The Serious Fraud Office used London as a meeting point for a more operational discussion on cross-border economic crime. In collaboration with France’s Parquet National Financier and Switzerland’s Office of the Attorney General, it convened a two-day International Economic Crime Conference at Drapers’ Hall, bringing together more than 100 investigators and prosecutors. According to the SFO, the event marked an important step for the joint taskforce established by the three authorities. The practical point is clear: major economic crime investigations rarely fit neatly within one legal system, and effective action depends on agencies being able to share intelligence, align strategy and act before assets or evidence move.
Baroness Margaret Hodge, the UK’s Anti-Corruption Champion, opened the conference. The government notice states that she focused on the real-world harms caused by economic crime and on the need for strong international partnerships if enforcement is to be effective. That framing matters because economic crime is not only a compliance issue. It affects victims, distorts markets and weakens confidence that complex financial offending can be pursued with the same seriousness as more visible crimes. A public event of this kind therefore carries both operational and institutional weight.
Across the two days, the agenda covered case detection, insight sharing, corporate prosecutions, asset recovery and the growing role of cryptocurrency in financial crime, according to the SFO. Those subjects are closely linked in practice. Early detection is only useful if investigators can convert intelligence into admissible evidence, while cross-border prosecution becomes harder when documents, witnesses and company records are spread across several jurisdictions. Asset recovery then turns on speed, legal coordination and a clear understanding of where value is held.
The inclusion of corporate prosecutions is particularly notable. Many serious economic crime cases now involve multinational entities, layered ownership structures and parallel lines of inquiry in different countries. A shared forum does not alter statutory powers, but it can improve how authorities sequence cases, manage mutual assistance and reduce avoidable delay. For businesses and advisers, the conference is best read as an enforcement signal rather than a ceremonial event. Firms with exposure across the UK, France and Switzerland may face more coordinated scrutiny where suspected misconduct has a cross-border element.
The conference also gave clear attention to cryptocurrency, which the SFO identified as a growing feature of financial crime work. Digital assets can move quickly across platforms and jurisdictions, making tracing, restraint and recovery more difficult than in conventional banking arrangements. That has practical implications beyond specialist crypto businesses. Compliance teams, investigators and prosecutors increasingly need to understand wallet activity, payment flows and the ways in which digital assets can be used to obscure ownership or move proceeds. In policy terms, crypto is now part of mainstream economic crime enforcement rather than a niche issue.
Day two opened with an address from Joe Powell MP, Chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Anti-Corruption and Responsible Tax. The government notice says his remarks reinforced parliamentary commitment to tackling economic crime, placing legislative interest alongside prosecutorial cooperation. Taken together, the London conference was less a venue for headline announcements than a demonstration of how enforcement is changing. The SFO used the event to show that cross-border cases now require sustained partnerships, shared operational learning and continued political attention. For practitioners, that is the clearest message from the meeting.