Page 125 - ACFE Fraud Reports 2009_2020
P. 125

How Cash is Misappropriated                     following table provides a summary of each scheme along
                                                          with its relative frequency and median loss. Skimming was
          Cash Receipts and Cash on Hand                  slightly more common than cash larceny; approximately
          Based  on  past  studies  and  research,  we  identified  eight   19% of the asset misappropriation cases in our study in-
          common  methods  by  which  fraudsters  steal  cash  from   volved  skimming.  Skimming  also  had  a  slightly  higher
          their employers. Two schemes — cash larceny and skim-  median loss at $76,000 as opposed to $73,000 for cash
          ming — target incoming receipts or cash on hand. The   larceny. 5





                               Schemes Involving Cash Receipts and Cash On Hand
                                                                       Cases    % of Asset  Median
           Category         Description              Examples
                                                                     Reported   Mis. Cases    Loss
           Skimming   Any scheme in which cash is    ¨  employee accepts    196  18.9%      $76,000
                      stolen from an organization   payment from a
                      before it is recorded on the   customer but does
                      organization’s books and records.  not record the sale
           Cash       Any scheme in which cash is   ¨  employee steals cash and  147  14.2%  $73,000
           Larceny    stolen from an organization after   checks from daily receipts
                      it has been recorded on the   before they can be
                      organization’s books and records.  deposited in the bank.



























          5 Readers should note that our method of measuring the median loss for asset misappropriation schemes has changed from previous reports. Many
          fraud schemes involve multiple methods of fraud, and in the past we have been unable to subdivide the losses in a given scheme based on the respective
          methods used. For example, if an occupational fraud caused $100,000 in losses and involved both billing fraud and payroll fraud, we could not
          determine how much of the $100,000 was attributable to fraudulent billings and how much to the payroll fraud. In our 2006 survey, we asked
          respondents to identify the amount of losses directly attributable to each specific method of fraud when more than one method was used in a scheme.
          So, in the example above, a respondent might note that $70,000 in losses was caused by billing fraud and $30,000 was caused by payroll fraud. This
          change allows us to present much more accurate data on the costs associated with various categories of asset misappropriation than in the past.



                                                                ACFE Report to the Nation on Occupational Fraud & Abuse       1
   120   121   122   123   124   125   126   127   128   129   130