TRANSNATIONAL FINANCIAL FRAUD IN THE CONTEXT OF DIGITALIZATION: INSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGES OF KAZAKHSTAN AND INTERNATIONAL COUNTERMEASURES

2026

Closed access Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.48371/ismo.2026.64.2.006
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

The article examines transnational financial fraud as an institutional security challenge emerging in the context of Kazakhstan’s accelerated digitalization. The study argues that the spread of mobile payments, digital public services, remote identification, platform-based communication, and cross-border financial instruments has changed not only the scale of fraudulent activity, but also its organizational logic. Contemporary fraud schemes increasingly combine social engineering, spoofed communications, foreign hosting, money-mule networks, crypto-asset conversion, and international payment routes. As a result, the effectiveness of counteraction depends less on isolated technical barriers than on the ability of institutions to coordinate in real time. The purpose of the article is to explain why digital financial fraud acquires a transnational character in Kazakhstan and to identify foreign institutional mechanisms that may be adapted to national practice. The study uses qualitative comparative institutional analysis based on policy documents, official reports, and academic literature on cybercrime, fraud victimization, governance capacity, and collaborative regulation. The article develops the concept of a digitalization-capacity gap, understood as the mismatch between the speed of criminal adaptation in digital ecosystems and the speed of institutional prevention, information exchange, urgent intervention, and cross-border cooperation. The results show that Kazakhstan’s key vulnerabilities are temporal, informational, organizational, and jurisdictional. The comparative assessment of Singapore, the European Union, and the United States demonstrates the value of shared responsibility models, threat-intelligence platforms, complaint-based analytics, and rapid-response coordination. The article concludes that Kazakhstan requires an integrated anti-fraud governance architecture linking financial regulators, banks, telecom operators, law-enforcement bodies, digital platforms, and international partners.