I was asked to lend my name for fraud!

A deceptive proposal in software development

The email I received from Albert (a name used here as a fictional placeholder) initially reads like a reasonable business proposition. It’s polished, professional, and framed as a long-term collaboration between two developers. But beneath its seemingly legitimate surface lies a deeply unethical (and fraudulent) proposal.

Let’s look at the original message Albert sent me:

Hi Tomas,

I hope you’re doing well! I’m reaching out because I’m seeking a long-term business partner in Europe to help secure higher-quality software development opportunities.

I’m a senior software engineer based in Malaysia with 8 years of experience. While I have the skills to work at European market rates, accessing opportunities directly can be challenging due to geographic and time zone barriers. That’s where I believe we could form a great collaboration.

Here’s how I see it working:

• You act as the client-facing consultant, managing communication and helping secure projects.
• I handle the complete software development process, including technical prep, execution, and delivery.
• You receive a guaranteed 50/50 share of the project earnings, without needing to take on any development work.
• We focus only on fully remote projects to keep things smooth and efficient.
• Payments can go through an escrow service or an official contractor agreement to ensure full transparency.

This is not about using someone else’s identity — it’s about creating a strategic partnership where we combine strengths to land better-paying, high-quality work.

If this sounds interesting, I’d love to set up a short, no-pressure call to discuss the details and determine whether it’s a good mutual fit.

Looking forward to hearing your thoughts!

Best regards, Albert

Now, let’s break down why this is not a partnership — it’s a scam proposal with serious ethical and legal implications.

The illusion of mutual benefit

At first glance, the offer seems generous. Albert positions himself as a skilled, experienced developer who is unable to access European opportunities — not because of skill, but because of geography. He proposes a partnership: I find clients, he does the work, and we split earnings 50/50. No development work required on my end. On paper, this might sound like a classic outsourcing arrangement.

But it’s not.

This proposal differs fundamentally from a legitimate freelance team-up or subcontractor relationship. There’s no transparency about who is actually doing the work. There’s no disclosure to the client. Instead, the client is being led to believe they are hiring me — a European-based developer — when in reality, the work is being completed by Albert from Malaysia. That’s not a partnership. That’s identity laundering.

Misrepresentation as a business model

Albert claims that “this is not about using someone else’s identity,” but that’s precisely what he’s proposing. If I accepted his offer, I would be the face of the business — the “client-facing consultant” — while Albert works behind the scenes, unseen and uncredited. The client would pay me as the sole contractor, unaware that another person is actually delivering the product.

This deception goes beyond being unethical — it crosses into potentially illegal territory. Presenting yourself as the sole provider of services while subcontracting all the work without disclosure constitutes fraud. It violates basic principles of professional integrity and contract law in many jurisdictions.

Don’t be fooled — using a European name as a strategy is nothing more than exploitation.

Hidden risks and quality concerns

What makes this proposal even more concerning is the complete lack of quality control and accountability. As the “face” of the business, I would have no guarantee that Albert would deliver quality work. I wouldn’t even know if he’s actually doing the work himself or further subcontracting it to others. This creates a dangerous chain of hidden subcontracting where:

• The client believes they’re hiring a European developer
• I would be the middleman, taking responsibility for work I never see
• Albert could potentially subcontract to other developers without my knowledge
• Quality control becomes impossible to maintain
• Accountability disappears in this web of deception

This lack of transparency and quality assurance puts both the client and myself at significant risk. If the work is subpar or fails to meet requirements, I would be legally and professionally responsible, despite having no control over the actual development process.

A false promise of fairness

Albert frames this as a “strategic partnership,” where both sides benefit from combining strengths. But there is no fairness in the division of labor or reward.

He is asking me to take on the responsibility of client acquisition, communication, and project management — but also to accept 50% of the income without doing any development. Meanwhile, he is expected to perform all the work — technical planning, development, delivery — for the same share. That’s not a balanced partnership. It’s a scheme that puts one party in a precarious legal and reputational position, while the other does all the labor for half the credit.

And let’s not ignore the deeper issue: Albert is not seeking fair compensation for his work. He’s seeking to bypass the system entirely. Instead of advocating for equal pay for equal work — or building his own reputation and client base — he wants to piggyback on someone else’s identity to access higher-paying opportunities.

This is not a solution to wage disparity — it’s a reinforcement of it.

Why this harms the entire industry

Remote work has opened the door for global collaboration in software development. It has allowed talented developers from all over the world to access opportunities that were once limited by geography. But it has also introduced new risks, especially when it comes to transparency and accountability.

If this kind of behavior becomes normalized — developers outsourcing their work without disclosure, or acting as fronts for others — clients will begin to lose trust in individual developers and small teams. They will increasingly turn to agencies and platforms with more opaque structures, which ironically may offer less value for more money.

The erosion of trust in remote work harms everyone: clients, developers, and the industry at large. We must not allow unethical practices to become the new standard.

A better way forward

There are ethical, sustainable ways for developers to collaborate across borders — and to earn a fair living regardless of where they live.

If Albert truly believes his work deserves European rates, he should work to earn them. That means building a portfolio, creating a personal brand, engaging with the global developer community, and positioning himself as a credible, independent professional.

If he prefers to collaborate with a European developer, that’s fine — but the arrangement must be transparent. The client should know exactly who is working on the project, what each person’s role is, and how compensation is divided. Perhaps the European developer acts as a project manager or business lead. That’s a legitimate partnership — and one that can be fairly compensated for real contributions.

But offering to work behind the scenes for half the credit, under someone else’s name? That’s a blueprint for deception.

Final thoughts

When I received Albert’s email, I was tempted — not by the offer itself, but by the ease of it. A 50% cut for no development work? That’s an appealing proposition, especially for someone who’s just starting out or facing financial pressure.

But ethical decisions are rarely the easiest ones.

If you’re ever approached with a proposal like this, don’t just say no — call it out for what it is. This is not a strategic partnership. It’s a scheme that undermines trust, exploits wage disparities, and puts both parties at risk.

And if you’re a developer like Albert — skilled, ambitious, and looking to break into higher-paying markets — remember: the solution is not to hide behind someone else’s name. It’s to build your own. One honest project at a time.