The number of cases in which the EU’s various anti-fraud bodies have supported each other in recent years has remained “relatively small”, the bloc’s auditors have said in a report, warning of gaps in the strategy to tackle financial crime against the EU budget.
There is also no mechanism in place to monitor whether court-ordered financial recovery has taken place and whether “the full amount due to the EU budget has been recovered”, the Luxembourg-based European Court of Auditors (ECA) said on Monday.
The ECA report assessed the role of the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), based in Brussels, the EU Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (Eurojust) and the EU Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol), both located in The Hague, and the Luxembourg-headquartered European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO), which began operations in 2021. Unlike OLAF, which carries out administrative investigations and can make recommendations, EPPO can launch criminal prosecutions.
Defined mandates and ‘complementary’ roles
While each body has defined mandates and “complementary” roles in fighting fraud against the EU budget, the exchange of information between the various bodies and the oversight of the fight against fraud by the European Commission remains insufficient, the auditors concluded.
“While they welcome mutual support when requested, the number of cases where they have supported one another in recent years has remained relatively small,” the ECA said in a press release accompanying the report.
In the years between 2022 and 2024, a total of 27,000 fraud allegations were received by both OLAF and EPPO, the ECA report found, a third of which “merited investigation”.
EU auditor wants work to be more relevant to citizens, says ECA president
“Figures show that EU bodies report three times more fraud allegations to OLAF than to EPPO, while for many member states there is a substantial gap between their share of the EU budget and the number of cases of fraud they report,” the auditors added.
“The auditors call on the Commission to analyse the reasons for these variations, and to investigate the causes of any significant under-reporting,” the auditors added.
Fraud reporting procedures often lead to “duplicate reporting to OLAF and EPPO”, the auditors said, with the current system failing to “ensure that all allegations reach EPPO, which could assess them for potential criminal activity”.
There are also major gaps in verifying the actual amounts which are reimbursed to the EU, the auditors said.
The ECA report stated that following its investigations during the period under review, OLAF recommended repayments of €615 million, but just €23 million had already been repaid by the end of 2024. EPPO, meanwhile, froze €3 billion worth of assets over the same period, and courts had ordered national authorities to recover €232 million resulting from criminal activity in 2024.
“However, the Commission does not have a mechanism to monitor whether the recoveries ordered by the courts have taken place and the full amount due to the EU budget has been recovered. The auditors therefore stress the need for the Commission to enhance its oversight of the follow-up of fraud investigations,” the ECA report stated.
Effective cooperation between all those fighting fraud, from EU investigators to national police and judicial authorities, is key to keeping fraudsters at bay
Katarína Kaszasová
European Court of Auditors
“Effective cooperation between all those fighting fraud, from EU investigators to national police and judicial authorities, is key to keeping fraudsters at bay,” said Katarína Kaszasová, the ECA member responsible for the audit. “The ongoing review of EU anti-fraud architecture is a golden opportunity to right the system’s faults in terms of information exchange and oversight.”
Responding to the report, the European Commission said that “notwithstanding the impressive results achieved by OLAF and EPPO in their respective fields”, it acknowledged “there is scope to further develop a methodology to measure all the amounts of fraud or irregularities established, prevented and actually recovered.”
EPPO said that it “has become manifest that the EU Anti-Fraud Architecture needs to be further developed, in particular to counter more efficiently organised crime groups defrauding EU revenue.”
Proposals contained in a new EU strategy, entitled ProtectEU: A European Internal Security Strategy, foresees an “overhaul of Europol’s mandate, with the aim of elevating Europol’s operational capabilities, for providing even stronger support” for member states, Europol said in its response to the ECA report.
