CRIMINAL LIABILITY FOR FINTECH-ENABLED ECONOMIC CRIMES: A COMPARATIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS

Financial technology increases access to financial services but simultaneously introduces distinct risks, including money laundering, payment fraud, illegal digital lending, crypto-asset scams, data misuse, terrorist financing, and cyber-enabled theft. Although existing scholarship addresses these risks extensively, the literature remains fragmented by offense typologies, regulatory instruments, and national liability doctrines. This article examines the attribution of criminal liability to FinTech startups that commit, facilitate, or fail to prevent economic crime. The methodology involves a structured review of 30 English-language studies published primarily between 2020 and 2025, supplemented by comparative doctrinal analysis of legal and regulatory materials from the United States, the European Union, Indonesia, India, and China. The analysis identifies seven recurrent crime categories and three contrasting accountability models: broad vicarious corporate liability in the United States; harmonised regulation with nationally differentiated criminal liability rules in Europe; and heterogeneous Asian frameworks where formal corporate liability is often stronger than its practical enforcement. The principal finding reveals an implementation gap between the legal recognition of corporate responsibility and the evidential, institutional, and technological capacity necessary to enforce it. The article proposes an integrated liability model based on organisational fault, failure-to-prevent duties, proportionate compliance expectations, and technology-assisted supervision. This model aims to preserve innovation while ensuring that liability is responsive to startup governance, platform architecture, risk exposure, and compliance culture.