Forensic auditing’ covers a broad spectrum of activities, with terminology not strictly defined in regulatory guidance. Generally, the term ‘forensic accounting’ is used to describe the wide range of investigative work which accountants in practice could be asked to perform. The work would normally involve an investigation into the financial affairs of an entity and is often associated with investigations into alleged fraudulent activity.
Forensic accounting refers to the whole process of investigating a financial matter, including potentially acting as an expert witness if the fraud comes to trial. Although this article focuses on investigations into alleged frauds, it is important to be aware that forensic accountants could be asked to look into non-fraud situations, such as the settling of monetary disputes in relation to a business closure or matrimonial disputes under insurance claims.
The process of forensic accounting as described above includes the ‘forensic investigation itself, which refers to the practical steps that the forensic accountant takes in order to gather evidence relevant to the alleged fraudulent activity. The investigation is likely to be similar in many ways to an audit of financial information, in that it will include a planning stage, a period when evidence is gathered, a review process, and a report to the client. The purpose of the investigation, in the case of an alleged fraud, would be to discover if a fraud had actually taken place, to identify those involved, to quantify the monetary amount of the fraud (ie the financial loss suffered by the client), and to ultimately present findings to the client and potentially to court.
Finally, ‘forensic auditing’ refers to the specific procedures carried out in order to produce evidence. Audit techniques are used to identify and to gather evidence to prove, for example, how long the fraud has been carried out, and how it was conducted and concealed by the perpetrators. Evidence may also be gathered to support other issues which would be relevant in the event of a court case. Such issues could include: * the suspect’s motive and opportunity to commit fraud
* whether the fraud involved collusion between several suspects * any physical evidence at the scene of the crime or contained in documents * comments made by the suspect during interviews and/or at the time of arrest * attempts to destroy evidence.
TYPES OF INVESTIGATION
The forensic accountant could be asked to investigate many different types of fraud. It is useful to categorise these types into three groups to provide an overview of the wide range of investigations that could be carried out. The three categories of frauds are corruption, asset misappropriation and financial statement fraud.
There are three types of corruption fraud: conflicts of interest, bribery, and extortion. Research shows that corruption is involved in around one third of all frauds. In a conflict of interest fraud, the fraudster exerts their influence to achieve a personal gain which detrimentally affects the company. The fraudster may not benefit financially, but rather receives an undisclosed personal benefit as a result of the situation. For example, a manager may approve the expenses of an employee who is also a personal friend in order to maintain that friendship, even if the expenses are inaccurate.
Bribery is when money (or something else of value) is offered in order to influence a situation.
Extortion is the opposite of bribery, and happens when money is demanded (rather than offered) in order to secure a particular outcome.
By far the most common frauds are those involving asset misappropriation, and there are many different types of fraud which fall into this category. The common feature is the theft of cash or other assets from the company, for example: * Cash theft – the stealing of physical cash, for example petty cash, from the...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document