Western Union admits to aiding wire fraud, to pay $586M

Re:Western Union admits to aiding wire fraud, to pay $586M by ghurtado on Monday January 23, 2017 @03:18PM (#13465573)

> (size of fine * chance of being caught) > profit from not being caught

But that's precisely the problem, isn't it? How can you ensure the risk is too high for the company unless you take into account its financials?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Western Union admits to aiding wire fraud, to pay $586M by dpark on Monday January 23, 2017 @04:18PM (#13466144)

Because the question isn't whether the fine will bankrupt the company but whether the expected value of the illegal transaction is negative. Illegal transactions that lose you money are a generally bad idea regardless of whether your net worth is ten dollars or ten billion.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Western Union admits to aiding wire fraud, to pay $586M by habosa on Monday January 23, 2017 @04:19PM (#13466148)

That's the profit part. It could be the following:

  * $x of fines for every $y of wire fraud
  * $x of fines for every individual instance of wire fraud

The point is if a company that makes a billion dollars does $100k in fraud they should probably pay the same fine as a company that makes a million dollars and does $100k in fraud.

[ Parent | on HN ]