Varför anmäler revisorer få penningtvättsrapporter till Finanspolisen? : En kvalitativ studie om revisorers rapportering till Finanspolisen analyserat utifrån selektionsteori

Sammanfattning: Purpose: Apply selection theory to the subject of money laundering. The aim of the study is to examine why auditors report few money laundering reports to the finacial intelligence. Method: Qualitative interviews for data collection. Frame of reference: Selection Theory formulated by the National Council for Crime Prevention, audit-expectationgap and the money laundering act. Results and conclusions: Money laundering reports from auditors to the financial intelligence police have been few, both presently and in the past. There are many causes for the few reports, a short conclusion reads as follows: Laundering is difficult and time-consuming to examine. Auditors do not consider it a part of their duties. They have a high threshold for reporting suspected money laundering, higher than the money-laundering act prescribes. It is fairly safe for auditors to avoid reporting without consequences for themselves. Some auditors fear the customer can claim a compensation charge if they send in an erroneous report. Through the study the author understood that auditors tend to be more loyal towards their employers than towards law enforcement authorities. The author finds it likely, that, to a large extent, auditors are happy to discontinue their mandate, when they find irregularities, rather than to report to the law enforcement authorities (FIU or Swedish Economic Crime Authority).    Some shelf-corporation company auditors could probably prevent money laundering to a greater extent than they do today. Some shelf corporation divestments carried out are probably sold to persons who intend to commit tax offences, false accounting and fraud. The coordinator at the Financial Intelligence (FIU) police unit stated that unfortunately shelf-corporation auditors do not obey the money laundering act.