Wednesday, May 15, 2013

Marquet Report On Embezzlement - Highlights From 5 Year Aggregated Analysis

An analysis of the data we have compiled on major embezzlements in the US over the past five years, from the beginning of 2008 through the end of 2012, which includes a total of 2,110 case studies, allows us to make some definitive conclusions, consistent with our prior findings: 

  • Embezzlers begin their schemes in their early 40s (42.7, on average);
  • The average major embezzlement spans a 4.7 year period;
  • By a significant margin, embezzlers are most likely to be individuals who hold bookkeeping or finance positions (67.1% of all cases);
  • The financial services industry suffers the greatest losses from embezzlement (more than 26.2% of all losses in the data);
  • Non-profits and religious organizations together account for nearly one-eighth of all the incidents (12.3% of all cases);
  • Women are more likely to embezzle than men (62.4% vs. 37.6% overall in the data);
  • Men embezzle significantly more than women ($1.9 million vs. $801,000, on average);
  • The vast majority of embezzlements are caused by sole perpetrators (86% of all cases);
  • Gambling is a clear motivating factor in driving some perpetrators to embezzle;
  • About 4.5 percent of major embezzlers have prior criminal histories;
  • The most common embezzlement scheme involves forgery or unauthorized use of company checks (35.5% of all cases in which the method was known).  The next most common scheme involves the theft and/or conversion of cash receipts (21.2%), followed by unauthorized electronic transfers (12.2%)
  • California has experienced the greatest number of major embezzlements over the past four years (266 cases or 12.5% overall), followed by Michigan (112/5.3%), Pennsylvania (101/4.7%), New York and Texas, both at (89/4.2%); and,
  • The ten states with the highest risk for loss from embezzlement are in order of risk: Iowa, Vermont, Rhode Island, West Virginia, Massachusetts, Florida, Montana, South Dakota, Louisiana and Connecticut. 

No comments: