[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by jonbxx

Fair enough, I am not an accountant (my experience of audits are quality system ones) and assumed that financial audits take samples and extrapolate from that (much like quality audits) rather than going line by line through the whole account book.[SEPH]: The audit methodology can be found at https://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECAD..._MANUAL_EN.pdf and for sample size in §2.25.. Long story short on that one, the base for the threshold % (they chose 1,000 samples for audit) is usually total expenditure; so how they arrive at an exact number such as 1,000 on "Entitlement & Administrative Payments" of €63.3 billion is somewhat opaque - especially as the total number of transactions is not stated in your link. The Audit Rules state that they usually take 2% of the total population. This would be €1.3 billion and 1,000 samples would average §1.3 million each. Without knowing what the actual average payment is, it is somewhat opaque as to the validity of the 1,000 samples

<SNIP>

I didn't accuse the UK of committing fraud BTW, OLAF did this. However, the government is quibbling on the value, not the facts. I am concerned that, if this is true, then the trust for a new trading agreement is somewhat eroded.
[SEPH]: Well, your actual words were was issued as a statement of fact: "Unfortunately, the biggest fraud so far was by the UK at €2.7bn".

I also think it is clutching at straw to say that "the level of trust for a new trading agreement is somewhat eroded". If we remained in the EU, wouldn't that erosion of trust remain? Your point seems to me to be self-defeating.