The Effect of Hexagon Fraud on the Potential Fraud Financial Statements with the Audit Committee as a Moderating Variable

: This study aims to obtain empirical evidence of the influence of the six elements of fraud hexagon theory on potential financial statement fraud by involving the audit committee which acts as a moderating variable in the financial statements of state-owned companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange in 2016-2020. Potential financial statement fraud is measured using the f-score model. The research sample was obtained by the purposive sampling technique. Data analysis methods and techniques include descriptive statistics, evaluation of the SEM-PLS model, and hypothesis testing. The results show that financial pressure has a positive effect on potential financial statement fraud, effective monitoring has a negative effect on potential financial statement fraud, while related party transactions, CEO education, CEO narcissism, and political connection do not affect potential financial statement fraud. The role of the audit committee as a moderating variable is only able to weaken the relationship between financial pressure and potential financial statement fraud.

as the fraud pentagon theory (Horwarth, 2011). The latest theoretical development was carried out by Vousinas in 2019 by Replacing the elements of pressure and arrogance into stimulus and ego and adding one element, namely collusion. The latest theory consists of six elements and is referred to as the fraud hexagon theory, this theory is also referred to as the S.C.C.O.R.E Model (Vousinas, 2019). This study uses the fraud hexagon point of view in detecting fraud in financial statements. The risk of financial statement fraud can be minimized through internal control. The role of the audit committee is expected to be an element of optimal internal control to create an effective company internal control system to prevent various frauds, especially financial statement fraud. This statement is reinforced by the research of Handoko & Ramadhani (2017); Kamarudin & Ismail (2014); Prasetyo (2014) who tested the effect of audit committee attributes on the risk of financial statement fraud. The existence of an audit committee in a BUMN company is regulated in Law No. 17 of 2003 concerning BUMN Article 70 which states that the board of commissioners and the supervisory board of BUMN are obliged to form an audit committee. This study involves the role of the audit committee as a moderating variable in the direct relationship between elements of the fraud hexagon theory and the potential for fraudulent financial statements. Referring to the results of the ACFE survey, cases of financial statement fraud from state-owned companies, several previous studies, and the fraud hexagon theory, the researchers are interested in researching the effect of the six elements of the fraud hexagon theory on the potential for fraudulent financial statements with the audit committee as a moderating variable. The research contributions consist of four contributions. First, the use of the latest fraud detection theory compared to previous fraud detection theories, namely the fraud hexagon theory by Vousinas (2019). Second, using the related party transaction indicator on the rationalization element according to the suggestion of Hasnan et al. (2013). Third, using the CEO education indicator on the capability element following the advice of Abdullahi & Mansor (2015) by considering the nature of the capability element inherent in management, so that capability can be measured using the characteristics of the CEO. Using the measurement of the Audit Committee Financial and Accounting Expertise (ACFAE) to measure the audit committee variables, because based on OJK Regulation No. 55/POJK.4/2015 the audit committee is tasked with assisting the supervisory system of management when presenting the company's financial statements so that audit committee members must have financial and financial expertise. accounting to carry out the supervisory function.

LITERATURE REVIEW
Agency theory explains that shareholders as company owners (principals) do not manage the company's business directly, but delegate business management tasks to management (agents) (Jensen & Meckling, 1976). Management manages the company's business in the interests of the shareholders, and management must be able to account for the tasks delegated by the shareholders. The desire to get high returns from investments that have been invested (return on investment) is in the interests of shareholders (principals). The principal also has an obligation to the agent namely, to provide financial compensation for his work in managing the company's business. This difference in interest is the origin of the conflict of interest. Financial statements are the result of a series of accounting processes that are prepared and presented by management as a form of accountability to shareholders (Astuti et al., 2019). The company's financial statements are a source of information that can reflect the financial condition and performance of the company in a certain period (Trisanti, 2020a). Meanwhile, according to The Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE) fraud is an unlawful act that aims to manipulate and present untrue reports or other actions carried out by executors inside or outside the organization for their interests or the interests of certain groups with full awareness and resulting in losses. either directly or indirectly. So that financial statement fraud according to the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) is a deliberate act to omit material facts, presenting accounting data that plunges users of financial statements so that it can affect the judgment of users of financial statements when making decisions. This study examines the effect of the six elements of the fraud hexagon theory Vousinas (2019) on the potential for fraudulent financial statements involving the audit committee as moderation. Fraud hexagon theory is also called S.C.C.O.R.E Model, which is an acronym for stimulus, capability, collusion, opportunity, rationalization, and ego. Stimulus is another term for pressure which is representative of the pressure experienced by someone until that person commits fraud. Capability is a person's ability to know which area opportunities and conditions are like being able to commit fraud. Collusion is an agreement between two or more parties who agree to harm a third party, such as an act of fraud on the rights of the third party. Opportunity is an opportunity for certain individuals or groups to commit fraud that can be detected through general information and technical skills. Rationalization is the attitude of someone who justifies the act of cheating before the person commits fraud through the office and how to commit fraud as consideration. Ego is another term for arrogance, which is an attitude of superiority to other people and/or to situations so that they feel that the rules in the environment do not have to be obeyed. The audit committee is a form of supervision effort so that the company's internal control and internal audit are carried out properly, to prevent and reduce the potential for fraudulent financial statements. The audit committee is part of the board of commissioners whose task is to assist the supervision of the board of commissioners on the financial reporting implementation system to the presentation of the company's financial statements (Ika & Mohd Ghazali, 2012). The audit committee is expected to be able to reduce improper accounting measurements and management fraud (Trisanti, 2020b).

HYPOTHESIS DEVELOPMENT Financial Pressure on Stimulus Elements Affects Potential Financial Statement Fraud
The financial pressure experienced by management was created because the company set targets too high. The company's financial performance will be considered good by stakeholders if the financial targets set by the board of directors can be met, therefore management will work as effectively and efficiently as possible. Based on agency theory Jensen & Meckling (1976) explains that if management succeeds in achieving the set targets, shareholders will appreciate management's performance by giving bonuses. Return on Assets (ROA) is a measure of operating performance that is useful for assessing management performance in determining management compensation (Skousen et al., 2008). However, this compensation calculation mechanism is often misused by management. Lokanan & Sharma (2018); Ozcelik (2020) proved that financial pressure measured using the ROA ratio proved to have a positive relationship with financial statement fraud. Based on this explanation, the researcher formulated the first hypothesis, namely: H1: Financial pressure has a significant positive effect on potential financial statement fraud

Effective Monitoring on Opportunity Elements Affecting Potential Financial Statement Fraud
The effective monitoring system implemented by the company will help management to achieve optimal performance because management knows that the tasks carried out as agents are always supervised by shareholders as owners of the company. So that an effective monitoring system will prevent and reduce opportunities for management to commit fraud. One of the efforts to create an effective supervisory system is to establish a board of commissioners that includes independent commissioners. Independent commissioners are tasked with monitoring the performance of the company's management. So, the ratio of the number of independent commissioners (BDOUT) can be used to measure effective monitoring. Kusumawardani (2018); Lokanan & Sharma (2018) prove that effective monitoring as measured by the number of independent commissioners has a negative relationship with financial statement fraud. Based on this explanation, the researcher formulated the second hypothesis, namely: H2: Effective monitoring has a significant negative effect on potential financial statement fraud

CEO Education on Capability Elements Positively Affects Potential Financial Statement Fraud
Capability is the ability and capacity of a manager to commit fraudulent actions in the company environment. Not everyone in the company can commit financial statement fraud. Relevant capability is required to conduct financial statement fraud. One way to obtain certain abilities that are often done by humans is through education, therefore capability can be measured using CEO education. Ying & Mei (2014) suspect that if a manager or director has higher education, the possibility of financial statement fraud will be higher. Based on this explanation, the researcher formulated the fourth hypothesis, namely: H4: CEO education has a significant positive effect on potential financial statement fraud

CEO Narcissism on Arrogance Elements Positively Affects Potential Financial Statement Fraud
Arrogance is a greedy and superior attitude that assumes that an organization's internal control is not effective for someone who is arrogance, so that person is more likely to commit fraud. The higher a person's position in the company, the more arrogant that person tends to be. The study of Tessa G & Harto (2016) suggests that CEOs tend to emphasize to others about the position and status of the position they have at the company they work for because they do not want to lose their position and status. The CEO's way of showing their position and status is by including their photo on the company's annual report. Based on this explanation, the researcher formulated the fifth hypothesis, namely: H5: CEO narcissism has a significant positive effect on potential financial statement fraud

Political Connection on Collusion Elements Affects Potential Financial Statement Fraud
Collusion is the act of making certain agreements dishonestly by two or more people for the personal interests of the parties involved in the agreement. Collusion in the company can be identified through the political connections owned by company officials (Shleifer & Vishny, 1994). Political connections can provide benefits for companies in terms of making it easier to borrow funds from banks, avoiding tax payments, to obtaining projects or contracts from the government which is carried out in a way that tends to be dishonest or fraudulent. The study of Matangkin et al. (2018) has used the political connection to measure collusion and obtained results that prove that political connections have a significant positive effect on fraudulent financial statement acts. Based on this explanation, the researcher formulated the sixth hypothesis, namely: H6: Political connection has a significant positive effect on potential financial statement fraud

Audit Committee Moderates Relationship between Fraud Hexagon Theory Elements and Potential Financial Statement Fraud
The audit committee is a form of corporate governance that aims to minimize agency conflicts. An effective audit committee within the company can ensure that the company's management has made decisions based on the applicable corporate governance regulations in any situation and condition (Lastanti, 2020). The seventh hypothesis to the twelve hypotheses, researchers suspect that the existence of an audit committee in the company will weaken the relationship between the elements of fraud hexagon theory and financial statement fraud, except for hypothesis eight. In the eighth hypothesis, it is suspected that the audit committee acts as a moderating variable that strengthens the significant negative relationship between effective monitoring and financial statement fraud. Dewi & Anisykurlillah (2021); Lastanti (2020); Wailan'an (2019) have examined the role of the audit committee as a moderator on the relationship between the influence of fraud theory on financial statement fraud. Based on this explanation, the researchers formulated the seventh to twelve hypotheses, namely: H7: The audit committee weakens the influence of financial pressure on potential financial statement fraud. H8: The audit committee strengthens the effect of effective monitoring on potential financial statement fraud. H9: The audit committee weakens the influence of related party transactions on potential financial statement fraud. H10: The audit committee weakens the influence of CEO education on potential financial statement fraud. H11: The audit committee weakens the influence of CEO narcissism on potential financial statement fraud. H12: The audit committee weakens the influence of political connection on potential financial statement fraud.

RESEARCH RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The population of this study is state-owned companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange in 2016-2020. The research sample was obtained using a purposive sampling technique with three criteria so that 80 data were obtained from the annual report of BUMN companies listed on the IDX in 2016-2020. Non-financial state-owned companies (4) 3 State-owned companies that present complete data on research variables from two years before the research period (2014-2020) -Companies that meet the criteria for sampling 16 The number of observations used in this study (16x5) 80 The research data of 80 data were processed using warpPLS version 7.0 so that the results of hypothesis testing were obtained as follows:    Damayani et al. (2017), the frequency of the appearance of CEO photos in annual reports has two sides, namely negative and positive sides. The negative side shows a person's arrogance, superiority, and arrogance over the position and position they have. The positive side shows a sense of confidence in skills, principles, and norms that are held, and concern for others. So that the use of the frequency of occurrence of CEO photos in the annual report to measure the element of arrogance is not appropriate.
The results of testing the sixth hypothesis show that political connections do not affect the potential for fraudulent financial statements as evidenced by a p-value of 0.011 and a path coefficient value of -0.243, so the decision made is to reject the sixth hypothesis even though the p-value is less than 0.05 but the direction the path coefficient is not under the research hypothesis. Testing the eighth hypothesis, in a p-value of <0.001 and a path coefficient value of -0.365, so the decision made was to reject the eighth hypothesis even though the p-value was less than 0.05 but the direction of the path coefficient was not under the research hypothesis. The ninth hypothesis testing in a p-value of 0.139 and a path coefficient value of 0.118, so that the decision made was to reject the ninth hypothesis. Testing the tenth hypothesis, in a p-value of 0.124 and a path coefficient value of 0.125, so the decision made was to reject the tenth hypothesis. The eleventh hypothesis testing in a p-value of 0.418 and a path coefficient value of 0.023, so the decision made was to reject the eleventh hypothesis. Testing the twelfth hypothesis, in a p-value of 0.347 and a path coefficient value of -0.043, so the decision made was to reject the twelfth hypothesis even though the direction of the path coefficient was under the research hypothesis. The decision of the last five hypotheses is in line with the research of Indriyani & Suryandari (2021); Lastanti (2020). The audit committee as measured by the comparison of the number of audit committee board members with accounting and/or finance expertise to the number of audit committee board members does not yet represent how effective the supervision carried out by the audit committee board is, so that the audit committee board's supervisory function is less effective in increasing the effectiveness of supervision. Against the risk of fraudulent financial statements.

CONCLUSION, LIMITATIONS, AND SUGGESTIONS
This study aims to obtain empirical evidence of the influence of the six elements of the hexagon theory Vousinas (2019) on the potential for fraudulent financial statements of state-owned companies listed on the IDX in 2016-2020. This study involves an audit committee that acts as a moderator on the direct relationship between variables from the elements of the Hexagon theory of fraud and financial statement fraud. The results show that not all elements of the fraud hexagon theory affect the potential for fraudulent financial statements, only financial pressure has a positive effect on fraudulent financial statements and effective monitoring has a negative effect on fraudulent financial statements, henceforth related party transactions, CEO education, CEO narcissism, and political connection does not affect fraudulent financial statements. The role of the audit committee as a moderating variable is only able to weaken the direct relationship between financial pressure and financial statement fraud. This study has several limitations that are expected to be improved or completed by researchers in the future. This study only focuses on the risk of fraudulent financial reporting practices in state-owned companies, so the results of the study cannot describe the relationship between elements of the theory of fraud hexagon, financial statement fraud, and audit committees in companies other than state-owned companies listed on the IDX. This study uses the type of secondary data that is not appropriate to measure subjective variables, while in the fraud hexagon theory there are two subjective elements, namely elements of rationalization and