Again, when we were asked to produce those estimates, one of the concerns we had.... For example, with the multinationals that are within my responsibility, I would like to see declining returns to scale. Today, with the number of audits we do, we have 20:1. If I do more audits, hopefully I will see a deterrent impact and the identified audit issues going down because taxpayers are getting the message and I'm looking at less risky taxpayers.
When we estimated 5:1, we were hoping there would be declining marginal yields, but as you can see here in the chart, exhibit 7.2 shows we are up $4.3 billion in the last year that the OAG looked at, compared to the first year. There's a 60% increase, with only a 5% increase in resources.
What we are finding is that better data and better tools are allowing us to identify more non-compliance more effectively than we could in the past. The additional resources have given us the horsepower, but it's not just auditors; the $1 billion has also given us more data analytics, and we're using things like country-by-country reports from multinationals, CRS data that has offshore bank accounts from taxpayers and electronic funds transfers over $10,000. There is a strategy behind how the OAG is attacking this high-end non-compliance, and it's not all boots on the ground. A lot of it is advanced analytics and how we're using those analytics.
To go back to investments, it's really how we've made use of those investments, and I'd say first that we've expanded in a number of areas at once, and second that roughly $60 million in IT builds and better data is driving those outcomes.