{"id":384,"date":"2007-01-30T19:21:20","date_gmt":"2007-01-30T17:21:20","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/2007\/01\/30\/lets-get-the-defintion-of-fraud-right\/"},"modified":"2007-01-30T19:21:20","modified_gmt":"2007-01-30T17:21:20","slug":"lets-get-the-defintion-of-fraud-right","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/2007\/01\/30\/lets-get-the-defintion-of-fraud-right\/","title":{"rendered":"Let’s get the defintion of fraud right"},"content":{"rendered":"

KPMG are reporting that<\/a>:<\/p>\n

Fraud cases involving sums of more than \u00a3100,000 rose to 277 in 2006, from 222 in the previous year, according to KPMG Forensics Fraud Barometer - an increase of almost 25%.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

For once I will make no comment on the messenger<\/a>. What I do want to make clear is that I think this a wholly inadequate definition of fraud. That's in no small part because it focuses on the perpetrator. That's akin to the corruption debate, which does likewise because corruption is defined<\/a>:<\/p>\n

\n

as the misuse of entrusted power for private gain<\/em><\/span><\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

That's inadequate because there are substantial problems with this definition:<\/p>\n

1. It focuses on the symptoms and not the cause of this problem;
2. It emphasises corruption within government, or against government;
3. It ignores illicit corporate activity perpetrated by those entities themselves;
4. It specifically ignores the issue of tax evasion as corruption.<\/p>\n

Those criticisms can be translated to the definition of fraud used by KPMG. Tax misrepresentation is, for example, fraud but doesn't appear on their radar. A radical rethink is needed on these issues. You could start here<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

KPMG are reporting that: Fraud cases involving sums of more than \u00a3100,000 rose to 277 in 2006, from 222 in the previous year, according to
 Read the full article…<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[14,23,11],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-384","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-corruption","category-kpmg","category-tax-justice-network"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/384","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=384"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/384\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=384"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=384"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=384"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}