Of the FDs polled, 37% say companies’ responsibilities should extend to picking up the bill when fraud is investigated, and pay for protection against further crime.
Several believe fraud goes unreported because of the stigma created by its detection Ñ others were unhappy at the prospect of a victim of crime having to pay for its investigation.
Of those in favour of ‘victim pays’, one said: ‘People expect businesses to be run properly. The cost to rectify reputations and prevent future occurrences must outweigh any short-term expense.’ Another pointed out: ‘Companies should have systems and procedures to control fraud. If they don’t they should be liable.’
Of the 50% in the ‘shouldnåt pay’ camp, one explained: ‘Fraud is a criminal offence and should be dealt with by the police. All companies pay council tax, part of which funds the police. Why should we pay again?’
One respondent remained neutral with a remarkably complacent comment: ‘Never experienced fraud nor likely to – so a little indifferent.’
Does Darwin's theory apply to taxation? Colin ponders...
The EC has been instructed to draft a European Union (EU) directive authorising an EU financial transaction tax, which would apply to ten of the EU’s 28 member states
Accountancy watchdog the FRC has dropped its investigation into the former chief financial officer of Tesco, nearly two years after the supermarket was engulfed in an accounting scandal
Colin imagines how Apple's logo might change in the wake of the EC's ruling over its Irish tax arrangements