Top Menu

Issues To Consider From The Halliburton Enforcement Action

Issues

This prior post went in-depth into last week’s $29.2 million Foreign Corrupt Practices Act enforcement action against Halliburton and this post continues the analysis by highlighting additional issues to consider.

Timeline

Halliburton disclosed to the DOJ / SEC in December 2010 or perhaps early 2011. Regardless of the precise date, Halliburton’s FCPA scrutiny lasted approximately 6.5 years.

If the SEC wants the public to have confidence in its FCPA enforcement program, it must resolve instances of FCPA scrutiny much quicker. Having FCPA scrutiny linger for 6.5 years is inexcusable particularly since Halliburton, in the words of the SEC, “[cooperated] including making foreign witnesses available, compiling financial data and analysis relating to the transactions at issue, and making substantive presentations on key topics at the staff’s request.”

Continue Reading

Issues To Consider From The CDM Smith Enforcement Action

Issues

This previous post highlighted the DOJ’s recent Foreign Corrupt Practices Act enforcement action against CDM Smith Inc. Pursuant to a so-called “declination” with disgorgement, CDM Smith agreed to disgorge approximately $4 million based on DOJ findings “that CDM Smith, through its employees and agents, and those of its wholly owned subsidiary in India paid approximately $1.18 million in bribes to government officials in India in exchange for highway construction supervision and design contracts and a water project contract…”.

This post highlights additional issues to consider.

Continue Reading

FCPA Flash – A Conversation With Danforth Newcomb & Cynthia Urda Kassis Regarding “Transacting Business During a Corruption Investigation”

FCPA Flash

The FCPA Flash podcast provides in an audio format the same fresh, candid, and informed commentary about the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and related topics as readers have come to expect from written posts on FCPA Professor.

This FCPA Flash episode is a conversation with Shearman & Sterling attorneys Danforth Newcomb and Cynthia Urda Kassis who recently authored an article titled “Transaction Business During a Corruption Investigation.”

During the podcast, Danforth and Cynthia discuss: (i) the origins of the article; (ii) what makes potential legal liability under the FCPA or similar laws different than potential legal liability under other laws; (iii) the gap between corporate FCPA enforcement and individual FCPA enforcement; and (iv) whether a recent DOJ statement that “FCPA investigations [should] be measured in months, not years” is believable.

FCPA Flash is sponsored by Kroll. Kroll is trusted by companies and compliance officers worldwide to help prevent, detect, and remediate FCPA challenges with scalable, end-to-end compliance solutions: from high-volume third party screening and automated monitoring, to risk-based due diligence, to complex investigations and monitorships.

FCPA Flash Podcast – A Conversation With Richard Grime (Former Assistant Director of SEC Enforcement) Regarding FCPA Enforcement

FCPA Flash

The FCPA Flash podcast provides in an audio format the same fresh, candid, and informed commentary about the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and related topics as readers have come to expect from written posts on FCPA Professor.

This FCPA Flash podcast episode is a conversation with Richard Grime (Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher and former Assistant Director of SEC Enforcement) and is a must listen if you want to hear informed and candid commentary about the current FCPA enforcement landscape from someone who used to enforce the FCPA.

During the podcast, Grime discusses: (i) reasons for the general increase in FCPA enforcement (among the reasons he mentions is “the government has realized this is a money-winner”; (ii) whether FCPA enforcement, including the internal control’s provisions, has been pushed beyond the breaking point (in Grime’s words yes it has and “almost any conduct becomes subject to an enforcement vehicle”); and (iii) whether long, drawn-out FCPA investigations can be avoided.

Continue Reading

DOJ’s McFadden Makes Sense When Talking About “Declinations” And States That FCPA Investigations Should Be “Measured In Months, Not Years”

mcfadden

Yesterday, Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Trevor McFadden deliver this speech in Washington, D.C.

Sure, like a prior recent speech, McFadden did read from the “DOJ’s FCPA script,” but to his credit he did say some important things about FCPA compliance that is refreshing to hear from the DOJ. In addition, McFadden’s statement that his “intent is for our FCPA investigations to be measured in months, not years” should be welcome news to the business community. However, the DOJ has been saying the same thing for years and a wait and see approach is most prudent. For instance, in this 2005 speech then DOJ Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division Christopher Wray talked about “real-time enforcement” and stated: “in other words, punishing wrongdoers promptly after they commit their crimes. Simply put, speed matters in corporate fraud investigations . The days of five-year investigations, of agreement after agreement tolling the statute of limitations-while ill-gotten gains are frittered away and investor confidence sinks-are increasingly a thing of the past.”

Moreover, as highlighted in more detail below, McFadden made sense when talking about DOJ “declinations” and his reasons for why the DOJ may not bring a Foreign Corrupt Practices Act enforcement action in an instance of FCPA scrutiny undermines the “declination” definition used by certain FCPA Inc. participants.

Continue Reading

Powered by WordPress. Designed by WooThemes