Revisorernas dilemma - tala eller tiga?

Sammanfattning: Since 1999 auditors have an obligation, according to 42-44 §§ aktiebolagslagen (2005:551), to report suspicions of crime. The obligation to report means that the auditor is legally obliged to report any suspicious economical crime potentially committed by the executive director or a member of the board to a district attorney. Prior to the enactment it was almost impossible for the auditor to report any criminal suspicion due to the professional confidentiality. According to Ekobrottsmyndigheten the number of crime suspicion reports filed by auditors has reduced by 50 percent in the Stockholm-region between 2006 and 2010. However, after the enactment crime suspicion reports increased successively each year. The purpose of this study is to analyze the problems surrounding the auditors obligation to report as well as to investigate whether the view on the problems differ depending on the auditors professional experience. To conduct the study we used a qualitative method, which means that we have performed interviews to gather data for our empirical chapter. We interviewed eight auditors in total; four auditors with a long history of professional experience and four with slightly shorter work experience, active in Stockholm and Örebro. We have come to the conclusion that more professional experience gives the auditor a broader view on the existing tasks and factors and difficulties they encounter while working. Lack of legal knowledge is the greatest obstacle to the auditor in cases of suspected crimes. Finally, we note that the auditors' focus of today, twelve years after the enactment, no longer is on the obligation to report crime.