Upload
others
View
7
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
FIG. 1 Countries with reported cases and median loss for each region
United StatesMEDIANLOSS: $108,000
CASES: 1,000 (48%) Sub-Saharan AfricaMEDIANLOSS: $90,000
CASES: 267 (13%) Asia-PacificMEDIANLOSS: $236,000
CASES: 220 (11%)
Western EuropeMEDIANLOSS: $200,000
CASES: 130 (6%)
Latin America and the CaribbeanMEDIANLOSS: $193,000
CASES: 110 (5%)
Middle Eastand North AfricaMEDIANLOSS: $200,000
CASES: 101 (5%)
Southern AsiaMEDIANLOSS: $100,000
CASES: 96 (5%)
Eastern Europe and Western/Central Asia MEDIANLOSS: $150,000
CASES: 86 (4%) CanadaMEDIANLOSS: $200,000
CASES: 82 (4%)
Less than $200,000
$200,000–$399,999
$400,000–$599,999
$600,000–$799,999
$800,000–$999,999
$1 million or more
55%
11%
7%
3%
2%
22%
FIG. 2 How much does an occupational fraud cost the victim organization?
FIG. 3 How is occupational fraud committed?
89%
38%
10%
$114,000
$250,000
$800,000
Asset misappropriation Corruption Financial
statement fraud
PE
RC
EN
T O
F C
AS
ES
ME
DIA
N L
OS
S
Corruption
Conflicts of Interest
Cash
Theft of Cash on Hand
Theft of Cash Receipts
Fraudulent Disbursements
Inventory and All Other Assets
PurchasingSchemes
Sales Schemes Bid Rigging
Skimming Cash Larceny
Misuse Larceny
Asset Requisitions
and Transfers
False Sales and Shipping
Purchasing and Receiving
Unconcealed Larceny
Sales
Unrecorded Write-O� Schemes
Lapping Schemes
Unconcealed
Understated
Receivables Refunds and Other
Billing Schemes
Payroll Schemes
Expense Reimbursement
Schemes
Check and Payment
Tampering
Register Disbursements
Forged Maker False Voids
False RefundsForged Endorsement
Authorized Maker
Altered Payee
Mischaracterized Expenses
Ghost Employee
Commission Schemes
Overstated Expenses
Fictitious Expenses
Multiple Reimbursements
Falsified Wages
Shell Company
Non-Accomplice
Vendor
Personal Purchases
Invoice Kickbacks
Timing Di�erences
Fictitious Revenues
Improper Asset
Valuations
Concealed Liabilities and
Expenses
Timing Di�erences
Understated Revenues
Improper Asset
Valuations
Overstated Liabilities and
Expenses
Improper Disclosures
Improper Disclosures
Illegal Gratuities Economic ExtortionBribery
Net Worth/Net Income
Overstatements
Net Worth/Net Income
Understatements
Asset Misappropriation Financial Statement Fraud
FIG. 4 Occupational Fraud and Abuse Classification System (the Fraud Tree)
FIG. 5 How often do fraudsters commit more than one type of occupational fraud?
Asset misappropriation
Corruption
Financial statement fraud
Asset misappropriation and corruption
Asset misappropriation and financial statement fraud
Financial statement fraud only
Corruption, asset misappropriation, and financial statement fraud
23%
Corruption only 9%
Asset misappropriation only 57%
3%
1%
Corruption and financial statement fraud 1%
4%
FIG. 6 What asset misappropriation schemes present the greatest risk?
L E S S R I S K M O R E R I S K
Register disbursements$29,000 (3%)
Payroll$63,000 (7%)
Cash larceny$75,000 (11%)
Check and payment tampering$150,000 (12%)
Billing$100,000 (20%)
Noncash$98,000 (21%)
Skimming$50,000 (11%)
Expense reimbursements$31,000 (14%)
Cash on hand$20,000 (15%)
FIG. 7 How does the duration of a fraud relate to median loss?27%
$30,000$75,000
$125,000
$200,000
$400,000 $425,000
$500,000
$715,000
19%
10%
13%
11%
5%6%
8%
6 months or less
7–12 months
13–18 months
19–24 months
25–36 months
37–48 months
49–60 months
More than 60 months
PE
RC
EN
T O
F C
AS
ES
ME
DIA
N L
OS
S
FIG. 8 How long do different occupational fraud schemes last?
30 months
24 months
24 months
24 months
24 months
24 months
22 months
18 months
18 months
12 months
12 months
Payroll
Check and payment tampering
Financial statement fraud
Expense reimbursements
Billing
Cash larceny
Corruption
Skimming
Noncash
Register disbursements
Cash on hand
FIG. 9 How is occupational fraud initially detected?
Tip
Internal audit
Management review
By accident
Other
Account reconciliation
Document examination
External audit
Surveillance/monitoring
Notified by law enforcement
IT controls
Confession
40%
15%
13%
7%
6%
5%
4%
4%
3%
2%
1%
1%
FIG. 10 Who reports occupational fraud?
Anonymous14%
Other5%
Competitor3%
Shareholder/owner2%
Employee53%
Customer21%
Vendor8%
Internal source External source Other
FIG. 11 How does detection method relate to fraud duration and loss?
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
ME
DIA
N M
ON
TH
S T
O D
ET
EC
TIO
N
IT co
ntrols
Surveilla
nce/monito
ring
Account re
concili
ation
Internal audit
Manag
ement revie
w
Document exam
ination Tip
External a
udit
By acci
dent
Confession
Notified by p
olice
$39,0005 months
$50,0006 months
$52,00011 months
$108,00012 months
$110,00014 months
$126,00018 months
$130,00018 months
$150,00024 months$250,000
23 months
Active detection method
Passive detection method
Potentially active or passive detection method $186,00024 months
$935,00024 months
FIG. 12 What types of organizations are victimized by occupational fraud?
Privatecompany Not-for-profitGovernmentPublic
company Other
$164,000
16%
42%
29%
9%4%
ME
DIA
N L
OS
S
$117,000 $118,000
$75,000
$120,000
PE
RC
EN
T O
F C
AS
ES
FIG. 13 What levels of government are victimized by occupational fraud?
38+31+26+5+F National: 38%($200,000*)
Local: 31%($92,000*)
State/provincial: 26%($110,000*)
Other: 4%($58,000*)
*Dollar amounts are median loss.
FIG. 14 How does an organization’s size relate to its occupational fraud risk?
<100 employees
10,000+employees
1,000–9,999employees
100–999 employees
$200,000
26%28%
22%24%
ME
DIA
N L
OS
S
$100,000 $100,000
$132,000
PE
RC
EN
T O
F C
AS
ES
FIG. 15 How does occupational fraud affect organizations in different industries?
17+83+R 10+90+R5+95+R
9+91+R
Insurance
Manufacturing
14%366Cases
4+96+R
7+93+R4+96+R
Education
Health care
83Cases
2+98+R3+97+R3+97+R3+97+R
Technology Religious, charitable, or social services
Services (professional)
Arts, entertainment, and recreation
4+96+R
5+95+R4+96+R
Other
Retail
Food service and hospitality
84Cases
76Cases
1+99+R1+99+R
1+99+RMining
Utilities
Wholesale trade
Telecommunications Real estateAgriculture, forestry, fishing, and hunting
4+96+R
1+99+R2+98+R2+98+R
90Cases
Construction
7%Government and
public administrationBanking and
financial services
Transportation and warehousing
4+96+REnergy
1+99+R1+99+RServices (Other) Communications and
publishing
MEDIAN LOSS:
$110,000MEDIAN LOSS:
$240,000 MEDIAN LOSS:
$125,000MEDIAN LOSS:
$100,000
212Cases
201Cases
158Cases
MEDIAN LOSS:
$50,000
MEDIAN LOSS:
$153,000MEDIAN LOSS:
$68,000MEDIAN LOSS:
$300,000
94Cases
97Cases
101Cases
108Cases
MEDIAN LOSS:
$227,000MEDIAN LOSS:
$70,000
MEDIAN LOSS:
$140,000MEDIAN LOSS:
$90,000
58Cases
60Cases
51Cases
68Cases
MEDIAN LOSS:
$150,000MEDIAN LOSS:
$90,000MEDIAN LOSS:
$258,000
MEDIAN LOSS:
$88,000MEDIAN LOSS:
$100,000MEDIAN LOSS:
$180,000MEDIAN LOSS:
$136,000MEDIAN LOSS:
$150,000
50Cases
35Cases
32Cases
29Cases
28Cases
27Cases
24Cases
24Cases
MEDIAN LOSS:
$82,000MEDIAN LOSS:
$208,000MEDIAN LOSS:
$525,000MEDIAN LOSS:
$110,000
FIG. 16 What are the most common occupational fraud schemes in various industries?
Cases Billin
g
Cash
larc
eny
Cash
on
hand
Chec
k an
d pa
ymen
t ta
mpe
ring
Corru
ptio
n
Expe
nse
reim
burs
emen
ts
Fina
ncia
l sta
tem
ent f
raud
Nonc
ash
Payr
oll
Regi
ster
disb
urse
men
ts
Skim
min
g
I N D U S T R Y
Banking and financial services
338 11% 14% 23% 12% 36% 7% 8% 11% 2% 3% 9%
Manufacturing 201 27% 8% 15% 12% 51% 18% 10% 28% 5% 3% 7%
Government and public administration
184 15% 11% 11% 9% 50% 11% 5% 22% 7% 2% 11%
Health care 149 26% 7% 13% 13% 36% 16% 11% 19% 17% 1% 12%
Retail 104 20% 10% 19% 9% 28% 8% 12% 34% 5% 13% 13%
Education 96 23% 19% 19% 6% 38% 18% 6% 19% 6% 0% 14%
Insurance 87 20% 9% 3% 18% 45% 8% 7% 11% 3% 1% 11%
Energy 86 20% 2% 10% 12% 53% 10% 3% 27% 7% 2% 10%
Construction 83 37% 12% 8% 19% 42% 23% 16% 23% 14% 1% 13%
Transportation and warehousing
79 25% 8% 8% 9% 46% 15% 8% 28% 3% 3% 13%
Food service and hospitality
75 17% 16% 20% 11% 29% 12% 12% 24% 7% 0% 23%
Technology 62 26% 5% 10% 8% 42% 21% 16% 32% 8% 0% 6%
Religious, charitable, or social services
58 40% 9% 22% 19% 34% 29% 10% 19% 22% 3% 17%
Services (professional) 54 26% 17% 15% 26% 17% 30% 13% 13% 15% 0% 15%
Arts, entertainment, and recreation
50 14% 20% 36% 6% 32% 12% 8% 18% 4% 8% 28%
L E S S R I S K M O R E R I S K
FIG. 17 What anti-fraud controls are most common?Code of conduct
External audit of financial statements
Management certification of financial statements
Internal audit department
External audit of internal controls over financial reporting
Management review
80%
80%
73%
72%
67%
66%
Independent audit committee
Employee support programs
Fraud training for employees
Anti-fraud policy
Fraud training for managers/executives
Dedicated fraud department, function, or team
63%
61%
54%
54%
53%
52%
41%
41%
37%
37%
19%
12%
Hotline
Formal fraud risk assessments
Surprise audits
Job rotation/mandatory vacation
Proactive data monitoring/analysis
Rewards for whistleblowers
FIG. 18 How does the presence of anti-fraud controls relate to median loss?
Control Percent of cases
Control in place
Control not in place
Percent reduction
Code of conduct 80% $ 110,000 $ 250,000 56% Proactive data monitoring/analysis 37% $ 80,000 $ 165,000 52% Surprise audits 37% $ 75,000 $ 152,000 51% External audit of internal controls over financial reporting 67% $ 100,000 $ 200,000 50% Management review 66% $ 100,000 $ 200,000 50% Hotline 63% $ 100,000 $ 200,000 50% Anti-fraud policy 54% $ 100,000 $ 190,000 47% Internal audit department 73% $ 108,000 $ 200,000 46% Management certification of financial statements 72% $ 109,000 $ 192,000 43% Fraud training for employees 53% $ 100,000 $ 169,000 41% Formal fraud risk assessments 41% $ 100,000 $ 162,000 38% Employee support programs 54% $ 100,000 $ 160,000 38% Fraud training for managers/executives 52% $ 100,000 $ 153,000 35% Dedicated fraud department, function, or team 41% $ 100,000 $ 150,000 33% External audit of financial statements 80% $ 120,000 $ 170,000 29% Job rotation/mandatory vacation 19% $ 100,000 $ 130,000 23% Independent audit committee 61% $ 120,000 $ 150,000 20% Rewards for whistleblowers 12% $ 110,000 $ 125,000 12%
$50,000
$100,000
$150,000
$200,000
$250,000
Median loss with controls
Median loss without controls12% 20% 23% 29% 33% 35% 38% 38% 41% 43% 46% 47%
50%50%50% 51% 52% 56%
P E R C E N T R E D U C T I O N
Rewards for whistleblowers
Independent audit committee
Job rotation/mandatory vacation
External audit of financial statements
Dedicated fraud department, function, or team
Fraud training for managers/executives
Employee support programs
Formal fraud risk assessments
Fraud training for employees
Management certification of financial statements
Internal audit department
Anti-fraud policy
Hotline
Management review
External audit of internal controls over financial reporting
Surprise audits
Proactive data monitoring/analysis
Code of conduct0
FIG. 19 How does the presence of anti-fraud controls relate to the duration of fraud?
Control Percent of cases
Control in place
Control not in place
Percent reduction
Proactive data monitoring/analysis 37% 10 months 24 months 58% Surprise audits 37% 11 months 24 months 54% Internal audit department 73% 12 months 24 months 50% Management certification of financial statements 72% 12 months 24 months 50% External audit of internal controls over financial reporting 67% 12 months 24 months 50% Management review 66% 12 months 24 months 50% Hotline 63% 12 months 24 months 50% Anti-fraud policy 54% 12 months 24 months 50% Fraud training for employees 53% 12 months 24 months 50% Fraud training for managers/executives 52% 12 months 24 months 50% Formal fraud risk assessments 41% 12 months 24 months 50% Rewards for whistleblowers 12% 9 months 18 months 50% Independent audit committee 61% 12 months 23 months 48% Code of conduct 80% 13 months 24 months 46% Job rotation/mandatory vacation 19% 10 months 18 months 44% Dedicated fraud department, function, or team 41% 12 months 20 months 40% External audit of financial statements 80% 15 months 24 months 38% Employee support programs 54% 12 months 18 months 33%
0
5
10
15
20
25
Median duration with controls
Median duration without controls
P E R C E N T R E D U C T I O N
Employee support programs
External audit of financial statements
Dedicated fraud department, function, or team
Job rotation/mandatory vacation
Code of conduct
Independent audit committee
Rewards for whistleblowers
Formal fraud risk assessments
Fraud training for managers/executives
Fraud training for employees
Anti-fraud policy
Hotline
Proactive data monitoring/analysis
Management review
External audit of internal controls over financial reporting
Management certification of financial statements
Internal audit department
Surprise audits
ME
DIA
N M
ON
TH
S T
O D
ET
EC
TIO
N
58%
33% 38% 40% 44% 46% 48% 50% 50%
50%50%50% 50% 54%
50% 50% 50% 50%
FIG. 20 Was a background check run on the perpetrator prior to hiring?
Yes 52%
Did the check reveal existing red flags?
No
Yes 10%
90%No 48%
FIG. 21 What types of background checks were run on the perpetrator prior to hiring?
Employment history
Criminal checks
Reference checks
Education verification
Credit checks
Other
75%
78%
50%
55%
4%
36%
FIG. 22 What are the primary internal control weaknesses that contribute to occupational fraud?
Lack of clear lines of authority
Lack of independent checks/audits
2%
Lack of employee fraud education 2%
Lack of reporting mechanism <1 %
4%
Lack of internal controls 30%
Override of existing controls 19%
Lack of management review 18%
Poor tone at the top 10%
Lack of competent personnel in oversight roles 8%
Other 6%
FIG. 23 How do internal control weaknesses vary by scheme type?
Lack of internal controls
Lack of management review
Override of existing internal controls
Poor tone at the top
Lack of competent personnel in oversight roles
Lack of independent checks/audits
29%
Other
Lack of clear lines of authority
Lack of employee fraud education
Lack of reporting mechanism
32%25%
15%
19%15%
14%
18%21%
23%
9%18%
5%
8%6%
8%
5%7%
5%
4%3%
<1%
2%3%
0%
2%2%
1%
<1%1%
Asset misappropriation Corruption Financial statement fraud
FIG. 24 How does the perpetrator’s level of authority relate to occupational fraud?
3%
$50,000
$150,000
$850,000
$189,000
44%
34%
19%
Employee Manager Owner/executive Other
PE
RC
EN
T O
F C
AS
ES
ME
DIA
N L
OS
S
FIG. 25 How does the perpetrator’s level of authority relate to scheme duration?
Position Median months to detection
Employee 12 months
Manager 18 months
Owner/executive 24 months
FIG. 26 How does the perpetrator’s tenure relate to occupational fraud?
Less than 1 year
1–5 years
6–10 years
More than10 years
M E D I A N L O S SP E R C E N T O F C A S E S
$100,000
$173,000
$241,00024%
23%
44%
9% $40,000
FIG. 27 How does the perpetrator’s tenure relate to median loss at different levels of authority?
6 years or more
5 years or less
Employee
Manager
Owner/executive
$100,000
$200,000
$125,000
$1,000,000
$672,000
$35,000
M E D I A N L O S S
FIG. 28 What departments pose the greatest risk for occupational fraud?
Department* Percent of cases Median loss
Accounting 14% $ 212,000Operations 14% $ 88,000Sales 12% $ 90,000Executive/upper management 11% $ 729,000Customer service 8% $ 26,000Administrative support 8% $ 91,000Other 6% $ 77,000Finance 6% $ 156,000Purchasing 5% $ 163,000Facilities and maintenance 3% $ 175,000Warehousing/inventory 3% $ 200,000Information technology 3% $ 225,000Marketing/public relations 2% $ 80,000Manufacturing and production 2% $ 200,000Human resources 1% $ 76,000
0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16%$0
$50,000
$100,000
$150,000
$200,000
$250,000
L E S S R I S K M O R E R I S K
Human resources
Manufacturingand production Warehousing/inventory
Information technology
Facilities and maintenancePurchasing
Finance
OtherAdministrative support
Customer service
Sales Operations
Accounting
Marketing/public relations
Executive/upper management$729,00011%
L E S S R I S K M O R E R I S K
FIG. 29 What are the most common occupational fraud schemes in high-risk departments?
Cases Billin
g
Cash
larc
eny
Cash
on
hand
Chec
k an
d pa
ymen
t ta
mpe
ring
Corru
ptio
n
Expe
nse
reim
burs
emen
ts
Fina
ncia
l sta
tem
ent f
raud
Nonc
ash
Payr
oll
Regi
ster
disb
urse
men
ts
Skim
min
g
I N D U S T R Y
Accounting 290 29% 14% 17% 30% 23% 12% 13% 7% 14% 2% 19%
Operations 266 15% 8% 15% 8% 36% 11% 4% 20% 5% 2% 11%
Executive/upper management
223 35% 14% 16% 15% 62% 29% 30% 20% 12% 3% 9%
Sales 216 10% 12% 12% 6% 34% 13% 6% 25% 2% 5% 14%
Customer service 155 5% 16% 31% 8% 19% 4% 1% 15% 3% 5% 14%
Administrative support 147 33% 7% 21% 14% 26% 22% 8% 19% 13% 3% 14%
Finance 110 17% 15% 21% 16% 37% 13% 16% 15% 6% 2% 10%
Purchasing 94 18% 5% 6% 5% 77% 10% 3% 31% 3% 2% 4%
FIG. 30 How does the perpetrator’s gender relate to occupational fraud?
$89,000
$156,000
31%
69%
Male Female
PE
RC
EN
T O
F C
AS
ES
ME
DIA
N L
OS
S
����� �
����
Male Female
69%
31%
92%
8%
Western EuropeCanada
United StatesMiddle East
and North Africa
Asia-Pacific
Southern Asia
Sub-Saharan AfricaLatin American and the Caribbean
Eastern Europe and Western/Central Asia
�����84%
16%
�����73%
27%
�����88%
12%�����76%
24%
�����77%
23%
����� 21%
79%
�����58%
42%
FIG. 31 How does the gender distribution of perpetrators vary by region?
FIG. 32 How does gender distribution and median loss vary based on the perpetrator’s level of authority?
86%
73%
58%
$50,000 $50,000
$165,000$128,000
$295,000
$1,000,000
42%
27%
14%
Owner/executiveManagerEmployee
Male Female
PE
RC
EN
T O
F C
AS
ES
ME
DIA
N L
OS
S
FIG. 33 How does the perpetrator’s age relate to occupational fraud?
15%
10%
5%
$200,000
$40,000$23,000
$100,000 $100,000
$250,000 $237,000
$480,000
$355,000
19% 19%
14%
9%
6%
3%
<26 26–30 31–35 36–40 41–45 46–50 51–55 56–60 >60
PE
RC
EN
T O
F C
AS
ES
ME
DIA
N L
OS
S
FIG. 34 How does the perpetrator’s education level relate to occupational fraud?
High school graduate or less
Postgraduate degree
University degree
Some university
47%
24%
15% 14%
$75,000
$160,000$130,000
$230,000
PE
RC
EN
T O
F C
AS
ES
ME
DIA
N L
OS
S
FIG. 35 How does the number of perpetrators in a scheme relate to occupational fraud?
���������������
ONE PERPETRATOR
TWOPERPETRATORS
THREE OR MOREPERPETRATORS
$74,000
$150,000
$339,000
52%
Median loss
of cases
19%of cases
30%of cases
Median loss
Median loss
FIG. 36 Do perpetrators tend to have prior fraud convictions?
Never charged or convicted (89%)
Charged but not convicted (6%)
Had prior convictions (4%)
Other (1%)
FIG. 37 Do perpetrators tend to have prior employment-related disciplinary actions for fraud?
Never punished or terminated (85%)
Previously terminated (9%)
Previously punished (6%)
Other (1%)
FIG. 38 How often do perpetrators exhibit behavioral red flags?
Living beyond means
Financial di�culties
Unusually close association with vendor/customer
No behavioral red flags
Control issues, unwillingness to share duties
Divorce/family problems
“Wheeler-dealer” attitude
Irritability, suspiciousness, or defensiveness
Addiction problems
Complained about inadequate pay
Excessive pressure from within organization
Social isolation
Past legal problems
Refusal to take vacations
Past employment-related problems
Complained about lack of authority
Excessive family/peer pressure for success
Other
Instability in life circumstances
41%
29%
20%
15%
15%
14%
13%
12%
10%
9%
7%
7%
6%
6%
6%
5%
4%
4%
3%
FIG. 39 Do fraud perpetrators also engage in non-fraud-related misconduct?
Yes 45% No 55%
Bullying or intimidation (21%)
Excessive absenteeism (14%)
Excessive tardiness (10%)
Excessive Internet browsing (7%)
Sexual harassment (4%)
Visiting inappropriate websites (4%)
Other (4%)
FIG. 40 Do fraud perpetrators experience negative HR-related issues prior to or during their frauds?
Yes 39% No 61%
Poor performance evaluations (14%)
Fear of job loss (13%)
Actual job loss (5%)
Cut in benefits (4%)
Other (4%)
Cut in pay (3%)
Demotion (3%)
Involuntary cut in hours (3%)
FIG. 41 How do victim organizations punish fraud perpetrators?
Termination
Settlement agreement
Perpetrator was no longer with organization
Permitted or required resignation
Probation or suspension
No punishment
Other
65%
12%
11%
10%
8%
6%
4%
FIG. 42 Does the perpetrator’s position affect the punishment for fraud?
72%67%44%
10%12%18%
10%12%15%
Termination
Settlement agreement
Perpetrator was no longer with organization
8%11%16%
Permitted or required resignation
8%8%7%
Probation or suspension
3%5%
12%No punishment
Owner/executive Manager Employee
FIG. 43 How often is litigation pursued against occupational fraud perpetrators?
201820162014201220102008 201820162014201220102008
22% 23% 23%23%24%22%
61%59% 58%
65%64%
69%
Referred to law enforcement
Civil suit filed
FIG. 44 What were the results of criminal referrals?
AcquittedOtherDeclined to prosecute
Convicted at trial
Pleaded guilty/no contest
53%
20%18%
7%
1%
FIG. 45 What were the results of civil suits?
OtherJudgment for perpetrator
SettledJudgment for victim
53%
27%
15%
5%
FIG. 46 Why do organizations decide not to refer cases to law enforcement?
Fear of bad publicity
Internal discipline su�cient
Too costly
Private settlement
Lack of evidence
Other
Civil suit
Perpetrator disappeared
38%
33%
24%
21%
12%
12%
4%
2%
FIG. 47 What was the primary occupation of survey participants?
Fraud examiner/investigator
Internal auditor
Accounting/finance professional
Law enforcement
Compliance and ethics professional
Risk and controls professional
External/independent auditor
Consultant
Other
Corporate security and loss prevention
Attorney
Private investigator
Bank examiner
IT/computer forensics specialist
Educator
37%
22%
9%
7%
5%
4%
4%
4%
3%
3%
1%
1%
1%
1%
<1%
FIG. 48 What was the professional role of the survey participants?
���������In-house examiner
53%
Professional services firm
27%
Law enforcement
18%
Other 2%
FIG. 49 How much fraud examination experience did survey participants have?
�����������6–10 years 28%
5 years or fewer
22%
More than 20 years
19%
11–15 years 18%
16–20 years 13%
FIG. 50 How many fraud cases have survey participants investigated in the past two years?
5 or fewer cases (41%)
6–10 cases (20%)
11–15 cases (7%)16–20 cases (7%)
More than 20 cases (25%)
FIG. 51 What are the most common occupational fraud schemes in the Asia-Pacific region?
Corruption
Noncash
Expense reimbursements
Billing
Financial statement fraud
Check and payment tampering
Cash larceny
Skimming
Payroll
Register disbursements
51%
25%
17%
14%
13%
Cash on hand13%
8%
8%
7%
4%
3%
FIG. 52 How is occupational fraud initially detected in the Asia-Pacific region?
Tip
Internal audit
Management review
External audit
Other
Document examination
Account reconciliation
Surveillance/monitoring
Notification by law enforcement
IT controls
Confession
47%
16%
10%
8%
4%
By accident4%
3%
3%
2%
1%
1%
<1%
FIG. 53 What anti-fraud controls are the most common in the Asia-Pacific region?
Control Percent of cases
External audit of financial statements 93% Code of conduct 87% Internal audit department 80% Management certification of financial statements 79% Hotline 74% External audit of internal controls over financial reporting 73% Management review 71% Independent audit committee 69% Anti-fraud policy 60% Fraud training for employees 59% Fraud training for managers/executives 57% Employee support programs 49% Dedicated fraud department, function, or team 42% Formal fraud risk assessments 37% Surprise audits 34% Proactive data monitoring/analysis 32% Job rotation/mandatory vacation 16% Rewards for whistleblowers 11%
FIG. 54 How does the perpetrator’s level of authority relate to occupational fraud in the Asia-Pacific region?
Employee Manager Owner/executive
30%
41%
26%
$58,000
$323,000
$1,000,000
ME
DIA
N L
OS
SP
ER
CE
NT
OF
CA
SE
S
FIG. 55 Cases by country in the Asia-Pacific region
Country Number of cases
Australia 38Cambodia 2China 49East Timor 1Hong Kong 10Indonesia 29Japan 4Macau 1Malaysia 14Myanmar (Burma) 1New Zealand 8Papua New Guinea 1Philippines 25Singapore 17South Korea 6Taiwan 6Thailand 3Vietnam 5
Total cases: 220
FIG. 56 What are the most common occupational fraud schemes in Canada?
Corruption
Billing
Noncash
Financial statement fraud
Skimming
Expense reimbursements
Check and payment tampering
Payroll
Register disbursements
Cash larceny
40%
20%
18%
14%
13%
Cash on hand13%
11%
10%
6%
3%
3%
FIG. 57 How is occupational fraud initially detected in Canada?
Tip
Internal audit
Management review
Other
Surveillance/monitoring
Account reconciliation
Document examination
By accident
IT controls
32%
21%
15%
7%
6%
External audit5%
5%
4%
4%
1%
FIG. 58 What anti-fraud controls are the most common in Canada?
Control Percent of cases
Code of conduct 80% External audit of financial statements 72% Internal audit department 71% Employee support programs 71% Management review 68% Management certification of financial statements 67% Independent audit committee 61% Hotline 57% External audit of internal controls over financial reporting 54% Fraud training for managers/executives 51% Fraud training for employees 51% Anti-fraud policy 44% Proactive data monitoring/analysis 38% Formal fraud risk assessments 35% Dedicated fraud department, function, or team 33% Surprise audits 28% Job rotation/mandatory vacation 15% Rewards for whistleblowers 10%
FIG. 59 How does the perpetrator’s level of authority relate to occupational fraud in Canada?
Employee Manager Owner/executive
47%
27%23%
$156,000$205,000
$600,000
ME
DIA
N L
OS
SP
ER
CE
NT
OF
CA
SE
S
FIG. 60 What are the most common occupational fraud schemes in Eastern Europe and Western/Central Asia?
Corruption
Noncash
Billing
Expense reimbursements
Cash larceny
Cash on hand
Check and payment tampering
Skimming
Register disbursements
Payroll
60%
30%
15%
11%
10%
Financial statement fraud10%
9%
5%
4%
4%
2%
FIG. 61 How is occupational fraud initially detected in Eastern Europe and Western/ Central Asia?
Tip
Internal audit
Management review
By accident
Other
Surveillance/monitoring
IT controls
Notification by law enforcement
External audit
Document examination
40%
20%
16%
7%
6%
Account reconciliation3%
2%
2%
1%
1%
1%
FIG. 62 What anti-fraud controls are the most common in Eastern Europe and Western/Central Asia?
Control Percent of cases
External audit of financial statements 95% Internal audit department 91% Code of conduct 83% Management certification of financial statements 79% Management review 76% Hotline 75% External audit of internal controls over financial reporting 75% Independent audit committee 73% Anti-fraud policy 66% Fraud training for employees 58% Dedicated fraud department, function, or team 57% Fraud training for managers/executives 56% Formal fraud risk assessments 46% Surprise audits 40% Proactive data monitoring/analysis 36% Employee support programs 27% Job rotation/mandatory vacation 17% Rewards for whistleblowers 5%
FIG. 63 How does the perpetrator’s level of authority relate to occupational fraud in Eastern Europe and Western/Central Asia?
Employee Manager Owner/executive
39%
33%
28%
$28,000$155,000
$3,700,000
ME
DIA
N L
OS
SP
ER
CE
NT
OF
CA
SE
S
Country Number of cases
Bulgaria 3Czech Republic 3Georgia 1Hungary 1Kazakhstan 4Kosovo 2Latvia 2Lithuania 1Macedonia 2Montenegro 1Poland 5Romania 11Russia 15Serbia 9Slovakia 4Slovenia 4Tajikistan 1Turkey 13Ukraine 3Uzbekistan 1
Total cases: 86
FIG. 64 Cases by country in Eastern Europe and Western/Central Asia
FIG. 65 What are the most common occupational fraud schemes in Latin America and the Caribbean?
Corruption
Noncash
Cash on hand
Financial statement fraud
Skimming
Billing
Payroll
Check and payment tampering
Register disbursements
Expense reimbursements
51%
22%
17%
14%
12%
Cash larceny11%
11%
9%
8%
3%
1%
FIG. 66 How is occupational fraud initially detected in Latin America and the Caribbean?
Tip
Internal audit
Management review
Surveillance/monitoring
Other
Account reconciliation
By accident
Document examination
Confession
IT controls
49%
14%
10%
5%
5%
External audit5%
5%
4%
3%
2%
1%
FIG. 67 What anti-fraud controls are the most common in Latin America and the Caribbean?
Control Percent of cases
Internal audit department 89% External audit of financial statements 86% Code of conduct 81% Management certification of financial statements 73% Management review 71% External audit of internal controls over financial reporting 70% Hotline 68% Independent audit committee 61% Employee support programs 51% Anti-fraud policy 50% Fraud training for employees 50% Fraud training for managers/executives 48% Dedicated fraud department, function, or team 44% Formal fraud risk assessments 40% Surprise audits 35% Proactive data monitoring/analysis 32% Job rotation/mandatory vacation 26% Rewards for whistleblowers 6%
FIG. 68 How does the perpetrator’s level of authority relate to occupational fraud in Latin America and the Caribbean?
Employee Manager Owner/executive
40% 40%
19%
$100,000$150,000
$900,000
ME
DIA
N L
OS
SP
ER
CE
NT
OF
CA
SE
S
FIG. 69 Cases by country in Latin America and the Caribbean
Country Number of cases
Antigua and Barbuda 1Argentina 8Bahamas 3Belize 1Brazil 22Chile 8Colombia 10Costa Rica 1Curaçao 2Grenada 1Haiti 1Honduras 1Jamaica 6Mexico 29Nicaragua 3Peru 5Saint Kitts and Nevis 1Trinidad and Tobago 7
Total cases: 110
FIG. 70 What are the most common occupational fraud schemes in the Middle East and North Africa?
Corruption
Cash on hand
Noncash
Cash larceny
Billing
Expense reimbursements
Check and payment tampering
Payroll
Financial statement fraud
Register disbursements
49%
23%
19%
15%
15%
Skimming13%
9%
8%
4%
4%
2%
FIG. 71 How is occupational fraud initially detected in the Middle East and North Africa?
Tip
Internal audit
Management review
Other
Account reconciliation
By accident
Document examination
Notification by law enforcement
External audit
38%
20%
16%
9%
5%
Surveillance/monitoring4%
2%
2%
2%
2%
FIG. 72 What anti-fraud controls are the most common in the Middle East and North Africa?
Control Percent of cases
External audit of financial statements 93% Internal audit department 85% Management certification of financial statements 81% Code of conduct 78% External audit of internal controls over financial reporting 69% Management review 68% Independent audit committee 67% Hotline 59% Surprise audits 59% Anti-fraud policy 54% Fraud training for managers/executives 47% Fraud training for employees 47% Dedicated fraud department, function, or team 44% Formal fraud risk assessments 40% Proactive data monitoring/analysis 40% Employee support programs 33% Job rotation/mandatory vacation 23% Rewards for whistleblowers 9%
FIG. 73 How does the perpetrator’s level of authority relate to occupational fraud in the Middle East and North Africa?
Employee Manager Owner/executive
41%
33%
23%
$105,000$175,000
$1,250,000
ME
DIA
N L
OS
SP
ER
CE
NT
OF
CA
SE
S
FIG. 74 Cases by country in the Middle East and North Africa
Country Number of cases
Algeria 1Bahrain 2Cyprus 5Egypt 8Iraq 1Israel 4Jordan 10Kuwait 5Lebanon 2Oman 4Qatar 8Saudi Arabia 16Syria 1United Arab Emirates 34
Total cases: 101
FIG. 75 What are the most common occupational fraud schemes in Southern Asia?
Corruption
Noncash
Billing
Expense reimbursements
Skimming
Cash on hand
Cash larceny
Check and payment tampering
Payroll
Register disbursements
62%
20%
13%
13%
12%
Financial statement fraud10%
9%
8%
7%
3%
1%
FIG. 76 How is occupational fraud initially detected in Southern Asia?
Tip
Internal audit
Management review
Surveillance/monitoring
Other
By accident
Account reconciliation
Notification by law enforcement
Document examination
Confession
IT controls
53%
13%
10%
4%
3%
External audit3%
3%
3%
2%
2%
2%
1%
FIG. 77 What anti-fraud controls are the most common in Southern Asia?
Control Percent of cases
External audit of financial statements 90% Internal audit department 88% Code of conduct 88% Management certification of financial statements 85% External audit of internal controls over financial reporting 77% Independent audit committee 76% Management review 76% Hotline 63% Anti-fraud policy 58% Fraud training for employees 56% Surprise audits 53% Fraud training for managers/executives 53% Dedicated fraud department, function, or team 49% Employee support programs 43% Formal fraud risk assessments 42% Proactive data monitoring/analysis 35% Job rotation/mandatory vacation 25% Rewards for whistleblowers 9%
FIG. 78 How does the perpetrator’s level of authority relate to occupational fraud in Southern Asia?
Employee Manager Owner/executive
31%
46%
19%
$50,000
$100,000
$350,000
ME
DIA
N L
OS
SP
ER
CE
NT
OF
CA
SE
S
FIG. 79 Cases by country in Southern Asia
Country Number of cases
Afghanistan 6Bangladesh 3India 72Maldives 2Pakistan 13
Total cases: 96
FIG. 80 What are the most common occupational fraud schemes in Sub-Saharan Africa?
Corruption
Cash on hand
Noncash
Billing
Check and payment tampering
Expense reimbursements
Skimming
Financial statement fraud
Payroll
Register disbursements
49%
21%
18%
17%
15%
Cash larceny14%
12%
10%
9%
6%
2%
FIG. 81 How is occupational fraud initially detected in Sub-Saharan Africa?
Tip
Internal audit
Management review
Account reconciliation
By accident
Document examination
External audit
Surveillance/monitoring
Notification by law enforcement
IT controls
Confession
40%
19%
12%
7%
6%
Other4%
4%
2%
2%
1%
1%
1%
FIG. 82 What anti-fraud controls are the most common in Sub-Saharan Africa?
Control Percent of cases
External audit of financial statements 90% Code of conduct 89% Internal audit department 87% Management certification of financial statements 81% Independent audit committee 73% External audit of internal controls over financial reporting 72% Hotline 70% Management review 69% Anti-fraud policy 60% Fraud training for employees 55% Fraud training for managers/executives 52% Employee support programs 50% Formal fraud risk assessments 46% Surprise audits 46% Dedicated fraud department, function, or team 43% Proactive data monitoring/analysis 40% Job rotation/mandatory vacation 25% Rewards for whistleblowers 20%
FIG. 83 How does the perpetrator’s level of authority relate to occupational fraud in Sub-Saharan Africa?
Employee Manager Owner/executive
48%
36%
14%
$55,000 $73,000
$2,716,000
ME
DIA
N L
OS
SP
ER
CE
NT
OF
CA
SE
S
Country Number of cases
Angola 3Botswana 1Cameroon 1Central African Republic 1Chad 3Congo, Democratic Republic of the 3Congo, Republic of the 1Cote d’Ivoire 5Equatorial Guinea 1Gambia 1Ghana 8Guinea 1Kenya 34Liberia 8Madagascar 2Malawi 3Mali 4Mauritania 1Mauritius 2Mozambique 1Namibia 4Nigeria 55Rwanda 1Senegal 1Somalia 2South Africa 87Sudan 1Swaziland 1Tanzania 5Uganda 11Zambia 5Zimbabwe 10
Total cases: 267
FIG. 84 Cases by country in Sub-Saharan Africa
FIG. 85 What are the most common occupational fraud schemes in the United States?
Corruption
Billing
Noncash
Expense reimbursements
Cash on hand
Skimming
Cash larceny
Payroll
Financial statement fraud
Register disbursements
30%
26%
21%
17%
15%
Check and payment tampering15%
14%
11%
10%
9%
3%
FIG. 86 How is occupational fraud initially detected in the United States?
Tip
Management review
Internal audit
By accident
Other
Document examination
External audit
Notification by law enforcement
Surveillance/monitoring
Confession
IT controls
37%
14%
13%
9%
7%
Account reconciliation5%
5%
3%
3%
3%
1%
1%
FIG. 87 What anti-fraud controls are the most common in the United States?
Control Percent of cases
Code of conduct 73% External audit of financial statements 69% Employee support programs 62% Management certification of financial statements 61% Internal audit department 60% External audit of internal controls over financial reporting 60% Management review 59% Hotline 56% Fraud training for employees 50% Fraud training for managers/executives 49% Independent audit committee 49% Anti-fraud policy 47% Formal fraud risk assessments 37% Proactive data monitoring/analysis 36% Dedicated fraud department, function, or team 35% Surprise audits 31% Job rotation/mandatory vacation 15% Rewards for whistleblowers 12%
FIG. 88 How does the perpetrator’s level of authority relate to occupational fraud in the United States?
Employee Manager Owner/executive
48%
31%
18%
$50,000
$150,000
$637,000
ME
DIA
N L
OS
SP
ER
CE
NT
OF
CA
SE
S
FIG. 89 What are the most common occupational fraud schemes in Western Europe?
Corruption
Billing
Noncash
Cash on hand
Expense reimbursements
Check and payment tampering
Financial statement fraud
Skimming
Payroll
Register disbursements
36%
28%
17%
15%
13%
Cash larceny8%
8%
8%
5%
4%
1%
FIG. 90 How is occupational fraud initially detected in Western Europe?
Tip
Management review
Internal audit
Other
Account reconciliation
Document examination
External audit
Surveillance/monitoring
Notification by law enforcement
IT controls
Confession
46%
11%
9%
6%
5%
By accident5%
4%
4%
4%
2%
2%
1%
FIG. 91 What anti-fraud controls are the most common in Western Europe?
Control Percent of cases
Code of conduct 93% Management certification of financial statements 88% External audit of financial statements 88% External audit of internal controls over financial reporting 85% Management review 83% Internal audit department 80% Independent audit committee 78% Hotline 76% Anti-fraud policy 65% Fraud training for managers/executives 63% Fraud training for employees 59% Formal fraud risk assessments 53% Dedicated fraud department, function, or team 49% Employee support programs 48% Surprise audits 41% Proactive data monitoring/analysis 38% Job rotation/mandatory vacation 22% Rewards for whistleblowers 10%
FIG. 92 How does the perpetrator’s level of authority relate to occupational fraud in Western Europe?
Employee Manager Owner/executive
41%
34%
18%
$90,000
$235,000
$500,000
ME
DIA
N L
OS
SP
ER
CE
NT
OF
CA
SE
S
FIG. 93 Cases by country in Western Europe
Country Number of cases
Austria 4Belgium 7Denmark 2Finland 2France 4Germany 16Greece 22Iceland 1Ireland 2Italy 8Netherlands 10Norway 2Portugal 1Spain 4Switzerland 11United Kingdom 34
Total cases: 130