Whitepaper 02 · Business fraudSmall-Business Embezzlement.
Warning signs, the controls that stop each scheme, and what to do in the first 72 hours after you suspect a trusted employee.
- Written for
- Owners of small and mid-size businesses, their CPAs and counsel
- Scope
- Occupational fraud data (ACFE), controls, response, Florida law, insurance and recovery
- Author
- Geoffrey B. Davis Jr.
- Current to
- November 11, 2026 / 20 min read
Executive summary
Embezzlement is theft by someone the business trusted with its money or property: the bookkeeper who writes checks, the office manager who takes deposits, the controller who adds vendors. In small businesses it tends to run longer and cost more, relative to revenue, than owners expect, because the same few people do everything and nobody independent looks at the bank statements.
This paper sets out what the best available data says about how these schemes work, the controls that actually stop or surface each scheme, and a time-boxed plan for the first 72 hours after a suspicion surfaces, when the decisions that protect evidence, insurance and recovery are made. It closes with how Florida prosecutes embezzlement and how money comes back.
Key findings
- 01
Small firms lose more than they think
Organizations with fewer than 100 employees had a median occupational fraud loss of $126,000 in the ACFE’s 2026 data, the highest of any size group.
- 02
The schemes are ordinary
Billing, check and payment tampering, expense, payroll and skimming schemes were all more common at small organizations, and they were often concealed with fake or altered paper.
- 03
Cheap controls work
Management review, proactive data monitoring and surprise audits were each associated with median losses about half as large. Small firms use them far less than larger ones.
- 04
The first 72 hours decide recovery
Confronting too early, missing the insurer’s notice condition or leaving the suspect with bank access can cost more than the theft itself.
- 05
Florida treats it as theft
Embezzlement is charged under the theft statute, graded by value, with amounts from one scheme aggregated; civil theft allows treble damages.
The scale of the problem.
The most detailed public data on employee theft comes from the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE). Its Occupational Fraud 2026: A Report to the Nations analyzed 2,402 cases investigated between January 2024 and September 2025 in 143 countries and territories, with total losses of more than $3.4 billion.1 The ACFE calls the category “occupational fraud”: the use of one’s job to enrich oneself by deliberately misusing the employer’s resources.2 Embezzlement, in the everyday sense, is the largest part of it.
Source: ACFE, Occupational Fraud 2026: A Report to the Nations.1
Three features of the data matter most to a small business.
Size does not protect you. Organizations with fewer than 100 employees made up 22% of cases and had a median loss of $126,000, the highest of the four size groups (employers with 10,000 or more staff were close behind at $123,000). The ACFE notes that a loss of that size hits a small organization harder because it is likely a much larger share of revenue.3
Asset misappropriation dominates. Schemes in which an employee steals or misuses the organization’s resources appeared in 90% of cases, with a median loss of $100,000. Financial statement fraud was rare (6% of cases) but far more costly (median $1,000,000).1
Time is money. The typical scheme ran 12 months before it was caught, and each month a fraud continued added a median $9,400 in losses. Expense reimbursement schemes typically lasted 18 months, billing schemes 14, and check tampering and payroll schemes 13.4 Losses climbed steadily with duration, from a median of $40,000 for schemes caught within six months to $1,115,000 for those running more than five years.44
All ACFE figures in this paper are from the 2026 edition. They come from cases that CFEs investigated, so they describe frauds that were caught and examined, not every theft. They are the best benchmark available, not a census.
How small-business schemes work.
The ACFE divides asset misappropriation into nine sub-schemes, defined by how the money or property leaves the business.5 Knowing which one you are dealing with tells you which records will prove it and which control failed.
Fraudulent disbursements
Billing schemes cause the business to pay invoices for fictitious goods or services, inflated invoices, or personal purchases; the classic version is a shell company the employee controls billing the employer for work never done. Check and payment tampering means intercepting, forging or altering a check or electronic payment, such as making out stolen blank checks to oneself or rerouting a vendor’s electronic payment to one’s own account. Payroll schemes generate false compensation claims: ghost employees, falsified hours, inflated commissions. Expense reimbursement schemes claim fictitious or inflated business expenses.2
Theft of receipts and assets
Skimming takes cash before it is recorded in the books, so there is no entry to reconcile against. Cash larceny takes cash or checks after they have been recorded, typically from the daily deposit. Noncash misappropriation covers inventory, equipment and confidential information.2
Percent of cases involving each scheme; a case can involve more than one. “Larger” means 100 or more employees. Gold marks schemes more common at small organizations.
Source: ACFE, Occupational Fraud 2026: A Report to the Nations, Figure 24.3
The chart shows the pattern that should drive a small firm’s control priorities. Billing, skimming, and check and payment tampering showed the biggest gaps between small and larger organizations; only noncash theft and corruption were more common at larger employers.3 Across all organizations, check and payment tampering had the highest median loss of the asset schemes ($114,000), and billing combined high frequency (21% of cases) with a $90,000 median.5 The ACFE ranks noncash theft, billing, and check and payment tampering as the highest-risk combinations of frequency and loss.5
Most schemes are hidden with paper. Only 11% of frauds involved no concealment at all; the most common methods were creating fraudulent physical documents (39%) and altering physical documents (33%).6 That is why the original invoice, the cleared check image and the bank’s own records, not the bookkeeper’s summary, are the evidence that matters.
Two of our case studies show the range. Alex Murdaugh pleaded guilty in 2023 to state charges including breach of trust and money laundering for taking millions in settlements from injured clients and millions from his own law firm, over more than a decade (the Murdaugh financial crimes).7 At the other end, the Charlie Javice prosecution concerned fabricated customer records produced to a buyer in due diligence; JPMorgan paid $175 million for Frank, which, according to the SEC, had identifying data for about 300,000 students rather than the 4.25 million claimed, and a jury convicted Javice in March 2025 (the Javice and Frank case).89 The common thread is records that looked right and were never tested against an independent source.
Warning signs.
In the ACFE data, 84% of perpetrators showed at least one behavioral red flag while committing the fraud, and more than half showed several. Living beyond one’s means has been the most common red flag in every edition of the study.10 Behavior is not proof, and plenty of honest people have money trouble. But red flags tell you where to look in the records.
Lifestyle beyond pay
New vehicles, renovations, travel or spending the salary cannot explain. Seen in 39% of ACFE cases.
Financial pressure
Debt, garnishments, collection calls, divorce or family problems. Financial difficulties were seen in 29% of cases.
Too close to a vendor or customer
Personal relationships, unusual favors or a vendor who only deals with one employee. Seen in 17% of cases.
Will not share the work
Control issues and unwillingness to share duties (12%), refusing vacations (5%), coming in early and staying late to handle the mail or the bank.
Defensive about questions
Irritability, suspiciousness or defensiveness (11%) when anyone asks about a reconciliation, a vendor or a missing document.
Records that do not behave
Late or missing reconciliations, copies instead of originals, new vendors with post office boxes, voided checks, round-dollar invoices, credits and write-offs nobody approved.
The first five rows are behavioral red flags measured by the ACFE; the last row lists common record anomalies, not ACFE figures.
Source: ACFE, Occupational Fraud 2026: A Report to the Nations, Figure 55.10
Human resources events are signals too: 45% of perpetrators experienced one, most often a poor performance evaluation, fear of losing their job, or being denied a raise or promotion.10
Look for the weakness as well as the person. The ACFE found that a lack of internal controls was the main contributing factor in 33% of cases and an override of existing controls in another 19%, so more than half of the frauds came down to an inadequate control system. A lack of management review accounted for 18%; together the three explained 70% of cases.11 An owner who signs whatever is put in front of them, or never opens the bank statement, is the opportunity most schemes depend on.
The question is rarely whether a trusted employee would steal. It is whether anyone would notice if they did.
Controls that address each scheme.
Small organizations run far fewer anti-fraud controls than larger ones. Only 24% of victim organizations with fewer than 100 employees had a hotline (85% of larger ones did); 16% used surprise audits (52%); 41% had management review (79%); and 8% used job rotation or mandatory vacation (32%).12 Yet those are among the cheapest controls to run.
Every one of the 18 controls the ACFE measured was associated with lower losses and faster detection. Surprise audits were associated with a median loss of $74,000 against $149,000 without them, and a median duration of 8 months against 16. Management review was associated with a median loss of $84,000 against $186,000. Organizations with mandatory vacation or job rotation had a median loss of $65,000 against $128,000 and caught frauds in a median of 8 months against 12.13 Those are associations, not proof that one control caused the difference, but they are consistent across editions.
| Scheme | Primary controls | How to test it now |
|---|---|---|
| Billing (shell or inflated vendors) | Vendor master controls: a person who does not pay bills adds and changes vendors, with documentation (W-9, address, bank letter) and call-back verification; approval of invoices by the person who received the goods. | Match vendor addresses, phone numbers, bank accounts and tax IDs against the employee file; list vendors added or changed in the last 24 months; look for sequential or round-dollar invoices and vendors with only a post office box. |
| Check and payment tampering | Positive pay (the bank pays only checks matching your issue file) and payee positive pay; dual approval for checks and electronic payments; check stock locked up; signer is not the preparer or reconciler. | Pull cleared check images from the bank, not from the books, and compare payee, amount and endorsement to the check register; review changes to vendor bank details and ACH templates. |
| Payroll | Owner or manager reviews each payroll register; new hires, rate changes and terminations need a second approval; direct deposit changes confirmed with the employee directly. | Compare payroll to the personnel list and to time records; look for shared bank accounts or addresses, employees with no withholding or deductions, and pay after termination dates. |
| Expense reimbursement | Written policy, original receipts, approval by the employee’s supervisor, and company card statements reviewed by someone other than the cardholder. | Sort reimbursements by employee and by vendor; check weekends, personal merchants, duplicate receipts and amounts just under the approval limit. |
| Skimming and cash larceny | Two people open mail and log receipts; lockbox or remote deposit; daily deposit of all receipts intact; customer statements mailed by someone outside accounts receivable. | Reconcile the receipts log to deposits and to sales or billing; review credits, write-offs and voids by employee; confirm a sample of balances directly with customers. |
| Any scheme | Owner receives the bank statements directly (or has online view-only access) and reviews the reconciliation each month; surprise audits; mandatory vacation; a reporting channel employees, customers and vendors can use. | Have the owner or an outside professional perform one reconciliation from the bank’s own statements, unannounced, while the usual preparer is away. |
The controls column reflects standard practice; the Federal Reserve recommends dual controls for issuing checks, separating issuing or signing from reconciling, limiting access to check stock, frequent reconciliation and services such as positive pay.
Source: ACFE, Occupational Fraud 2026: A Report to the Nations, Figures 28–30;1312 Federal Reserve, FedPayments Improvement.14
Segregation of duties when you have three people
Separation of duties means no single person can authorize a payment, make it, record it and reconcile it. In a small office, perfect separation is impossible, so the owner becomes the separating control: the owner adds vendors, approves payroll changes, and receives the bank statement first. If the owner cannot do that, an outside accountant can do the monthly reconciliation review for a defined fee.
Reconcile promptly; the clock is legal as well as practical
Florida’s version of the Uniform Commercial Code requires a bank customer to examine statements with reasonable promptness and report unauthorized signatures or alterations. If the same wrongdoer forges more checks after the customer had a reasonable period, not exceeding 30 days, to examine the statement, the customer can be barred from recovering those later items from the bank. And regardless of care, a customer who does not report an unauthorized signature or alteration within 180 days after the statement is made available loses that claim against the bank; for unauthorized endorsements the period is one year.15 Those periods are one more reason to look at every statement every month.
A reporting channel
Tips detected 43% of frauds in the ACFE study, nearly three times any other method, and 55% of tips came from employees, with outside sources such as customers and vendors supplying 34%.16 Organizations with formal reporting mechanisms had a median loss of $100,000 and a median duration of 11 months, against $150,000 and 17 months without them.17 For a small firm, a hotline can be an email address or web form that goes to the owner or outside counsel, publicized to staff and printed on vendor remittance instructions.
The first 72 hours.
Most owners learn of a problem by accident: a vendor calls about an unpaid invoice that the books show as paid, a bank flags a check, or the bookkeeper is out sick and someone else opens the mail. What happens in the next three days determines whether the evidence survives, whether the insurance responds, and whether the money can be traced. The plan below assumes counsel is engaged on day one, so that counsel directs the investigation from the start.
- Hour 0–4
Stop, do not confront
Do not accuse, question or tip off the employee, and limit who knows. Write down what you saw, when, and how you learned it. Do not try to “audit” it yourself in the accounting system, where every change is logged and can muddy the record.
- Hour 4–12
Call counsel and the bank
Retain a business or white-collar attorney. With counsel’s advice, ask the bank to add or confirm dual approval, positive pay and alerts, and review who can initiate wires, ACH and checks. Change shared passwords and remove remote access quietly if the employee can move money.
- Hour 12–24
Preserve the evidence
Secure company laptops, phones and paper files the employee uses; do not power devices on and browse them. Export or snapshot the accounting file and audit trail, payroll records and email. Order bank statements and cleared check images directly from the bank. Suspend routine deletion of email and backups.
- Hour 24–48
Notify the insurer
Find every policy that might respond: commercial crime, employee dishonesty, business owner’s or professional policies. Give written notice to the carrier and broker under the policy’s notice condition and calendar the proof-of-loss deadline. Do not settle with or release the employee without the insurer’s consent.
- Hour 48–72
Scope and decide
Engage a fraud examiner through counsel to scope the review: period, accounts, schemes and records. With counsel, decide the employee’s status, the timing and conduct of any interview, and whether and when to report to law enforcement. Keep a log of every step and every person told.
General guidance, not legal advice. Employment, privacy and insurance obligations differ by policy and by facts; follow counsel and the policy wording.
Source: Notice, proof-of-loss and cooperation conditions: ISO CR 00 22 06 22.18
Why not confront the employee?
An early confrontation invites document destruction, transfers of money out of reach and a prepared explanation, and it can complicate an insurance claim if the business then lets the employee keep working with access to funds. Under the standard ISO commercial crime form, coverage for an employee ends as soon as a designated person (or a human resources employee not in collusion) learns of theft or other dishonest acts by that employee.18 Any new loss after that moment may not be covered, so access must be cut once the business knows.
The insurer’s clock
The ISO crime form treats a loss as “discovered” when a designated person first becomes aware of facts that would cause a reasonable person to assume a covered loss has been or will be incurred, even if the amount or details are not yet known. On discovery the insured must notify the insurer as soon as possible, give a detailed sworn proof of loss within 120 days, cooperate, produce records, submit to examination under oath if asked, and do nothing to impair rights of recovery against the wrongdoer. A suit against the insurer must wait 90 days after proof of loss and be brought within two years of discovery.18 Your policy may differ, so read it, but assume the clock starts with the first credible suspicion, not with the end of the investigation.
- Bank statements and cleared check images for all accounts, obtained directly from each bank, for at least the employee’s tenure
- Accounting system data file, user list and audit trail (who entered, changed or deleted what, and when)
- Vendor master file with change history, plus W-9s and vendor onboarding documents
- Payroll registers, direct-deposit change records, personnel files and time records
- Credit card and expense reimbursement statements with receipts
- Deposit records, receipts logs, customer statements and write-off or credit approvals
- Company devices used by the employee, collected and kept powered as found, with a chain-of-custody note
- Email and messaging accounts, preserved under a written hold; backups suspended from routine deletion
- All insurance policies, declarations pages and the broker’s contact details
A fraud examination then rebuilds what happened from the bank’s own records outward, quantifies the loss by scheme and period, and documents it to the standard an insurer, prosecutor or court will expect. Our guide to what a forensic accountant does explains the work, and how forensic accounting engagements are priced explains what drives the cost. For the investigation itself, see business fraud and financial investigations.
Florida law.
Florida has no separate embezzlement statute. Its theft law defines “obtains or uses” to include conduct previously known as embezzlement, misapplication, misappropriation and conversion, and a person commits theft by knowingly obtaining or using another’s property with intent to deprive the owner of it or to appropriate it.1920 The degree of the crime turns mainly on value.
| Value of property | Offense | Classification | Maximum prison term |
|---|---|---|---|
| $100,000 or more | Grand theft, first degree | First-degree felony | Up to 30 years |
| $20,000 to under $100,000 | Grand theft, second degree | Second-degree felony | Up to 15 years |
| $750 to under $20,000 | Grand theft, third degree | Third-degree felony | Up to 5 years |
| $100 to under $750 | Petit theft, first degree | First-degree misdemeanor | Up to 1 year |
| Under $100 | Petit theft, second degree | Second-degree misdemeanor | Up to 60 days |
Statutory maximums; actual sentences are set under Florida’s sentencing rules and the facts. Third-degree grand theft is subdivided into $750–$5,000, $5,000–$10,000 and $10,000–$20,000 bands. Prior theft convictions can raise petit theft to a higher offense. Thresholds checked against the 2026 statute text.
Two rules matter for embezzlement in particular. First, amounts taken in separate thefts “pursuant to one scheme or course of conduct” may be aggregated to set the degree of the offense, so a long run of small checks can add up to a first-degree felony.19 Second, value means market value at the time of the offense, and for a check, the amount due on it.19 That is why the quantification has to be done item by item, with each transaction traced to the bank record.
On conviction, Florida courts must order restitution for loss caused directly or indirectly by the offense and related to the criminal episode, unless the court finds clear and compelling reasons not to.22 Restitution is only as good as the defendant’s ability to pay, which is why the civil and insurance paths below run in parallel.
Federal embezzlement statutes apply in narrower settings, such as banks, employee benefit plans and federal funds. Our guide What is embezzlement? summarizes those statutes and the difference between embezzlement, larceny and fraud.
Insurance and recovery.
Recovery is the exception, not the rule. In the ACFE study, 56% of victim organizations recovered nothing, 29% made a partial recovery and 15% recovered all their losses. Only 54% of cases were referred to law enforcement, the lowest share in the ten editions the ACFE charts; organizations that did not refer most often said internal discipline was enough (51%) or feared bad publicity (35%). Victims filed civil suits in only 25% of cases, but 82% of the suits filed ended in a settlement or a judgment for the victim.23
There are four main paths, and they work best together.
Crime insurance. A commercial crime policy’s employee theft coverage pays for loss of money, securities and other property resulting directly from theft by an employee, whether or not the employee is identified, and the ISO form treats forgery as theft.18 The claim stands or falls on the proof of loss, which should be built from bank records and documents, scheme by scheme, with the period of loss matched to the policy periods. Check whether the coverage comes from a standalone crime policy or an endorsement, and what its limit is.
Civil theft. Florida’s civil theft statute gives a person injured by a violation of the theft statutes a claim for three times actual damages, with minimum damages of $200, plus reasonable attorney’s fees and costs. The claimant must prove the claim by clear and convincing evidence and must first make a written demand; if the person pays within 30 days of receiving it, they get a written release. Punitive damages are not available under the statute, and a defendant can recover fees if the claim lacked substantial factual or legal support.24 Counsel will also consider conversion, unjust enrichment and breach of fiduciary duty, and remedies to freeze or trace assets.
Criminal restitution. Ordered on conviction, as above.22 A well-documented loss schedule given to the prosecutor makes a full restitution order more likely.
Tax treatment. Federal tax law treats a theft loss as sustained in the taxable year the taxpayer discovers it, and allows a deduction only for loss not compensated by insurance or otherwise.25 The business’s CPA should handle the deduction and any restatement; that is tax work FES does not do.
A practical point links all four: the same documented quantification serves the insurer, the prosecutor, the civil court and the tax preparer. Building it once, properly, from original records, is cheaper than rebuilding it for each audience. Lenders face a related problem when collateral itself is fabricated; see Verifying Receivables and Collateral. And when you choose an examiner, our guide to the Certified Fraud Examiner credential explains what it requires.
Fraud Examination Service examines suspected embezzlement for Florida businesses and their counsel: tracing disbursements, testing vendor and payroll records, quantifying the loss and supporting the claim. We do not perform audits or tax work; where a CPA is needed, we say so. See our business fraud investigation practice.
For owners and their advisers
Six things to do this month.
- 01
Take the bank statement
Have every statement come to the owner first, or set up view-only online access, and review the reconciliation monthly with the cleared check images.
- 02
Lock the vendor master
Move vendor additions and bank-detail changes to someone who does not pay bills, with call-back verification to a known number.
- 03
Turn on positive pay
Ask the bank for check and payee positive pay, ACH debit blocks and dual approval for wires and ACH.
- 04
Require real vacations
Make the bookkeeper take a full week off each year and have someone else do the work, including the bank reconciliation.
- 05
Open a reporting channel
An email address or web form that goes to the owner or outside counsel, publicized to staff, customers and vendors.
- 06
Read your crime policy
Confirm you have employee theft coverage, its limit and its notice and proof-of-loss conditions, and keep the broker’s number with this paper.
Common questions.
Short answers. The numbered notes link to the sources.
In the ACFE’s 2026 study of 2,402 occupational fraud cases, 22% of victims had fewer than 100 employees, and those small organizations had a median loss of $126,000, the highest of any size group. Billing, check tampering, expense, skimming and payroll schemes were all more common at small organizations than at larger ones.
The most common behavioral sign is an employee living beyond their known income, followed by financial difficulties and an unusually close relationship with a vendor or customer. Control signs include one person who will not share duties or take vacation, missing or altered documents, new vendors nobody recognizes, and bank reconciliations that are late or never reviewed.
Not at first. A confrontation before records, devices and bank access are secured gives the person a chance to destroy evidence, move money or build a story. Preserve the evidence, call your business attorney, notify your crime insurer, and plan any interview with counsel, usually after the documents have been examined.
Often, but only if the business bought commercial crime or employee dishonesty coverage, and only if it follows the policy conditions. The standard ISO crime form requires notice as soon as possible and a sworn proof of loss within 120 days, and coverage for that employee ends once a designated person learns of the theft. Read your own policy and call your broker immediately.
Florida prosecutes embezzlement as theft under section 812.014. Taking property worth $750 or more is grand theft, a felony; $20,000 or more is a second-degree felony and $100,000 or more a first-degree felony. Amounts taken under one scheme can be added together to set the degree. Below $750 the offense is petit theft, a misdemeanor.
Sometimes. Options include a crime insurance claim, criminal restitution, and a civil suit, including a Florida civil theft claim for three times actual damages after a written demand. Recovery is often partial: in the ACFE’s 2026 data, 56% of victim organizations recovered nothing. Acting fast and documenting the loss carefully improve the odds.
Endnotes
Sources and method.
Facts were checked on November 11, 2026. Statistics come from the ACFE’s 2026 report, read in the original PDF on acfe.com; statutes from the official Florida Senate and U.S. Code texts; insurance conditions from the published ISO commercial crime form. Policies differ, so read your own.
- 1Association of Certified Fraud Examiners · 2026Occupational Fraud 2026: A Report to the Nations, Key findings and how to use the report (pp. 4–6)
- 2Association of Certified Fraud Examiners · 2026Occupational Fraud 2026: A Report to the Nations, Glossary of terminology (p. 106)
- 3Association of Certified Fraud Examiners · 2026Occupational Fraud 2026: A Report to the Nations, Size of organization, Figures 22–24 (pp. 32–34)
- 4Association of Certified Fraud Examiners · 2026Occupational Fraud 2026: A Report to the Nations, Duration and velocity of schemes, Figures 7–9 (pp. 17–19)
- 5Association of Certified Fraud Examiners · 2026Occupational Fraud 2026: A Report to the Nations, Figure 5: asset misappropriation sub-schemes (p. 15)
- 6Association of Certified Fraud Examiners · 2026Occupational Fraud 2026: A Report to the Nations, Concealment of occupational fraud, Figure 10 (p. 20)
- 7Insurance Journal (Associated Press) · November 20, 2023Murdaugh pleads guilty to state financial crimes
- 8U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission · April 4, 2023SEC v. Charlie Javice, complaint
- 9Associated Press (via WDIV ClickOnDetroit) · March 28, 2025Charlie Javice convicted of defrauding JPMorgan during $175 million sale of financial aid startup
- 10Association of Certified Fraud Examiners · 2026Occupational Fraud 2026: A Report to the Nations, Behavioral red flags, Figures 55–57 (pp. 68–69)
- 11Association of Certified Fraud Examiners · 2026Occupational Fraud 2026: A Report to the Nations, Internal control weaknesses, Figure 37 (p. 49)
- 12Association of Certified Fraud Examiners · 2026Occupational Fraud 2026: A Report to the Nations, Anti-fraud controls by size of organization, Figure 30 (p. 44)
- 13Association of Certified Fraud Examiners · 2026Occupational Fraud 2026: A Report to the Nations, Effectiveness of anti-fraud controls, Figures 28–29 (pp. 39–41)
- 14Federal Reserve, FedPayments Improvement · CurrentHelp your business customers prevent check fraud
- 15The Florida Senate · 2025Florida Statutes §674.406, customer’s duty to discover and report unauthorized signature or alteration
- 16Association of Certified Fraud Examiners · 2026Occupational Fraud 2026: A Report to the Nations, Initial detection and who reports fraud, Figures 13–14 (pp. 23–24)
- 17Association of Certified Fraud Examiners · 2026Occupational Fraud 2026: A Report to the Nations, Reporting mechanisms and hotline effectiveness (p. 26)
- 18Insurance Services Office (specimen issued by AmTrust) · 2021 editionCommercial Crime Policy (Discovery Form), CR 00 22 06 22
- 19The Florida Senate · 2025Florida Statutes §812.012, definitions
- 20The Florida Senate · 2026Florida Statutes §812.014, theft
- 21The Florida Senate · 2025Florida Statutes §775.082, penalties
- 22The Florida Senate · 2025Florida Statutes §775.089, restitution
- 23Association of Certified Fraud Examiners · 2026Occupational Fraud 2026: A Report to the Nations, Litigation, criminal referrals and recovering losses, Figures 62–67 (pp. 75–77)
- 24The Florida Senate · 2026Florida Statutes §772.11, civil remedy for theft or exploitation
- 25Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School · Current text26 U.S.C. §165, losses
Talk to an examiner
Think someone is stealing from the business?
Request a consultation (727) 470-0960
This whitepaper is general information, not legal or tax advice. Talk to your attorney about your own matter.