Top Menu

Stock Option Grants For Doctors Results In FCPA Enforcement Action

stockoptions

[This post is part of a periodic series regarding “old” FCPA enforcement actions]

In March 2005, the DOJ announced that Micrus (a medical device company based in California) agreed to non-prosecution agreement and to pay a $450,000 criminal penalty to resolve its Foreign Corrupt Practices Act liability. The conduct at issue largely focused on stock option grants provided to physicians at publicly owned and operated hospitals in France, Turkey, Spain, and Germany.

Continue Reading

This Week On FCPA Professor

ThisWeekPost

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 post summarizes the FCPA issues on appeal to the Second Circuit in U.S. v. Chi Ping Patrick Ho.

Continue Reading

A Roundup Of FCPA Or Related Articles About COVID-19

Roundup

This recent post discussed how the COVID-19 crisis (and potential Foreign Corrupt Practices Act implications as a result of the crisis) once again demonstrates the difference between the FCPA (the statute as written by Congress and interpreted by courts) and the FCPA as enforced by the DOJ and/or SEC.

This post rounds up other FCPA or related articles regarding COVID-19.

Addressing Anti-Corruption Risks From the Coronavirus (March 4th)

Continue Reading

The Difference Between The FCPA (The Statute) And The FCPA As Enforced During The COVID-19 Crisis

roadsplits

Many people, not surprisingly, view current events through the lens of their profession. Indeed, there have been some thoughtful pieces written about the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act as the COVID-19 crisis unfolds. (See here, here, here and here).

Some of these articles have focused on the FCPA risks of moving product across borders, interacting with customs and border officials, and/or interactions with “foreign officials” in connection with licensing, permitting, and other regulatory issues.

My own two cents on FCPA issues in the midst of COVID-19 is that it once again demonstrates the difference between the FCPA (the statute as written by Congress and interpreted by courts) and the FCPA as enforced by the DOJ and/or SEC. (See herehere, and here for prior similar posts).

Continue Reading

Coalition For Integrity Calls For Post-Employment Restrictions On FCPA Enforcement Attorneys And Greater Transparency In FCPA Enforcement

C4I

For nearly a decade, these pages have called for restrictions when DOJ / SEC FCPA enforcement attorneys with supervisory and discretionary authority leave the government for private practice careers devoted to the FCPA. (See here, here, here and here among other posts).

I was thus happy to see that the Coalition for Integrity (“C4I” – a non-profited devoted to combating corruption and promoting integrity in the public and private sectors) recently called for post-employment restrictions on DOJ and SEC FCPA enforcement attorneys who leave for private practices in this policy paper submitted to the OECD in connection with its Phase 4 Evaluation of the U.S. Implementation of the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention.

It is a bit ironic though as C4I has several individuals on its Board of Directors who left the DOJ / SEC for lucrative positions in FCPA Inc. including an individual who still describes himself as “the architect and key enforcement official of DOJ’s modern Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) enforcement program.”

Continue Reading

Powered by WordPress. Designed by WooThemes