Joint Report on EUROFISC Cooperative Audit

Report ID: 255

Since 2011, EU Member States have implemented EUROFISC, an early warning system, which enables them to share information on suspected companies and their customers. EUROFISC increases the chances of national administrations to detect fraudsters in due time. The quality of data, IT support, response times and response rates of the Member States, however, need to be enhanced to effectively combat VAT fraud within the EU.

The current value added tax (VAT) system in the European Union (EU) provides opportunities for intra–Community fraud that all Member States have to deal with. This is sufficient reason for the Supreme Audit Institutions (SAIs) of the EU to address this topic. Due to its European dimension, the SAIs considered it necessary to cooperate in their audit activities. Consequently, a number of coordinated audits were conducted during the last years within the EU.

The SAIs of Austria, Germany and Hungary carried out a coordinated audit in 2013 and 2014 by each SAI in its territory and according to its own mandate. Their audit activities resulted in national reports for each of the three participating countries, and a joint report. The joint report presents the overall and synthesized conclusions and recommendations supported by the relevant audit observations of the participating SAIS. The audit period covered the years 2011 to 2013.

Report of the Task Force on European Banking Union on prudential supervision of medium-sized and small (“less significant”) institutions in the European Union after the introduction of the Single Supervisory Mechanism

Report ID: 259

As from 2008, Europe was hit by a financial crisis and a subsequent sovereign debt crisis. Many governments supported failing financial institutions with public funds amounting to hundreds of billions of euros. In response, the countries of the euro area introduced the European Banking Union, including a Single Supervisory Mechanism. In this Mechanism, the European Central Bank is directly responsible for prudential supervision of all ‘Significant Institutions’. National Competent Authorities are directly responsible for supervising the ‘Less Significant Institutions’, based on guidance of the European Central Bank.

The Supreme Audit Institutions of Austria, Cyprus, Finland, Germany and the Netherlands carried out a parallel audit to examine banking supervision at national level. The objectives of the parallel audit were:

1) to gain insight into differences among EU Member States in the way supervisors have set up and carry out prudential supervision for LSIs, and

2) to collect evidence about possible ‘audit gaps’ that may have emerged as a result of the introduction of the Single Supervisory Mechanism.

One of the findings was that a comprehensive audit mandate assessing the supervisory review and  evaluation process of banking supervision is no guaranteed in the Single Supervisory Mechanism(SSM) and that before November 2014, National Supreme Audit Institutions audit scope went far beyond what the ECA is able to exercise today vis-à-vis the ECB.

EUROSAI website:  https://www.eurosai.org/en/databases/audits/Report-of-the-Task-Force-on-European-Banking-Union-on-prudential-supervision-of-medium-sized-and-small-less-significant-institutions-in-the-European-Union-after-the-introduction-of-the-Single-Supervisory-Mechanism/

EUROSAI IT Working Group Parallel Audit on Biometric Passports

Report ID: 261

At the 8th Meeting of the EUROSAI IT Working Group (ITWG), held in Paris, France, in 2013, the SAIs of Switzerland (Audit coordinator), Portugal, Belgium, Latvia, Lithuania and Norway, decided to carry out Parallel Audit on Biometric Passports

The objective of the audit was to assess whether adequate management and control processes are in place relating to the biometric passport production process. Within the primary objective, auditors were expected to ascertain whether the process to obtain a reliable and secure biometric passport is well defined and properly implemented.

The main goal of this audit was to validate the following areas with regard to the production process, including the risk mitigation aspect: Benefit realisation, Security, Effectiveness and efficiency

The evaluation of the reported results showed that the overall passport process is generally under control while a couple of high-risk findings were identified in the non-process-specific assessments. In the non-process-specific assessments, most of the countries found deficiencies and weaknesses related to the IS/IT system and the IT management. Medium risks have been identified in the area of laws and regulations, cost-benefit realisation and transparency, as well as in security regulations relating to internal and external personnel.

Source: https://www.vkontrole.lt/en/docs/booklet-parallel-audit-on-biometricpassports.pdf

Making it easier to start a business - A report on public sector digitalisation by the SAIs of the Faroe Islands, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden

Report ID: 264

The co-operation on carrying out a parallel audit on public sector digitalisation was decided by the Auditor Generals of the SAIs of the Faroe Islands, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden at the Nordic Supreme Audit Institutions’ meeting in August 2017.

Between 2018 - 2019, the  participating SAIs conducted parallel audits on government agencies’ initiatives for simplifying the process of starting a business using digital tools. The co-operating SAIs wished to highlight an important area for public sector digitalisation. Starting a business was chosen as an audit topic, with focus on the process of starting a restaurant. Simplifying the process of starting a new business using digital tools is an objective in all participating countries, as efficient processes are beneficial for both entrepreneurs and the public sector.

The report presents the findings from the five national audits carried out during 2018–2019, are presented and discussed. The report contains general observations and conclusions but no joint recommendations. The SAIs followed an agreed audit approach, including the same audit questions, audit criteria, methodology and approach, while allowing for a certain flexibility to take national considerations into account in the separate national audits.

Source: https://www.riksrevisjonen.no/globalassets/reports/en-2019-2020/joint-report_start-business.pdf

REPORT OF THE REVIEW OF HIGH QUALITY PERFORMANCE AUDITING IN THE PACIFIC

Report ID: 266

During 2016 PASAI undertook a review of the performance auditing capacity of its members, in particular the capacity building benefit gained through the Cooperative Performance Audit (CPA) program.

The first objective of the review was to follow up and analyse the impact on the SAIs that participated in the first five cooperative performance audits led by PASAI. The benefits had been evaluated since 2010 through PASAI’s after action reporting process. However, a review was required to capture and consolidate this information and to ensure its currency.

Within the CPA Program, PASAI has conducted cooperative performance audits and training for PASAI members since 2009 with the objective of enhancing performance auditing capacity:

CPA 1 Solid Waste Management  2010*

CPA 2 Access to Safe Drinking Water 2011*

CPA 3 Managing Sustainable Fisheries 2012*

CPA 4 Climate Change Adaptation and Disaster Risks Reduction 2013/14*

CPA 5 Public Debt Management 2015*

For SAIs, the benefits of engaging in cooperative performance audits include facilitating mutual sharing and learning, capacity building, networking, and identifying and adopting good audit practices.  Among other interesting topics, the report addresses the results of the impact evaluation of PASAI Cooperative Performance Audits (CPA).

Source: https://www.pasai.org/review-high-quality-performance-audits-pacific

* This report is available on this virtual catalogue.