IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/reggov/v15y2021i1p82-97.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Myths and numbers on whistleblower rewards

Author

Listed:
  • Theo Nyreröd
  • Giancarlo Spagnolo

Abstract

Whistleblower rewards have been used extensively in the United States to limit procurement fraud and tax evasion, and since the financial crisis their use has been extended to fight financial fraud. There is currently debate over their introduction in Europe, but authorities there appear considerably less enthusiastic than their American counterparts. While it is important that these tools are scrutinized in a lively democratic debate, much has been written – even by important institutional players – that has no empirical backing or openly contrasts the available evidence from independent research. In this paper we review some of the most debated issues regarding the potential benefits and costs of financial incentives for whistleblowers, while trying to separate existing evidence from conjectures with no empirical support, and myths in contrast to available evidence.

Suggested Citation

  • Theo Nyreröd & Giancarlo Spagnolo, 2021. "Myths and numbers on whistleblower rewards," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(1), pages 82-97, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:reggov:v:15:y:2021:i:1:p:82-97
    DOI: 10.1111/rego.12267
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12267
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/rego.12267?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Abbink, Klaus & Wu, Kevin, 2017. "Reward self-reporting to deter corruption: An experiment on mitigating collusive bribery," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 256-272.
    2. Jeffrey V. Butler & Danila Serra & Giancarlo Spagnolo, 2017. "Motivating Whistleblowers," Departmental Working Papers 1701, Southern Methodist University, Department of Economics.
    3. Niels Johannesen & Tim B.M. Stolper, 2021. "The Deterrence Effect of Whistleblowing," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 64(4), pages 821-855.
    4. Perrotta Berlin, Maria & Spagnolo, Giancarlo & Qin, Bei, 2015. "Leniency, Asymmetric Punishment and Corruption: Evidence from China," SITE Working Paper Series 34, Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm Institute of Transition Economics, revised 25 May 2017.
    5. Alexander Dyck & Adair Morse & Luigi Zingales, 2010. "Who Blows the Whistle on Corporate Fraud?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 65(6), pages 2213-2253, December.
    6. Maria Bigoni & Sven-Olof Fridolfsson & Chloé Le Coq & Giancarlo Spagnolo, 2012. "fines, leniency, and rewards in antitrust," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 43(2), pages 368-390, June.
    7. Niels Johannesen & Tim Stolper, 2017. "The Deterrence Effect of Whistleblowing: An Event Study of Leaked Customer Information from Banks in Tax Havens," CESifo Working Paper Series 6784, CESifo.
    8. Roxan, Ian, 2012. "Limits to globalisation: some implications for taxation, tax policy, and the developing world," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 46768, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    9. Thomas Carson & Mary Verdu & Richard Wokutch, 2008. "Whistle-Blowing for Profit: An Ethical Analysis of the Federal False Claims Act," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 77(3), pages 361-376, February.
    10. Yehonatan Givati, 2016. "A Theory of Whistleblower Rewards," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 45(1), pages 43-72.
    11. Andreas Stephan, 2014. "Is the Korean Innovation of Individual Informant Rewards a Viable Cartel Detection Tool?," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Competition Policy (CCP) 2014-03, Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    12. Sue Konzelmann & Frank Wilkinson & Marc Fovargue-Davies & Duncan Sankey, 2010. "Governance, regulation and financial market instability: the implications for policy," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 34(5), pages 929-954.
    13. Nathan H. Miller, 2009. "Strategic Leniency and Cartel Enforcement," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(3), pages 750-768, June.
    14. Vishal P. Baloria & Carol A. Marquardt & Christine I. Wiedman, 2017. "A Lobbying Approach to Evaluating the Whistleblower Provisions of the Dodd†Frank Reform Act of 2010," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(3), pages 1305-1339, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Catarina Marvão & Giancarlo Spagnolo, 2023. "Leniency Inflation, Cartel Damages, and Criminalization," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 63(2), pages 155-186, September.
    2. Burgstaller, Lilith & Pfeil, Katharina, 2024. "Why whistleblowing does not deter collaborative tax evasion," Freiburg Discussion Papers on Constitutional Economics 24/3, Walter Eucken Institut e.V..

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nyreröd, Theo & Spagnolo, Giancarlo, 2017. "Myths and Numbers on Whistleblower Rewards," SITE Working Paper Series 44, Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm Institute of Transition Economics, revised 27 Apr 2018.
    2. Spagnolo, Giancarlo & Nyreröd, Theo, 2019. "Financial Incentives for Whistleblowers: A Short Survey," SITE Working Paper Series 50, Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm Institute of Transition Economics.
    3. Jun Hu, 2021. "Asymmetric punishment, Leniency and Harassment Bribes in China: a selective survey," Working Papers hal-03119491, HAL.
    4. Paolo Buccirossi & Giovanni Immordino & Giancarlo Spagnolo, 2021. "Whistleblower rewards, false reports, and corporate fraud," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 51(3), pages 411-431, June.
    5. Buckenmaier, Johannes & Dimant, Eugen & Mittone, Luigi, 2020. "Effects of institutional history and leniency on collusive corruption and tax evasion," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 296-313.
    6. Jeffrey V. Butler & Danila Serra & Giancarlo Spagnolo, 2020. "Motivating Whistleblowers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(2), pages 605-621, February.
    7. Perrotta Berlin, Maria & Spagnolo, Giancarlo & Qin, Bei, 2015. "Leniency, Asymmetric Punishment and Corruption: Evidence from China," SITE Working Paper Series 34, Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm Institute of Transition Economics, revised 25 May 2017.
    8. Batten, Jonathan A. & Lončarski, Igor & Szilagyi, Peter G., 2021. "Strategic insider trading in foreign exchange markets," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    9. Peter T. Dijkstra & Jonathan Frisch, 2018. "Sanctions and Leniency to Individuals, and its Impact on Cartel Discoveries: Evidence from the Netherlands," De Economist, Springer, vol. 166(1), pages 111-134, March.
    10. Emons, Winand, 2020. "The effectiveness of leniency programs when firms choose the degree of collusion," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    11. Stephen Davies & Peter L. Ormosi, 2014. "The economic impact of cartels and anti-cartel enforcement," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Competition Policy (CCP) 2013-07v2, Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    12. Jeong Yeol Kim & Charles N. Noussair, 2023. "Leniency Policies and Cartel Success: An Experiment," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 63(2), pages 187-210, September.
    13. Isogai, Shigeki & Shen, Chaohai, 2023. "Multiproduct firm’s reputation and leniency program in multimarket collusion," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    14. Iwasaki, Masaki, 2020. "A model of corporate self-policing and self-reporting," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    15. Laila Ait Bihi Ouali, 2020. "Effects of signalling tax evasion on redistribution and voting preferences: Evidence from the Panama Papers," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(3), pages 1-22, March.
    16. Maximilian Andres & Lisa Bruttel & Jana Friedrichsen, 2019. "The Effect of a Leniency Rule on Cartel Formation and Stability: Experiments with Open Communication," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1835, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    17. Bodnar, Olivia & Fremerey, Melinda & Normann, Hans-Theo & Schad, Jannika Leonie, 2021. "The effects of private damage claims on cartel activity: Experimental evidence," DICE Discussion Papers 315, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE), revised 2021.
    18. Georg Clemens & Holger A. Rau, 2019. "Do discriminatory leniency policies fight hard‐core cartels?," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(2), pages 336-354, April.
    19. Maria Bigoni & Sven-Olof Fridolfsson & Chloé Le Coq & Giancarlo Spagnolo, 2015. "Trust, Leniency, and Deterrence," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 31(4), pages 663-689.
    20. Iwan Bos & Stephen Davies & Peter L. Ormosi, 2014. "The deterrent effect of anti-cartel enforcement: A tale of two tails," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Competition Policy (CCP) 2014-06v2, Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:reggov:v:15:y:2021:i:1:p:82-97. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1748-5991 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.