Contents
Introduction
Forensic economic analysis
Conclusion
Bibliography
Introduction
Forensic economic expertise is an important tool for accumulation of evidences when considering many criminal and civil cases. A qualified expert opinion of accountant facilitates to establishment of objective truth and adoption of a fair judgment. The article deals with the problematic approaches to the notion of expertise, studies the problems of differentiation examinations in general and forensic economic in particular, there is proposed and justified the classification of economic expertise in various industry expertise with the needs of law-enforcement practices. It is dedicated to disclosure of economic and law content of forensic accounting expertise from the accounting positions. Based on accounting functions analysis, the origins of forensic accounting expertise are revealed. The scholars’ approaches to the interpretation of the essence of forensic accounting expertise as a research and learning activity are being analyzed, that allowed the author to create own vision of the place and role of forensic accounting expertise in market conditions. Attention is focused on narrower perception by majority of scholars of law and economic essence of forensic economic expertise, which appears in the use of meaning ‘forensic economic expertise’ which duplicates the general concept of legal expertise.
Forensic economic analysis
Forensic economic expertise is the most widespread. It includes the following:
Forensic accounting expertise is required when civil cases consideration, when there is a need to analyze economic transactions data reflected in accounting. The aim of the expert is to diagnose the problem and to address all issues specified by the court in the determination on the expertise assignment.
Financial and economic expertise (including tax expertise) can be directed to determination of financial position of the organization, execution of contractual relations, revelation of the optimization or tax evasion, etc. Specific questions of its conduction are also mentioned by the court in the determination on the expertise assignment.
Forensic economic expertise is required when civil proceedings, within the framework of which are considered the issues related to the damage amount caused for the company by the illegal (criminal) actions of management and other company employees.
Criminal and procedural legislation provides for the party of defense an opportunity to involve forensic expert (specialist) as a participant of the court proceeding [8].
Forensic expert-economist issues an opinion on:
amount of tax base and payable tax;
impact of transactions on the economic result of the taxpayer’s activity;
legality of the usual prices uses for purchased and sold goods, work and services;
legality of accounting standards applied;
the presence of business purpose and conscience of the taxpayer’s actions (for instance when recognition of transaction as null and void);
proof of absence of caused damage (events of a crime);
condition of settlements with state;
other economic aspects of economic activity influencing tax liabilities.
Participation of an expert-economist in the economic courts is necessary for:
Conclusion
With all these problems inherent in the constituent parts of the general equilibrium model, it is no surprise that the model itself is wrought with many weaknesses, the conditions under which it can hold in the economy are either empirically non-existent or very restrictive. Given the proofs of empirical emptiness, theoretical incoherence and absence of empirical support inherent in the model; it would only be logical to call for the dismissal of the use of the model. In research analysis, economists still frequently work with the theory and talk as if its deductions are applicable to reality with the use of computable general equilibrium gaining more academic prominence and adoption amongst economists in comparative-static analysis. Given the absence of a more mathematically superior and empirically robust model; proponents of the model would continue advocating its use as it is presently the most generally recognized comprehensive economic framework available for carrying out economic analysis.
Recent scandals in the corporate world have brought forensic economic to prominence. The use of forensic economic techniques, together with knowledge and skills in other investigative methods, will enhance the investigation and enforcement officers’ ability to investigate and prosecute those involved in fraud, bribery and other corrupt practices and criminal acts. Thus, the development of this expertise is an urgent initiative for those departments involved in detecting, investigating and prosecuting such crimes. Given the increasing sophistication of such illegal activities, failure to develop respective expertise would endanger such agencies’ effectiveness.
1. Boudin, Michel, “Forensic Economics”, Harvard Law Review, 1984, vol. 97, 835 p.
2. Gravelle, Huge &Rees, 1992. Microeconomics 3d ed., London: Longman. 738 p.
3. Hahn, F.H. (1984). “On the notion of equilibrium in economics”, in F.H. (ed.), Hahn, Equilibrium and Macroeconomics, Basil Blackwell, Oxford. 313 p.
4. Ward, John O. and Gerald W. Olson, “Forensic Economics: The Development and Outlook for the Fields”, Journal of Forensic Economics, 1986, vol. 1, issue 1. 56 p.
5. Wells J.T. (2005). Principles of fraud examination. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. 513 p.
6. https://bbr.baylor.edu/box/ [Дата обращения: 23.02.2017].
7. http://paper.researchbib.com/view/paper/30550 [Дата обращения: 23/02/2017].
8. www.encyclopedia.com [Дата обращения: 20.02.2017].
