January 22, 2019
Specifically, of the 17 corporate enforcement actions in 2018, 9 (53%) were against foreign companies (based in many instances on mere listing of securities on U.S. markets and in a few instances on sparse allegations of a U.S. nexus in furtherance of a bribery scheme). Even more dramatic, of the net approximate $1 billion in FCPA settlement amounts from 2018 corporate enforcement actions, approximately 72% of this number was from enforcement actions against foreign companies.
January 21, 2019
A “foreign official.”
Without one, there can be no FCPA anti-bribery violation (civil or criminal). Who were the alleged “foreign officials” of 2018?
This post highlights the alleged “foreign officials” from 2018 corporate DOJ and SEC FCPA enforcement actions.
There were 17 FCPA core corporate enforcement actions in 2018. Of the 17 enforcement actions 9 (53%) involved, in whole or in part, employees of alleged state-owned or state-controlled entities (“SOEs) with an additional 2 actions (12%) involving, in whole or in part, individuals associated with foreign health care systems.
January 20, 2019
Since 2014, the FCPA Institute has elevated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act knowledge and practical skills of hundreds of diverse professionals from around the world at leading companies and firms. Future dates for the live, in-person, two-day FCPA Institute are as follows: Nashville (April 11-12, 2019), Minneapolis (June 20-21, 2019) with an additional event TBD in September or October, 2019.
Due to demand for FCPA knowledge and practical skills from individuals around the world, I am pleased to announce the launch of the FCPA Institute Online – the most comprehensive online FCPA training course available.
January 19, 2019
FCPA Professor has been described as “the Wall Street Journal concerning all things FCPA-related,” and “the most authoritative source for those seeking to understand and apply the FCPA.”
Set forth below are the topics discussed this week on FCPA Professor.
This guest post highlights a recent settlement in Canada and addresses the question of whether it signifies a shift in the anti-corruption landscape in Canada by establishing a role for Canada’s securities regulators in tackling foreign corruption from a civil context.
January 18, 2019
Perhaps the starkest difference between the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and Canada’s foreign corruption law—the Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act (CFPOA)—is the fact that the CFPOA may only be enforced criminally. As a result, enforcement authorities in Canada are held to the higher criminal standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt when negotiating with a company to resolve a CFPOA investigation or contemplating whether to bring CFPOA charges.
The lack of a civil enforcement mechanism for the CFPOA is often cited as one of the main reasons for the disparity between the volume of foreign corruption enforcement activity in the U.S. and Canada. A recent settlement announced by the Ontario Securities Commission (OSC) with Katanga Mining Ltd. (Katanga), however, may signal the beginning of a shift in this landscape by establishing a role for Canada’s securities regulators in tackling foreign corruption from a civil context.