FACC Recovers Millions Lost in Sophisticated Fraud Scheme: Spotlight on China’s Role in International Asset Recovery
Austrian aerospace manufacturer FACC, based in Ried im Innkreis, has finally recovered €10.8 million, nearly a decade after falling victim to one of the largest corporate fraud cases in the country's history. The case, which involved deceptive emails, impersonation of top executives, and complex international money transfers, not only reshaped the company’s internal controls but also tested the limits of global legal cooperation—especially between Austria and China, where a portion of the stolen money had been frozen for years.
The return of the €10.8 million in 2025 closes a dark chapter in FACC’s history—but also serves as a beacon for what’s possible when international legal cooperation succeeds, even when it takes nearly a decade. / Picture: © © FACC
In late 2015, FACC became the target of what is known as a “Business Email Compromise” (BEC) or “CEO fraud.” Criminals impersonated the company's then-CEO, Walter Stephan, through convincing and professional-looking emails. These emails were directed to an unsuspecting employee in the finance department, who was instructed to wire €54 million to foreign accounts under the guise of a confidential acquisition strategy.
By the time the fraud was discovered, the majority of the funds had been transferred to banks in Asia and Eastern Europe, particularly China and Slovakia. The case quickly drew national attention and prompted an immediate response from law enforcement and the Austrian judiciary.
The Aftermath: Executive Fallout and Legal Battles
The incident caused internal turmoil within the company. In 2016, FACC’s supervisory board dismissed CEO Walter Stephan for gross negligence. The Chief Financial Officer (CFO) had already been removed earlier that year. FACC sued both executives for damages, accusing them of having failed to prevent the scam by not implementing sufficient internal safeguards. However, Austrian courts later dismissed the lawsuits, citing insufficient evidence of personal liability.
FACC’s stock price plummeted by over 17% in the immediate aftermath of the revelation, and the incident sparked widespread concern across the Austrian and European business community regarding the adequacy of cybersecurity protocols in large enterprises.
The Role of China: Frozen Funds and Legal Deadlock
Shortly after the fraudulent transfers, around €11 million of the stolen funds were traced to bank accounts in China. These funds were quickly frozen by Chinese authorities, preventing them from being laundered or dispersed. However, getting the money back proved far more difficult than locating it.
For years, the recovered funds sat frozen in Chinese bank accounts, technically under the custodianship of the People’s Republic of China, but legally entangled in international asset recovery procedures. The money could not be released without cooperation from Austrian and Chinese authorities, and both sides needed to navigate a complex web of legal requirements, involving cross-border criminal law, international banking law, and bilateral judicial assistance treaties.
In 2019, after years of diplomatic and legal work, the funds were transferred from China to the Austrian judiciary, specifically to the Higher Regional Court of Vienna (Oberlandesgericht Wien), where they were held in escrow pending final legal clearance.
The Breakthrough: Asset Return in 2025
Finally, in April 2025, after nearly nine years, FACC received a transfer of €10.8 million, representing a significant portion of the originally recovered amount. According to the company, the funds were listed in the books as receivables and are therefore not counted as profit, but they improve the liquidity of the business.
The fact that the company had to wait so long for the money was due to the complexity of the process. “We would like to thank all the authorities for their constructive cooperation over the past few years. The final transfer of the money back to FACC ends a long legal chapter,” emphasizes CEO Robert Machtlinger.
Lessons Learned: Strengthened Security and International Cooperation
In response to the attack, FACC introduced sweeping structural changes, including the tightening of internal authorization processes, employee cybersecurity training, and the implementation of multi-level verification systems for financial transactions.
The case also served as a wakeup call for international corporations, highlighting that cyber fraud is not limited to hackers breaching IT systems, but often involves social engineering and internal manipulation.
Moreover, it showcased the importance of international cooperation, especially with countries like China, whose collaboration is often criticized for being slow or opaque. In this case, Chinese authorities acted swiftly to freeze the funds, but the legal system’s complexity and geopolitical sensitivities delayed the transfer for years.
FACC: a model Austrian company
As a technology partner to the global aviation industry, the company connects the entire value chain of product manufacturing. FACC designs, develops, manufactures, maintains, and repairs lightweight components and systems for aircraft. Structural elements such as wings, empennage and fuselage, engine parts, and fairings as well as aircraft interiors are produced. Organizationally, the business areas are divided into three divisions, with the Aftermarket Service business area rounding off the services with maintenance and services in all divisions.
FACC's customers include all leading aircraft and engine manufacturers as well as Tier 1 suppliers of aircraft manufacturers: Airbus, Boeing, Airbus Helicopters, Aviation Partners, Bombardier, Comac, Dassault, Diehl, Embraer, Engine Alliance, Gulfstream, Hawker Beechcraft, Leonardo, Pratt & Whitney, Rolls-Royce, Safran, Collins Aerospace.
While FACC’s financial and reputational wounds have largely healed, the 2015 fraud case remains a cautionary tale for corporations worldwide. It illustrates the growing sophistication of cybercrime, the vulnerability of corporate structures, and the difficulties in cross-border legal enforcement.