the employer, their lawyer, or in some cases the industry regulator.

“This often puts whistleblowers off coming forward, as they worry it might precipitate the end of their career in that sector – something we have encountered on several occasions when supporting clients in the banking sector. We therefore welcome the fact that the consultation asks whether whistleblowers should have access to a wider range of additional disclosure routes, such as trade union officials, who can receive the information as a protected disclosure.”

Jo Mackie, employment partner at law firm Michelmores, said: “The introduction of financial incentives (payments) is not a sensible option. It will lead to a moral hazard and will undermine internal corporate governance. It is never helpful to have to question the motives of someone reporting an alleged crime, which will always be a risk, and so paying people to do so is fundamentally flawed.”