EU Commission: Corruption Across EU Costs €120 Billion 196
cold fjord writes with news that the EU has completed its first report on corruption in member states, and the results aren't looking too good. From the article: "'The extent of corruption in Europe is 'breathtaking' and it costs the EU economy at least 120bn euros (£99bn) annually, the European Commission says. EU Home Affairs Commissioner Cecilia Malmstroem has presented a full report on the problem. She said the true cost of corruption was 'probably much higher' than € 120bn. Three-quarters of Europeans surveyed for the Commission study said that corruption was widespread, and more than half said the level had increased. 'The extent of the problem in Europe is breathtaking, although Sweden is among the countries with the least problems,' Ms Malmstroem wrote in Sweden's Goeteborgs-Posten daily. The cost to the EU economy is equivalent to the bloc's annual budget. For the report the Commission studied corruption in all 28 EU member states. The Commission says it is the first time it has done such a survey. "
Relation to Debt Crisis? (Score:3)
Why are countries most affected by the debt crisis also the most corrupt?
Re: (Score:3)
You haven't seen corruption until you've done business with China.
Re: (Score:2)
And corruption in China is absolutely nothing compared to the level of corruption in India.
Re:Relation to Debt Crisis? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
President of Shmuckovia (yelling from the presidential balcony): "People! People! Relief is here! I am taking the extraordinary measure of canceling the debt of the People! All debts are null and void! No longer will you be crushed by debt as a result of..."
President's Advisor (in hushed and secretive tone): "My President! What are you doing! This is just a peace rally! Gah! We're doomed, you fool!"
President of Shmuckovia (obviously confused): But...but...I HAD TO DO SOMETHING! You said the peasants were re
Re: (Score:2)
No, I disagree. Best comment on the subject ever was done by my better half. Picture : we are eating a breakfast and BBC World is on the TV. Some man in the studio was just talking about Russian oligarchs and Putin and bla bla and in the end with pathetic aplomb he says "In short: Russia is a Mafia state"!
My wife looks up briefly and says "Of course it is a Mafia state. So is the West only here it is legal, so they don't call it Mafia".
'nuf said..
Re: (Score:2)
They're all way behind Spain...
Re: (Score:2)
In fact, I'd love to see the same process undertaken in other places... The EC should push for that if they think corruption is so bad, instead of just saying "Well it's rather bad and it's costing us a lot of money!" DO SOMETHING.
Re: Relation to Debt Crisis? (Score:3)
Because those are the countries whose corrupt inefficient systems lead to bad choices?
Incompetence in doing things like collecting taxes is left to go unchallenged. Money is spent on things that aren't needed because politicians are bribed. Services are unfairly provided due to nepotism.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If we consider that the questions on the survey were:
"do you feel that corruption is widespread in your country?"
and
"do you feel that corruption affects you personally?"
then it's an unsurprising result. If people are told their country is corrupt and bankrupt when it is obviously going through a serious crisis, it is easy to believe in that story and perpetuate that perception of a broken country.
Re:Relation to Debt Crisis? (Score:5, Insightful)
...which is why those hardcore libertarians running Sweden are counted "among the countries with the least problems," right?
Re: (Score:2)
Okay, so from context, I'm guessing that something in that post was ironic/sarcastic. Not sure which part, though, not being all that familiar with Sweden. What do you mean?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Sweden has one of the most extreme welfare states in the world, as do some of the other countries with very low corruption figures (and some that are hugely corrupt). There does not appear to be a correlation between the two. Welfare states have some huge drawbacks (as well as some benefits), but corruption does not seem to be among them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Welfare states have huge benefits."
I see what you did there!
Re: (Score:2)
Nationalized assets != Socialism.
Socialism can be other things than just appropriating the means of production.
Similarly, dictatorships might nationalize assets but won't be socialist, even if they may claim to be.
Re: (Score:2)
Socialism can be other things than just appropriating the means of production.
I lived in a socialistic country, and I was constantly bombarded from all my educators with the claim that socialism is all about appropriating the means of production and instituting planned economy. You must be living on a different planet.
Re: (Score:2)
I think you mean that you lived in a totalitarian socialist country. Socialism comes in many types, eg co-ops and credit unions are socialist as they are owned by the collective.
Totalitarian is bad whether socialist or capitalist.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Relation to Debt Crisis? (Score:5, Interesting)
The study does lighlight such factors, and as far as I know Sweden also has a lot less of this hidden corruption compared to NL. Not because they are a nanny state, but because of functional transparency laws. In the Netherlands, comparatively few people bother to check on their government, and when they do, they find transparency laws that are ranked amongst the worst in the world. Corrpution exists where it is profitable, undetected or unpunished. In that light, I shudder to think about what we can find in the EU offices themselves...
Re: (Score:2)
The real question you should be asking is "why did they get rid of the confirm button?"
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I know you're trying to be funny by saying that libertarians are running Sweden but there is some truth to that. Sweden is rank fairly high on the economic freedom index [heritage.org]. They have somewhat low corporate taxes and stay out of wars and these are things that you'll find in common with libertarians. Having that said, they are not a wealthy country either measured as a whole or per capita. Like other socialist countries, they have to enjoy a lower standard of living than countries with smaller governments.
Re: (Score:2)
Corporate tax rate is relatively low. 22% in Sweden vs 40% in the United States.
http://www.kpmg.com/global/en/... [kpmg.com]
Don't get me wrong, I'd confidently place a socialist label on Sweden as a whole but it's not as socialist as some might think.
Re: (Score:2)
What does welfare have to do with corruption? It's not the poor welfare recipients that are bribing the politicians.
Re: (Score:2)
What does welfare have to do with corruption? It's not the poor welfare recipients that are bribing the politicians.
Rather the other way around. I suppose it's one of the reasons I've never cared for this variety of welfare. The poor aren't being bribed in favor of my interests.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
That is the fundamental difference between liberals and conservatives. Liberals are concerned about meeting the interests of the most people possible, conservatives are only concerned with their own personal interests.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Socialism (as Marx envisioned it anyway) is the exact opposite of self interest.
Re: (Score:2)
They are bribed to not rebel. That's why you can give these modern-day "let them eat cake" statements without worrying about being dragged to a guillotine.
But human beings tend to regard whatever they're used to as the "natural" resting point of things. That's why politicians can't comprehend that if roads are not maintained, they'll be gone eventually. That's why people can't comprehend that if they don't stop stuffing their face, they'll have a heart
Re: (Score:2)
And that's why conservatists can't comprehend that if they implement their policies of removing all maintenance from civil society, they'll get a civil war.
Then there are other sorts of mental failures, such as ignorance. For example, the people who think that they can give free unicorns to everyone and somehow maintain any sort of society, much less a civil one.
I'm starting to think it'll take a major Western nation falling to anarchy to drive this point home again.
When that happens, let's see how many "social safety nets" they had in place. For example, when we look at major Western nations which are falling apart, they tend to have a lot of social programs. They're countries like Greece not like the US. Similarly, when one looks at the worst off states in the U
Re: (Score:2)
If you want to blame somebody, look in the mirror. Who did you vote for who failed to fight for your interests?
I don't "want" to blame someone. And it would be incorrect and counterproductive to blame myself for something over which I didn't have sufficient control.
Re: (Score:2)
To do something, you have to identify a problem - ergo assigning blame.
No. You can have a problem without having anyone to blame. And you can have someone to blame without actually having a problem.
As to the rest of your post, I find it very disingenuous. Living in a populous democratic society, my ability to control that society is by definition very limited (unless I should happen to muster enough power to make that society other than democratic). There will never be a politician in such a society who would represent my interests precisely, even if I were that politician.
Re:Relation to Debt Crisis? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Relation to Debt Crisis? (Score:5, Insightful)
BTW, in socialist countries, welfare is a kind of bribe, it keeps the poor masses living on those welfare payment in line, making sure they keep voting for the political parties who keep promising them the best short-term deal.
Because Denmark, Finland, Luxembourg and Sweden are well known for their "poor masses".
Re: (Score:2)
And for being lazy, you can tell my the huge amount of debt the countries carry
Re: (Score:2)
And for being lazy, you can tell my the huge amount of debt the countries carry
Yes well: Sweden 38.2% of GDP, Luxembourg 20.8% of GDP, Finland 53.1% of GDP, and Denmark 45.6% of GDP. (From the CIA world fact book, est. for 2012).
From the same source: USA 70% of GDP (and that's apparently not counting it all).
"Huge" debts indeed... So we're lazy? Well it takes one to know one I guess...
Re: (Score:2)
I forgot to include the Sarcasm tag.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, least corrupted if you look at how corruption is defined in the laws of the land. A lot of the corruption is legalized by law(state sanctioned or state run monopolies, or oligopolies run by politicians) and thus not counted towards the corruption score in international rankings.
That's a lot of conjecture in one post. But then again, conservative shills with their ritual hate of wealth redistribution would write something like that.
Would you care to give some examples from the countries in question? (SE, LU, FI, DK)
Re: (Score:3)
Well, least corrupted if you look at how corruption is defined in the laws of the land. A lot of the corruption is legalized by law(state sanctioned or state run monopolies, or oligopolies run by politicians) and thus not counted towards the corruption score in international rankings. Funny that, just invent a BS reason for a protection racket(protecting the state's or your own profits, not the people...) and BANG! Not corruption, just the way the country is run. BTW, in socialist countries, welfare is a kind of bribe, it keeps the poor masses living on those welfare payment in line, making sure they keep voting for the political parties who keep promising them the best short-term deal.
Well people giving votes for money and politicans giving money for votes is more like two wolves and a sheep deciding what's for dinner, but it's not corruption. Forget the government for a moment, if you want to say win a contract and it doesn't matter how good or bad your bid is only how much you bribe the person in charge, that's corruption. It's a form of fraud where the person doesn't do what he's hired to do, he's secretly lining his personal account at the expense of his employer. The money isn't tak
What a load of bull (Score:1)
You gotta add at least one digit to that.
"probably" much higher? (Score:4, Interesting)
120 billion euro? Internets, you so funny.
To put things in perspective:
1. Estimates [forbes.com] of just medicare/medicaid fraud in the US easily approach $100 billion. I'd bet those estimates are conservative.
2. Medicare/medicaid spending is only about a fifth of the US budget. (That doesn't necessarily mean that total US fraud is 5 times the above figure, but suggests it's much larger than $100B.).
3. The Eurozone's GDP is about equal to (slightly larger than) that of the US.
Put it all together, and tell me with a straight face that fraud in the Eurozone is 120 billion euro (about $160 billion). Keep in mind that for every Sweden there's an Italy.
Yeah, it's "probably" much higher, like the Broncos "probably" lost.
Re: (Score:2)
Keep in mind that for every Sweden there's an Italy.
Fraud isn't quite corruption, for example taking bribes is a seperate issue from fraud, though often highly related.
But yes, I'd be shocked if the corruption cost is 'only' 120B Euro for Italy alone.
Re: (Score:2)
In the case of corruption related to medicare disability fraud, the "fraud" part is the healthy person wanting to be on disability; the "corruption" part is the doctor and/or government agency helping him to do so.
Re: "probably" much higher? (Score:1)
So, that doesn't really put anything in perspective.
Re: "probably" much higher? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: "probably" much higher? (Score:2)
Also of note, the $130 billion is not the amount of corruption, it is the cost to the
Re: "probably" much higher? (Score:5, Insightful)
Corruption isn't just 100 billion dollar bad. If it was, any steadfast leader would pay it each year to remove it. Corruption is destroy your government, society, and civilization bad, and in the short run people's lives can be ruined.
Exactly. And that is before we factor in the cost in human lives. For example see the incredible increase in suicide rates in Spain in the wake of its scandalous banking and housing corrupticon, wheremajority of the top bankers and politicians [wikipedia.org] have been implicated or sentenced but not jailed in corruption cases.. It got so bad that the bailed out banks were forced to tone down their house repossessions [huffingtonpost.com] as pensioners were leaping from the windows to their deaths when the police came knocking to throw them out into the street. (tone down, not stop).
Isn't it funny that you almost never see a graphic displaying suicide statistics, especially lately. If there is one statistic a corrupt politician does not want the common folk to see too often, this must be it...
Re:"probably" much higher? (Score:5, Informative)
1. Estimates [forbes.com] of just medicare/medicaid fraud in the US easily approach $100 billion. I'd bet those estimates are conservative.
According to that link, the GAO estimated $48 billion in "improper payments." I suppose that's "approaching" $100 billion, if you are free to take any number and double it.
The GAO didn't say "fraud," they said "improper payments." Big difference.
The author of that article said that Medicare fraud is 10%, but private insurance fraud is only 1.5%. Funny thing, he used to work for the Council for Affordable Health Insurance, which is a private insurance industry lobbyist.
I went to a doctor about a bad knee. He gave me an x-ray, and billed the insurance company
$1,000. When I got home, I read a medical journal article about my knee problem. They said that x-rays aren't necessary. I wonder how much the private insurance industry loses to fraud. I'd like a calculation made by somebody who isn't a lobbyist for the private insurance industry.
Re: (Score:2)
It seems fairly easy to figure that out. Take the total health expenditure per capita [wikipedia.org], which for the US according to the OECD was $8508. The second in the list is Norway, with $5669. Norway isn't exactly an ill country, so that leaves $2839 per head (33.38%) unaccounted for.
If you'd compare it to a purely tax sponsored public system like Britain's NHS, that takes 3405 per capita, which would leave $5103 (or 60%) unaccounted for, somehow soaked up by the insurance industry.
Enjoy your free market!
Re: (Score:2)
That's a good way of looking at it.
I used to calculate it like this:
You pay a dollar premium to an insurance company. They take 15% or 20% of that off the top for administrative costs and profits (that's the item called "loss ratio" in their annual report). The doctor gets 80 cents, and he has to spend another 15 cents for administrative costs, so he's left with 65 cents of your premium dollar.
The funny thing is that most of that doesn't go to insurance company profits, it goes to administrative costs.
The o
Re: (Score:3)
No, what you'd actually like, is a system of health care in which the price of the simplest medical procedures is not gigantically inflated by profit margins. There is no way an xray costs a thousand dollars.
I work on the in the h
Re: (Score:2)
No, what you'd actually like, is a system of health care in which the price of the simplest medical procedures is not gigantically inflated by profit margins. There is no way an xray costs a thousand dollars.
Keep in mind, that any time you see US medical prices, they are inflated because insurance only pays 33 - 66 cents on the dollar. The hospital charges $1000, but only ends up getting $333 from insurance in most cases to apply to costs, and part of that has to go to helping pay for those that won't or can't pay their own bills.
Re:"probably" much higher? (Score:4, Interesting)
Keep in mind that for every Sweden there's an Italy.
As an Italian, I'd like to remind everyone that Italian corruption alone (60bn) accounts for half of the total of Europe losses.
So the average in Europe is actually much lower than you usually think if you exclude Italy.
Now we are also risking big fines if we do not pass laws that will fix the situation, but as you can guess, the politicians are not really inclined to do this...
Everyone is still following berlusconi, who is the father of our new election law (the previous one was ruled unconstitutional), even though he is not in the parliament anymore...
So actually, comparing the Italian corruption with any first-world country is actually laughable in any case...
Did I mention the proven interactions between the state and the mafia, or the convicted parliament memebers? Well, we can talk for hours on that...
Re: (Score:2)
You really shouldn't have thrown *all* your meat hooks away.
Re: (Score:2)
It may not seem that way politically, but Italy nevertheless is a first-world country [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:2)
Eurozone != EU
Perhaps... (Score:1)
This is what you get (Score:1)
When you allow Greece and Italy to be part of your organization.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There is nothing wrong with my English.
You want to get all grammar-nazi on me? I can play that game too:
The word "America" is supposed to have a capital first letter, because it's a proper noun.
The present-tense form of the word "corrupt" is "corrupt", not "corrupted".
120Billion? (Score:2, Insightful)
Try like 38 Trillion if you do a little Math on the LIBOR rigging.
None of these people EVER go to jail.
Remember that when you go to get a small business loan and want to work for yourself, instead of going on Welfare and working 50 hour weeks at 4 different jobs.
Sorry we can't give you a loan, you are not Microsoft, or McDonalds.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
None of these people EVER go to jail.
Yep don't start a charity start an investment bank and fuck the Economy that way the Government will pay you for receiving you seven figure bonus.
Did they just patch democracy? (Score:2)
Too much inclusion (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Too much inclusion (Score:5, Insightful)
If that's the cost of bringing those nations up to Western European or even Scandinavian standards then what's the problem?
No one's under any illusion that expansion means bringing countries into the EU with problems, in fact, that's kind of the point. The goal is to sort them out and hence make Europe ever stronger.
I live in Western Europe, I always have, and I'm happy to pay that cost. It's nice to know we're living on an ever more secure and ever more prosperous continent. Far better than the alternative of having constant repeats of Yugoslavia on our borders over and over and over which cost far more again in terms of military effort to contain or defuse the problem, far higher cost in terms of lives, and far higher cost in terms of ever more desperate people emigrating West trying to escape the war not able to bring anything with them, not even an education, because even their schools had been bombed.
Re:Too much inclusion (Score:5, Interesting)
But it's not a constant, it's changing over time. Many of the Eastern European nations have seen healthy declines in corruption towards the Western European and Scandinavian standards which is my point. There are still problem countries i.e. Greece and Italy but the financial crisis brought those glaring exceptions to the forefront of scrutiny such that even they can no longer get away with it and are being forced to deal with it.
Income differences are continuously decreasing too as new entrants become more prosperous over time from having their cheap starting base opened up to the demands of the wealthier nations creating jobs.
It isn't going to happen overnight, but it most definitely is happening. It's not like things are stagnant, it's not as if all EU nations are in the same place they were when they joined and nothing has improved or changed, that view is very much wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed, Estonia is a particularly impressive nation, punching way above it's weight in so many ways.
At the end of the day the EU puts strict rules on even entering the organisation, so many of the nations with corruption problems have come a long way even before they're actually a member state. Once they are they're still bound to long term improve plants or they risk losing membership. This is one thing the EU is very good at - improving balance of wealth across the continent.
Nations like Poland have been
Re: (Score:3)
In the short term, this is true. Including countries with lesser living standards will cost the EU as a whole.
In the mid-term (10-25 yrs), these countries will adopt some practices from EU-regulation, get an influx of highly educated workers that start to build up the country, all the while exporting cheap labor (both goods and services meaning immigrants coming to clean your house).
In the long term (25+ yrs) we will see a strong economic country with high education and living standards. Not including these
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Swiss banking commission... (Score:5, Funny)
EU Commission: Corruption Across EU Costs €120 Billion
Swiss banking commission: Corruption Across EU Earns us interest on €100 Billion
And now? (Score:2)
Great to know corruption costs so much money (as if we didn't know that already)..
But what are they gonna do about it? I guess the won't as the corruption is in high places and they want to continue receiving their scammoney..
Wisdom follows, pay attention! (Score:2, Interesting)
You do not understand what the European Union is. It is not an economic alliance. It's sole purpose is to prevent large war breaking out in Europe (cue WWI and WW2). Efficiency, anti-corruption, economic competitiveness are all tertiary compared to the great aim of peace, complete with doves carrying olive branches, lions and lambs napping together and whatnot.
If the EU ever falls apart, Britain, France and Germany will jump at each other's throat, Russia will invade Eastern Europe and the gunpowder barrel
Bloc's annual budget (Score:2)
TFA says:
The cost to the EU economy is equivalent to the bloc's annual budget.
What is this number? It is supposed to compare to 120 bn EUR of corruption, but the sum of EU member states budgets is much much higher. Is it the budget of the EU itself?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
I thought smart people came to Slashdot. I didn't realize Fixed News Fuckwits were paid to troll here too.
You should have sharted. It would have been more useful than your ODS garbage.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
you have to read between the lines. OP was a douche. Nobody likes douches. Myself, I don't know any europeans with corruption, so I can't speak to the accuracy of this report.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The no-bid and Michelle Obama nonsense is parroted by people who consume right wing news (propaganda) and mistakenly believe it to be true.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:... meanwhile in USA ... (Score:5, Insightful)
We do not have "corruption commission" in the States, therefore we do not have any solid figure of how much corruption is costing the American taxpayers.
I hear you guys call this "campaign contribution". Maybe that will help you find some figures -- I am told they are rather outlandish.
Re: (Score:2)
You can find out how much the campaign contributions are, but finding out how much they cost you is much more difficult. A $1m campaign contribution would normally bring more than $1m of benefits. How much more is the unknown number.
Re:... meanwhile in USA ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't worry, the biggest difference is that corruption is legal in the US, while it's illegal in the EU. Apart from that detail, it's business as usual.
It's funny that it's the European Commission talking about corruption. All top-level politicians in Europe are in bed with the business world. They keep trying to pass corporate-friendly legislation and create new tax-evasion routes. Sometimes, it's so blatant that they have to retreat. Often, these legislations pass undetected. Politicians spend some time in public office acting as corporate moles. After that, they are given comfortable positions in corporations as a reward for their good services. This behaviour is publicly known and, honestly I can't see any way out of this shit. If someone tries to change anything, they'll come up with some "sexual scandal" to silence him. Just look at what happened to Hollande because of the tax raises on the rich.
Europe is fucked, just like the USA. The foxes took over the hen house.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah. The way they tricked him into repeatedly getting onto that bike and going to the same house with the same woman in it! If you meant, and just poorly expressed, that the scandal was only revealed because he annoyed the wealthy then you're selectively ignoring the dozens of times that low-tax or pro-business politicians have been outed for scandals.
Re:... meanwhile in USA ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Having a mistress is not a scandal. What people do in their private sexual lives is not my business. It's a shame that the American puritanism has managed to come across the pond and is being used as a political weapon here in Europe.
Maybe this is a strange concept for you Americans, but most Europeans don't give a fuck about politician's private lives. It's what they do at their work that matters. Anything else is just diversion used by the hidden powers for manipulation.
mistresses (Score:2)
Americans get uppity about mistresses as it means the politician is compromised in some way. The politician could be blackmailed over it. The politician is not trustworthy. It implies that they are corruptible and have lied and makes us wonder what else they have lied about.
In our military, extra martial affairs are illegal for these very reasons.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I suppose, in addition to all the voters not minding an affair, the spouses also don't mind in Europe?
Well... they mind, but you can always find another one. Changing the voters is a lot more difficult.
Re: (Score:2)
Americans get uppity about mistresses as it means the politician is compromised in some way. The politician could be blackmailed over it. The politician is not trustworthy. It implies that they are corruptible and have lied and makes us wonder what else they have lied about.
In our military, extra martial affairs are illegal for these very reasons.
All of that is ridiculous.
Re: (Score:2)
How? Someone has entered into a contract (marriage) and made an oath to uphold it. Then broke the contract and lied while giving the oath. How are we supposed to trust someone to uphold their oath of office and contractual obligations to millions of people when they failed to do the same for their spouse?
Comparing apples and oranges.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, Hollandes popularity poll number was raised after this affair was published.
In France, having a mistress is a natural thing. The only requirement is handling it discrete. In Hollandes case he did that, but the journalists did nevertheless find it out when they found that he leaved his resident through a backdoor and went to the mistress on a bicycle.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't really care much about their private lives, but if he's diddling a young intern, we have a problem.
Re: (Score:2)
All that proves is that a man bad a hiding his mistress is also likely bad at hiding his corruption.
Re: (Score:2)
Just read a GAO report. They are usually pretty solid.
Re: (Score:2)
"of being extremely fucking likely to be some sort of unscrupulous run-of-the-mill government cronyismish corruption."
What you might call corruption is just another day in DC, We cant elect someone not already infected by this corruption.
Re: (Score:3)
Who needs corruption? We've got lobbyists!
That's simply legalised corruption.
Re: (Score:1)
I think your calculator needs new batteries.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Wow, what a conspiracy theory bullshit. Like any other sovereign state or supranational organization, the EU is not required to be audited by a chartered accountancy, but is audited by the ECA. Every year the ECA signs off the accounts provisionally, the only problem is that the current rules for the EU account audit require a 100% compliance for a full sign off, which is something no entity will ever achieve. You just need one person to lose a single receipt and you are non-compliant. Only so far, nobody h