Transcription

www.pwc.hrApril 2016Global Economic Crime Survey2016 – Croatia Country reportArmed and ready for battle?(your opponents are!)16%of Croatian organisationshave been asked to pay abribe in dealing with businesspartners in the past 24months25%of organisations in Croatiareported experiencingcybercrime80%of Croatian respondentsstated that they haveformal business ethics andcompliance programmeswww.pwc.com/crimesurvey

ForewordPer A. SundbyePartner, Forensic leaderin South East Europe (SEE)Martina ButkovićDirector, Forensic ServicesPwC Croatiaimportant detection tool in otherparts of the world, Croatiancompanies reported that zero caseshad come to their attention throughthis function. The internal auditorremains the most relied-upon defence,being the detection source in 25% ofcases.In fact, our Croatian respondents tellus that one quarter of the fraud casesManager, Forensic Serviceswere not identified by themselves as aPwC Croatiaresult of their own compliance andcontrol structures, but that they weremade aware by other external partiesor by accident. This indicates thatWelcome to our 2016 Global Economic Croatian companies can suffer lossesfrom economic crime for a long periodCrime Survey ("GECS") covering theof time before they become aware andperiod from our last survey in 2014 to2016. It is the largest survey of its kind, can take action. This also representsan increased reputational risk, as theywith 6,337 survey participants fromare less likely to be in a position to115 countries. This is the eighth timestay in control of a fraud investigation.we have prepared the global survey.Ivana RapićWe also know that economic crime isdynamic and that organisationsconstantly face new threats in newarenas, and, in particular, in theoverlap between new services, newmarkets and new technology. Basedon the information from ourrespondents, and also our ownexperience, Croatian organizationsare not quite prepared to tackle suchAt face value Croatia appears to bethreats. This is particularly true givenperforming really well, with a lowerthe background that organisations arethan average reported incident ratewith respect to economic crime. “Only” not yet seen to be in a position tocontain “old school” schemes such as26% of the respondents have sufferedasset misappropriation, bribery andfrom economic crime in the past twocorruption.years.We are particularly proud since this isthe first time we have published aCroatian country edition. It is atestament to the relevance of economiccrime to their organisations that asmany as 47 leading Croatian companiesvolunteered to share their experienceswith us.There are other circumstances,however, which point to the likelihoodof lower detection rates. Keymonitoring and detection tools suchas data analytics to identify unusualactivities and irregular transactionpatterns are not very sophisticatedand frequently not employed at all.There are usually no effectivechannels to report economic crime,such as a “hotline”. Or, if one is inplace, there is little or no confidence inthe integrity of this channel or thatwhistleblowers will be adequatelyprotected.Whilst the hotline is typically the cCrimeReport2016The level of confidence in local lawenforcement remains low, including incomparison to other countries in theregion. 27% of respondents perceivedlocal law enforcement to beadequately resourced and trained.This is, in our experience, aperception often shared by actualmembers of law enforcement bodiesthemselves, who may feel that theirwork is not sufficiently valued andprioritised. We are also told ofdiverging interests and prioritiesbetween businesses and lawenforcement. This indicates that thereis a strong need for law enforcement,companies and organisations to workmore closely together in the fightagainst economic crime.Croatian organisations are also morelikely to deal internally with detectedfraud cases and less likely to consultwith external investigation resourcesto secure evidence or to establish therelevant events and circumstances of afraud case.Overall, Croatian organisations needto recalibrate their radar to spoteconomic crime.We would like to thank thoseindividuals and organisations thattook the time to respond to oursurvey. Without your support thisreport for Croatia would not bepossible. We invite all business leadersto use the results of this survey andwe would also encourage an exchangeof best practices betweenorganisations. We trust you will find ita useful tool for yourself and yourrespective organisations to assist inyour battle with fraud risks and tohelp improve the Croatian marketoverall.

Contents2Foreword4At a glance6About GECS 20168State of Economic Crime in Croatia16Combatting economic crime21Thinking ahead22Global Participation StatisticsCroatia Economic Crime Report 20163

At a glance1Economic crime is a persistent threat, but responses arenot keeping pace Economic crime is a serious issue affecting organisations in Croatia,with no industry being immune. Our survey indicates thatapproximately 1 in 4 Croatian organisations (26%) reported havingexperienced one or more instances of economic crime in the last twoyears. Asset misappropriation, bribery & corruption and cybercrime arethe most common types of fraud reported in Croatia. Although the reported rate of economic crime is lower than theglobal and Eastern European results (36% and 33% respectively), itmay be that fraud incidents are not always detected. The role offraud risk assessment is underestimated, as 25% of Croatianrespondents have not performed this assessment. Every fourth crime perpetrated in Croatian organisations during thesurveyed period was detected outside the corporate control andcompliance structures (17% through external tip-off and 8% by pureaccident). This points to a potentially worrying trend: that too muchis being left to chance. More than two thirds of the reported economic crimes (67%) wereperpetrated by external parties, suggesting sufficient attention is notpaid to the selection process of Croatian business partners. Employee morale (50%) and reputational damage (34%) followedby relations with regulators (27%) are cited as the top non-financialforms of damage caused by perpetrated crime. Fifty percent of respondents reporting fraud estimated the totalfinancial loss of their company due to economic crime beingbetween around 350,000 HRK and 7 million HRK (50,000 USD and1 million USD). Only 27% of organisations reported having confidence in lawenforcement agencies being adequately resourced and trained toinvestigate and prosecute economic crime. An even lower level ofconfidence was reported in their skills and resources to deal withcybercrime (18%). Croatian organisations are less likely to engage a specialist forensicinvestigator when fraud is identified (only 9% would do so).4Croatia Economic Crime Report 2016

2Cybersecurity – time to take a stand? 25% of organisations in Croatia reported experiencingcybercrime (compared to an even higher 32% globally). Despite this fact, it seems that awareness of cybercrimerisks is still underestimated - less than a quarter ofsurveyed organizations (22%) think it is likely that theywill experience cybercrime in the next two years. Moreover, less than half (45%) of Croatian organisationshave a fully operational incident response plan for cyberthreats and every fifth (21%) organization does not evenintend to develop such a plan.3People and culture are the first line of defence 16% of Croatian organisations have been asked to pay abribe in dealing with business partners in the past 24months. The reported rate is above the global level, but inline with that of the Eastern Europe region (13% and 17%respectively), indicating that the entire region still has alot of work to do around combatting corruption andbribery. While 80% of Croatian respondents stated that they haveformal business ethics and compliance programmes, only48% of surveyed companies agreed that there areconfidential channels in place for raising concerns,including a clear whistleblowing policy.Croatia Economic Crime Report 20165

About GECS 2016The eighth Global Economic Crime Survey 2016 was carriedout by PwC during the period between July 2015 andSeptember 2015. It is the largest survey of its kind, with 6,337survey participants from 115 countries.The survey is intended not only to describe the current state ofeconomic crime but also to identify trends and perceptions offuture risks. It is comprised of 42 questions divided into sixsections: Organisation profile; Economic Crime Trends;Technology – an economic crime blessing or curse?; Profile ofthe fraudster and detection methods; Business Ethics andCompliance Programme, and AML & CFT. To ensure thecomplete confidentiality of responses, all survey data isseparated from the organisation name and responses areassociated only with the industry, organisation size and otherdemographic data. No references to individual organisationsare made in the results or analysis of the survey data.Croatian Participation StatisticsIn Croatia, 47 leading organisations shared their experienceand perception of economic crime on doing business inCroatia and worldwide. Organisations represented in thesurvey come from various industry sectors, but predominantlyfrom Financial Services, Insurance, Engineering andConstruction, Technology and Manufacturing.Figure 1: Surveyed industries in Croatia and and s EducationEnergy, Utilitiesand MiningEngineering 4%Entertainmentand MediaGovernment /State lity sRetail andConsumerTechnologyTransportationand LogisticsInsuranceManufacturingPharmaceuticalsand Life SciencesOtherBase global: 6.337Base Croatia:476Croatia Economic Crime Report 2016

About GECS 2016Predominantly CFOs, Treasurers and Controllers participatedin the survey (19%), followed by CEOs, Presidents andManaging Directors (17%), then Board Members (17%).Figure 2: Participants in the surveyMost of the surveyed organisations in Croatia were privatelyowned companies (70%), followed by publicly traded (21%),state-owned companies (6%) and other (2%). Furthermore,38% of these companies have offices only in Croatia, with 40%having additional offices in up to nine other countries.Figure 3: Ownership of surveyed organisation in CroatiaBoard Member17%Chief Executive Officer / President / Managing Director17%Privately owned70%Publicly Traded CompanyChief Operating OfficerGovernment / State Owned4%21%Chief Financial Officer / Treasurer / Controller19%Other2% 6%Chief Information Officer / Technology Director2%Figure 4: Number of countries where surveyed organisations inCroatia have officesSenior Vice President / Vice President / Director2%Head of Business Unit40%6%One only6%11-25Head of Department9%13%Head of Human Resources2-102%4%38%26-5051-100More than 1002%Manager11%Other6%Croatia Economic Crime Report 20167

State of Economic Crime inCroatiaGECS 2016 shows that bribery and corruption, moneylaundering, accounting fraud – to name but a few – continueto threaten economic and social justice worldwide. For thefirst time since the global financial crisis of 2008-9, we see aslight decrease (1%) in economic crime in 2016 in comparisonto 2014; however, it is worrying that more than a third ofglobal organisations were still experiencing economic crimein the period surveyed (36%).Croatia seems to be performing better – “only” 26% ofsurveyed organisations in Croatia reported that they weresubject to economic crime in the last 24 months. And 17% ofthose organisations experienced more than 10 (and fewerthan 50) separate fraud incidents (almost the same as theglobal and regional levels).Figure 5: Organisations experiencing economic crimeCroatia2014YesEastern Europe 39%49%Global 37%Croatia 26%2016Eastern Europe 33%Global 36%8Croatia Economic Crime Report 201653%62%12%10%12%54%53%13%11%NoDon't knowYesNoDon't know

AssetmisappropriationCybercrimeBribery andCorruption58%33%33%The picture on a global level is quite diverse.Figure 6: Where does economic crime occur?40%37%North America/ Carib.28%Latin AmericaWesternEurope57%Africa21%Middle East33%EasternEurope30%Asia / PacificRelatively better results forCroatia could be a reflection ofvarious factors, such aspossibly lower fraud detectionor the structure and number ofsurvey respondents.Croatia Economic Crime Report 20169State of Economic Crime in CroatiaThree most common types of fraud reported in Croatia

Which industries are at risk?Globally, the financial services industry has traditionallyproven to be the one most threatened by economic crime, as itserves the financial needs of all other industries. Government/ state-owned enterprises are second most at risk.Figure 7: Which industries are at risk?Based on the Croatian GECS 2016 survey results, the mostfraud-prone industries reported based on the share of fraudinstances per industry type are:1. Retail & Consumer2. InsuranceTechnologyChemicalsHospitality& LeisureFinancial ServicesPharmaceuticals& Life SciencesAutomotive29%29%23%20% 19%5. Manufacturing, nsportation& LogisticsCommunicationsAerospace & DefenceInsuranceEnergy, Utilities & MiningCroatia Economic Crime Report 2016Based on the ownership structure, government / state-ownedenterprises in Croatia reported the most fraud occurrences(33%), followed by privately owned (27%) and finallypublicly-traded companies (20%).Prevailing types of economic crime42%33%Entertainment& MediaRetail &Consumer44%GlobalEconomicCrime Rate30%104. Financial servicesGovernment/StateOwned Enterprises29%Engineering& Construction3. Engineering & constructionProfessional ServicesThe perennial leader among economic crimes continues to beasset misappropriation, both globally and in Croatia. It is byfar the most common economic crime experienced byorganisations reporting any fraud, with over half of therespondents suffering from it. While globally levels of briberyand corruption have declined over past two years, in Croatiabribery and corruption still “safely” holds the second place inprevailing economic crimes. Fraudsters are, however,continuously seeking out new avenues for defrauding victimsand are becoming more sophisticated. Cybercrime has hencemoved into third place in the most common crimes in Croatia.Accounting fraud, procurement fraud, money laundering andmortgage fraud follow, all of which have the same level ofreported occurrences. The table below breaks down thedegree of exposure by type of economic crimes reported.

Asset Misappropriation 64%69%20162014Bribery and Corruption 24%27%Cybercrime 32%24%Accounting Fraud 18%22%Money laundering 11%11%Procurement Fraud 23%29%Mortgage Fraud 6%7%Intellectual Property 7%(IP) infringement 8%Espionage2%3%Human Resources Fraud 12%(recruitment and/or payroll Fraud) 15%Tax Fraud 6%6%Insider trading 7%4%Competition Law / Anti-Trust Law4%infringement 5%Other 11%14%Asset Misappropriation 58%n/a20162014Bribery and Corruption 33%n/aCybercrime 25%n/aAccounting Fraud 17%n/aMoney laundering 17%n/aProcurement Fraud 17%n/aMortgage Fraud 17%n/aIntellectual Property 8%(IP) infringement n/aEspionage 8%3 n/a%Human Resources Fraud 8%(recruitment and/or payroll fraud) n/a%Tax Fraud 0%n/aInsider trading 0%n/aCompetition Law / Anti-Trust 0%Law infringement n/aOther 0%n/aIn our experience, in many cases, crimesremain undetected, especially bribery,cybercrime and procurement fraud. It isextremely difficult for organisations touncover all instances of fraud, especiallyif the organisation does not have stronginternal controls, does not makeavailable anonymous methods ofreporting economic crime and / or doesnot perform fraud risk assessmentsregularly. Companies are encouraged topay more attention to the different fraudschemes they may be facing, re-thinktheir controls and test them on a regularbasis. Control over cash and otherphysical assets might not be enough.#1 Economic crime in Croatia– Asset MisappropriationAsset misappropriation is by far themost common economic crimeexperienced by organisations reportingany fraud, with 58% of Croatianrespondents suffering from it. On aglobal scale, 64% of surveyedorganisations have reported this type offraud during the past two years.Asset misappropriation has traditionallybeen regarded as the easiest of frauds todetect but, if not tackled on time,besides the direct impact of loss offunds, it can also lead to a culture of lowmorale within organisations and causebad reputations. There are four basicmeans that, if properly applied, couldprevent theft of assets: properdocumentation of custodianship ofassets, segregation of duties,background searches on employees thathave custody of assets and physicalsafeguards.#2 Economic crime in Croatia– Bribery and corruptionIn recent years, corruption has become atopic of public discussion in Croatia, forgood reason. Corruption is among themost serious economic crimes and isseen as the greatest risk in doingbusiness globally, both in terms of loss ofreputation and monetary loss. In termsof occurrence, it is the second-mostnoted type of economic crime in Croatia(33%) and the third globally (24%).Eastern Europe is, along with Africa, theregion with the highest prevalence ofcorruption. On the other hand, WesternEurope and North America, as the tworegions with the most stringent antibribery legislation, reported the lowestrate of bribery incidents.Croatia Economic Crime Report 201611State of Economic Crime in CroatiaFigure 8: Types of economic crime Globally and in Croatia

Figure 9: Share of corruption and bribery of fraud reportedCroatia33%n/aEastern Europe34%39%Global24%27%Figure 10: Croatia experiences more bribery than the globalaverageCroatia2016201416% of Croatian respondents also indicated that theircompany had been asked to pay a bribe in the last 24 monthsand 22% believe their company had lost out on an opportunityto a competitor which they believed had paid a bribe in thesame period. Eastern Europe results are very similar, whilecompanies at the overall global level experienced less briberythan Croatian ones.EasternEuropeGlobalOrganisations which lost anopportunity to a competitor whothey believed had paid a bribe16% 17% 13%Organisations that have beenasked to pay a bribe22% 23% 15%Corruption and bribery was also cited as the highest scoringthreat to business growth in PwC’s 19th Global CEO Survey2016 - with more than half of the CEOs considering corruptionand bribery to be a threat. Moreover, of the top threats facingorganisations, the percentage of chief executives namingbribery and corruption saw the greatest increase.#3 Economic crime in Croatia – CybercrimeThe internet has expanded tremendously since 2000 andcurrently has approximately 3.6 billion users compared to 16million users in year 2000. Figure 11 shows the percentage ofusers across the regions, with the European region having thesecond most internet users.12Croatia Economic Crime Report 2016

State of Economic Crime in CroatiaFigure 11: Internet Users by region, 201518%9,3%NorthAmericaEurope48,2%AsiaInternet expansion, of course, has critical influence on allaspects of our lives and, consequently, the characteristics ofcrime have been adapted to the new requirements andopportunities of the virtual world. Cybercrime is the new wayof breaking the law, so the escalation in cybercrime is hardlysurprising — ranking as the third-most reported crime inCroatia (25%) and the second-most reported globally (32%,jumping from 4th place in GECS 2014).Other types of fraud also call for attentionEven though they are not among the top 3 economic crimes inCroatia, money laundering, procurement, accounting andmortgage fraud all share 4th place in the most commonlyreported crime types in Croatia. Of these, money launderingand mortgage fraud are above the global and regionalaverage. This could be caused by the fact that Croatia hadrelatively more respondents from the financial services andinsurance sectors, as these industries are more prone to suchtypes of crime, than there was at the global and regionallevels (38% respondents compared to 24% at the global andregional level).10,2%Latin America/ Carib.9,8%Africa3,7%Middle East0,8%Oceania /AustraliaSource: Internet world stats, November 30 2015.Croatia Economic Crime Report 201613

Who commits fraudContrary to the global results, where there is a slightprevalence of internal over external perpetrators (46%against 41%), in Croatia most perpetrators were cited asexternal (67% against 33%).Figure 12: The main perpetrator of the most serious economiccrime (in terms of monetary loss)33%No discussion of economic crime would be complete withouttrying to quantify the impact of fraud. After all, the anti-fraudeffort is just another function of the company which shouldpay off to justify its investments.67%Internal actorExternal actor6%Don't knowPrefer not to sayGloballyAs it comes to internal fraudsters, survey results for bothCroatia and globally indicate that, by far, the most significantcontributing factor for internal fraudsters to committing fraudis simply opportunity. Global results show that fraud is morelikely to be committed by middle managers (35%), but juniormanagement also contributed greatly to the perpetration offraud (32%). The most typical internal fraudster globally ismale, 31-40 years old, university / college graduate who hasspent three to five years in the company.Effects of economic crimeCroatia8%partners prior to engaging with them is less costly thandealing with the unpleasant consequences.46%41%The bulk of external perpetrators in Croatia were cited ascustomers and agents / intermediaries (63%, more thanglobal average of 42%). It seems, therefore, that there is roomfor organisations in Croatia to step-up their efforts in the areaof corporate intelligence / background checks of externalparties. As a key prevention measure, knowing your business50% of Croatian respondents that experienced economiccrime reported a total loss of between approximately 350,000HRK and 7 million HRK (50,000 USD and 1 million USD). Theremaining 42% had incurred losses below 350,000 HRK(50,000 USD) and 8% of respondents were not sure about theloss amount. Across the globe, 39% of organisationsexperienced losses in the same 350,000 HRK - 7 million HRKrange, but 14% of global organisations experienced higherlosses, with 5% thereof even losing over 35 million HRK (5million USD).It should, however, be noted that the consequences ofeconomic crime can go well beyond the nominated value ofthe initial and direct loss. Business has failed as a result oflonger term impact, sanctions are eroding trust andcredibility.There are also other ways that a company could suffer fraudconsequences besides losses that are purely financial.Consistent with the global results, Croatian companiesreported an impact on employee morale as the greatestnon-financial impact (50%). In this respect, we would like topoint out that a negative impact on employee morale mightserve as a trigger to secondary actions (fraud beingperpetrated by frustrated or demotivated employees).“Everybody does it” or “they deserved it” has been observedmany times as a handy rationalisation for first-time fraudsters!Other non-financial impacts of the economic crimeexperienced by Croatian organisations included reputationaldamage and worsened or lost relations with regulators andother businesses.14Croatia Economic Crime Report 2016

State of Economic Crime in CroatiaFigure 13: Non-financial effects of economic crimeEmployee morale 8%42%33%17%HighMediumReputation / brand strength 17%17%Business Relations 25%42%25%Relations with regulators 27%Share price 9%25%50%LowNone73%18%73%Remedial actionsThe survey indicated a clear stance by most companies againstfraudsters, both internal and external.It is encouraging that where external fraud is concerned, theoccurrence of notification of law enforcement and notificationof relevant regulatory bodies in Croatia is rather high (50%;on notification of relevant regulatory bodies scoring evenhigher than the global average).Figure 14: Remedial actions against external perpetratorCroatiaGlobalCivil action was taken25%28%Law enforcement informed50%53%Notified relevant regulatory authorities50%38%Cessation of the business relationship25%25%Other25%10%Don't know-7%No action taken-9%The most-cited measure against internal perpetrators inCroatia and globally is dismissal.Croatia Economic Crime Report 201615

Combatting economic crimeDuring the past decade there have been changes in Croatia’sresponse to the evolving threat of economic crime andlaw-enforcement bodies have co-ordinated more in the fightagainst it. However, when respondents were asked to givetheir views on whether they believe law enforcement agenciesto be adequately resourced and trained to investigate andprosecute economic crime, 27% of Croatian respondentsexpressed their confidence in those agencies.Figure 16: Established formal compliance programmes7%13%Don’t knowNoFigure 15: Level of confidence in local law enforcementCroatiaCroatia 27%Eastern Europe 25%Global 28%57%16%47%28%44%28%YesNoCompanies also have an important role in the arena ofcombatting crime. Attitudes and practice with regards toethics and compliance is changing in Croatia, with manycompanies having put in place formal complianceprogrammes. 80% of Croatian surveyed participants nowhave formal compliance programmes.Croatia Economic Crime Report 2016YesDon't knowAn even lower level of confidence was reported in the skillsand resources of law enforcement agencies to deal withcybercrime (only 18% of Croatian respondents expressed theirconfidence).1680%However, one must not mistake the difference between havinga compliance programme formally in place and having aprogramme that is effective. Businesses can assist in the fightagainst economic crime by acting proactively and preventingit. Based on the survey findings that more than 1 in 4organisations experienced economic crime over past twoyears, it may seem that efficiency of compliance programmesis not at the desired level. For example, risk assessments arean important part of compliance programmes, but its roleseems to be underestimated – 1 in 4 of the surveyedorganisations have not carried out such assessments. The realnumber might be even higher, as 18% of respondents were notaware of such risk monitoring activities performed in theirorganisation. Our experience with the businesses across theglobe shows that a key pre-requisite for efficient crimeprevention and detection is awareness of the risks anorganisation is actually exposed. In this respect, organisationsshould be encouraged to implement risk assessment exerciseson a regular basis.

Combatting economic crimeFigure 17: Performance of fraud risk assessment in the last two yearsGloballyCroatia-4%More oftenMore often2%10%2%6%39%31%QuarterlyQuarterlyEvery sixmonthsEvery sixmonthsAnnuallyAnnually25%Not at all18%Don’t know14%Once22%Not at all18%Don’t know10%OnceCroatia Economic Crime Report 201617

Besides, more resources should be invested in developinginternal processes to prevent economic crime and ensuringstaff are trained to be fully aware of their legal and ethicalobligations, but also of external threats.With respect to ethical obligations awareness, the surveyrevealed that 1 in 5 respondents in Croatia, similar to theglobal level, do not have or are not aware of the existence of aformal ethics and compliance programme in theirorganisation. Compared to their global and regional peers,more Croatian respondents said that they do not have regulartraining on the Code of Conduct and supporting policies,supported by regular communications and various advicechannels (23%, compared to 17% globally and 20%regionally). Furthermore, only 48% of Croatian respondentsthink confidential channels for raising concerns (including aclear whistleblowing policy and procedure) exist, compared to74% of their global and 68% regional peers. This might be theresult of multiple factors, such as lack of specific legislationthat would ensure protection for whistleblowers in Croatia.Whistleblower reporting hotlines are an important detectiontool, however, as employees are often reluctant to reportethical issues to their superiors or internal audit function andare more likely to report incidents anonymously or toindependent parties.There is an imperative for organisations to developmechanisms to minimise external threats, because the surveyresults also show that the most serious (in terms of monetaryloss) economic crimes experienced by Croatian organisationswere perpetrated by externals. One of those mechanismsshould be an implemented incident response plan to deal withcyberattacks. Improvements are required in this area, as lessthan half of the respondents in Croatia have a fullyoperational incident response plan, with more than onequarter of respondents having no plan at all. A quarter of theones which don’t have one think they actually need one.18Croatia Economic Crime Report 2016Figure 18: Implementation of an incident response plan to dealwith cyberattacks15%Croatia21%6%45%Yes, but not yet fullyimplemented13%No, but we are currentlyassessing the feasibility ofits implementation19%37%14%Globally17%Yes, fully implemented12%No, and we do not intend toimplement such a planDon't know

Combatting economic crimeWhen it comes to fraud detection, it is encouraging that 42%of the Croatian organisations that reported economic crimehave detected fraud via routine internal audit procedures orcorporate security. Proactive identification and detection ofeconomic crime are the most powerful tools in the fight

6 Croatia Economic Crime Report 2016 The eighth Global Economic Crime Survey 2016 was carried out by PwC during the period between July 2015 and Septemb