Home Office Boasts of Record Enforcement Activity
The Home Office has published a press release, reporting immigration enforcement activity to be at record levels in the UK.
Between July 2024 and the end of December 2025, raids increased by 77 percent and arrests rose by 83 percent. More than 17,400 enforcement visits were carried out nationally, resulting in over 12,300 arrests. Northern Ireland alone saw 187 raids in 2025, leading to 234 arrests.
Site visits and audits are no longer informal or advisory in tone. They are used to gather evidence to support illegal working allegations or other immigration compliance breaches.
Sectors traditionally associated with higher risk, such as hospitality, construction, car washes, nail bars and takeaway businesses, remain heavily targeted. However, enforcement is not limited to these areas. The Home Office has made clear that illegal working is being pursued wherever it occurs, including through subcontracting arrangements, casual labour models and supply chains where accountability is often assumed rather than verified.
Civil Penalty Referral Notices continue to be issued where illegal working is identified. Financial penalties can be substantial, but fines are rarely the most damaging outcome. Enforcement action frequently triggers follow-on scrutiny, including sponsor licence investigations, wider workforce audits, reputational damage and, in some cases, criminal liability.
The announcement also sits alongside the government’s stated intention to move towards mandatory digital identity and digital right to work verification by the end of the current Parliament. Employers should not treat this as a future problem. Enforcement teams are already operating on the assumption that employers are capable of running robust, auditable and technology-supported checking processes now.
Common Employer Errors
Illegal working exposure rarely arises from deliberate non-compliance in established businesses. It more commonly stems from weak systems, unintended oversights and outdated assumptions.
Common risk points include inconsistent right to work processes across departments, over-reliance on recruitment agencies without verification, failure to repeat checks where time-limited permission applies and poor record keeping. In many cases, checks were carried out at the outset but cannot be evidenced when enforcement officers attend.
Another recurring issue is the belief that low numbers equate to low risk. Enforcement action is frequently triggered by intelligence, tip-offs or sector-wide operations rather than headcount. A single non-compliant worker is enough to expose your organisation to penalties and investigation.
A significant development for employers is the confirmation that right to work checks are being expanded beyond traditional employment relationships. Through the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Act, checks are being extended to cover gig workers, casual staff, agency workers and subcontracted labour. Reliance on third parties or assumptions that responsibility sits elsewhere is now a direct compliance risk.
DMS Perspective
Employers that withstand enforcement scrutiny are rarely lucky. They are prepared. The following pointers focus on control, evidence and accountability rather than box-ticking.
First, right to work checks should be treated as a regulated process, not an HR admin task. Employers should have a single, documented procedure that applies across permanent staff, temporary workers, agency labour and subcontractors. If a worker is on site, there should be a record of who checked their status, when and how it can be evidenced.
Second, records should be audit-ready at all times. Enforcement visits do not allow for explanations after the event. Employers should be able to produce on request document copies, share codes and dates of checks. If records are incomplete or scattered, risk increases sharply.
Third, time-limited permissions require active tracking. Many penalties arise because a follow-up check was not carried out. Employers should have a reliable system to flag upcoming expiry dates and trigger repeat checks well in advance.
Fourth, do not assume third parties have done the checks. Agency agreements and subcontractor clauses do not protect against liability if checks are not actually carried out or cannot be evidenced. Employers should verify processes, carry out spot checks and retain confirmation rather than relying on contractual assurances.
Fifth, prepare for an enforcement visit before it happens. Managers should know what to do if officers attend, who to contact internally and how information should be provided. Panic, inconsistency and over-disclosure during a visit often create avoidable problems that extend the scope of an investigation.
Need Assistance?
What this Home Office announcement reinforces is that the UK enforcement environment has shifted within government priorities and operations. Illegal working compliance is now treated as part of border control, organised crime prevention and labour market enforcement, leaving employers that treat right to work checks as a background obligation as being increasingly exposed. In the current climate then, being able to evidence what you did, when you did it and why it was compliant is what separates a positive inspection outcome from enforcement action.
If you have a question about immigration compliance, right to work checks and Home Office enforcement, you can book a fixed-fee telephone consultation with one of our compliance specialists for advice specific to your circumstances and needs.
