Fraud-Related · PDF fileFraud-Related Compliance ... Disadvantages • Less control over...
Transcript of Fraud-Related · PDF fileFraud-Related Compliance ... Disadvantages • Less control over...
© 2015 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Inc.
Fraud-Related Compliance
Investigating and Reporting
© 2015 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Inc. 2 of 27
Investigations, Reporting, and Compliance
Investigations benefit victim organizations by:
• Recovering property
• Deterring future fraud
• Promoting a culture of integrity
Benefits aside, regulations can require:
• Investigations of certain crimes
• Disclosure of the results to the proper authorities
© 2015 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Inc. 3 of 27
When Is an Investigation Necessary?
Investigations may be necessary to:
• Fulfill duties of loyalty and care
• Honor employees’ rights (e.g., wrongful termination)
• Halt wrongful conduct
• Demonstrate that the company has an effective
compliance program
• Mitigate fines and penalties in an enforcement action
© 2015 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Inc. 4 of 27
Investigation Team
Should consist of a good variety of expertise,
but also be limited in number
• CFEs
• Legal counsel
• Auditors
• Security personnel
• IT and computer forensics experts
• Human resources personnel
• Management representative
• Outside consultants
© 2015 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Inc. 5 of 27
Conducting the Investigation
Developing evidence for investigations
• Testimony, documents, objects, etc.
• Consult with legal counsel to ensure proper collection
of evidence.
© 2015 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Inc. 6 of 27
Sources of Information
In-house sources of information
• Personnel files
• Computer files and logs
• Communications (voicemails, emails, memos, etc.)
• Prior audits/investigations
• Access codes
• Security videos
© 2015 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Inc. 7 of 27
Sources of Information
Public sources of information
• Government records and filings
• Court records
• Information from company’s vendors and customers
• Third-party information
• May require voluntary submission or court orders
© 2015 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Inc. 8 of 27
Sources of Information
Other sources
• Social networks
• Digital data analysis
• Computer forensics
• Covert operations
• Informants
• Surveillance
• Subpoenas/search
warrants
© 2015 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Inc. 9 of 27
Conducting Interviews
Determining whether an
interview is the best way
to acquire the desired
information
Legal issues with
interviewing
Order of interviews—
often least to most
knowledgeable
© 2015 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Inc. 10 of 27
Signed Statements
Reduce a verbal confession to a short written
statement.
The confession should state that it is voluntary
and truthful.
Provide each element of the offense (intent,
damage, etc.).
Note specific details (dates, number of
instances, etc.).
© 2015 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Inc. 11 of 27
Reporting the Investigation
Report to whoever is overseeing the
investigation.
Be aware of legal issues in disclosing results.
• Privileges and confidentiality
• Statements that could give rise to defamation claims
© 2015 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Inc. 12 of 27
Reporting the Investigation
Some investigations need to be reported to:
• Board of directors
• Audit committee
• External auditor
• Regulatory agencies
• Insurers
© 2015 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Inc. 13 of 27
Purpose of the Report
Conveys evidence
Adds credibility
Accomplishes
objectives of case
© 2015 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Inc. 14 of 27
Know the Reader
Internal readers
• Board of directors
• Audit committee
• Internal auditors
• In-house counsel
Potential outside
readers
• External auditors
• Outside legal counsel
• Law enforcement
• Government attorneys
• Regulatory agencies
• Insurers
© 2015 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Inc. 15 of 27
Report Format
Authors and date
Brief summary of findings
Introduction/purpose
Body
Results
Follow-up/recommendations
© 2015 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Inc. 16 of 27
Opinions and Conclusions
Opinions should only be on technical matters.
Conclusions should be self-evident.
Refrain from deciding guilt or innocence.
© 2015 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Inc. 17 of 27
Presenting the Case
After presentation of the report, management
must decide how to handle the case.
• Report to government authorities.
• Optional in certain cases
• Seek financial recovery.
• Insurance
• Litigation
• Sever business and employment relationships.
• Take disciplinary employment action.
© 2015 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Inc. 18 of 27
Presenting the Case
If further action is not pursued, the reason for
not pursing the case should be documented.
The audit staff should review internal controls
and include the incident in future fraud risk
assessments.
© 2015 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Inc. 19 of 27
Reporting to Law Enforcement
Reporting could be in
the organization’s best
interest.
Decision to report
depends on a variety
of factors.
© 2015 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Inc. 20 of 27
Reporting to Law Enforcement
Disadvantages
• Less control over
case decisions
• Cannot control
sentences
• Penalties may render
defendant insolvent.
Advantages
• Saves litigation
expenses
• Stronger government
investigatory power
• Quicker case resolution
• Imprisonment as a
deterrent
• Findings are available
for civil suits
© 2015 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Inc. 21 of 27
When Is Disclosure Required?
FAR 3.1003(A)(2) requires all government
contractors to disclose credible evidence of
criminal violations, civil violations, and
significant overpayments.
• Duty to disclose lasts three years after the final
payment on the contract.
• Disclosure must be made to inspector general and
affected contracting officer.
• Failure to disclose is basis for suspension and
debarment.
© 2015 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Inc. 22 of 27
Voluntary Disclosure Programs
Available when law enforcement has yet to
detect a violation.
• If the agency is already investigating the company,
the program may no longer apply.
Voluntary disclosure programs offer lenience.
Agencies with voluntary disclosure programs
include the SEC, IRS, DOJ, and FDA.
© 2015 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Inc. 23 of 27
Voluntary Disclosure Programs
Typical benefits of voluntary disclosure:
• Recommendation by the agency to not press charges
• Decreased or eliminated fines
• Decreased sentences
• Prevention of dissolution of the company for serious
offenses
Agency will not always grant reprieve.
© 2015 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Inc. 24 of 27
Voluntary Disclosure Programs
Whether a disclosure is “voluntary” varies from
different agencies, federal or state.
Typically, companies must:
• Disclose without being compelled to.
• Be timely (the agency must not have been aware of
the violation through independent means, e.g., an
informant or the media).
• Willingly cooperate to remedy the violation.
• Adopt policies to prevent future violations.
© 2015 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Inc. 25 of 27
Antitrust Leniency Program
Department of Justice Antitrust Division
Similar to voluntary disclosure programs
The first party to confess to participation in an
antitrust violation granted leniency
Different eligibility requirements for individuals
and corporations
If Antitrust Division has already learned of the
violation—may still grant leniency
© 2015 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Inc. 26 of 27
SEC Enforcement Manual
Decides how much credit to give to cooperating
organization based on:
• The level of assistance in the investigation
• The importance of the violation
• The societal interest in holding the organization
accountable
• The appropriateness of the cooperation given the
profile of the organization
© 2015 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Inc. 27 of 27
SEC Enforcement Manual
Seaboard Report credit factors
• Self-policing, including effective compliance program
• Self-disclosure
• Remediation
• Cooperation with the government
© 2015 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Inc. 28 of 27
Deferred Prosecution Agreements
Prosecutors agree to drop charges in exchange
for the company’s cooperation.
Requirements usually focus on preventing
future occurrences, such as internal controls.
Fines still typically attach to DPAs.
Example: Arthur Andersen refused a DPA.
Filip Memo—Department of Justice memo
stating the key factor of cooperation is timely
disclosure of relevant evidence.
© 2015 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Inc. 29 of 27
DPA Example—Fiat
Fiat subsidiaries violated FCPA by paying over
$5 million in kickbacks to Iraqi officials and
falsifying accounting records.
Criminal penalty: $7 million
Terms for Fiat under the DPA:
• Mandatory review of current anti-corruption policies
• Revising and maintaining internal accounting controls
• Appointing FCPA and anti-corruption compliance officer
• Ongoing training for employees and contractors
• Create a reporting mechanism
© 2015 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Inc. 30 of 27
Discussion Question #1
Why might you be required to perform an
investigation in this situation?
© 2015 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Inc. 31 of 27
Discussion Question #2
You decide to commence an investigation into
the issue. Who should be involved in the
investigation team?
© 2015 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Inc. 32 of 27
Discussion Question #3
What evidence do you think will likely be
necessary? Discuss the methods you will use to
gather information.
© 2015 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Inc. 33 of 27
Discussion Question #4
To whom within the company should you report
your investigation?
© 2015 Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Inc. 34 of 27
Discussion Question #5
Should you report the findings of the
investigation to law enforcement? Why or why
not?