Top Menu

Friday Roundup


Monitor costs, scrutiny alert, quotable, and survey says. It’s all here in the Friday roundup.

Monitor Costs

As highlighted in prior posts here and here, in late 2019 Ericsson resolved a Foreign Corrupt Practices Act enforcement action and the $1.06 billion settlement amount was the largest net FCPA settlement amount in history. As a condition of settlement, Ericsson was required to engage an independent compliance monitor for a three-year period.

Recently, Ericsson disclosed “a provision of SEK 0.6 billion [approximately $60 million] was made to cover future monitoring costs.” (See here for the article “FCPA Ripples.”)

Continue Reading

Friday Roundup


Scrutiny alerts, wow that case is still going on, and for the reading stack.

It’s all here in the Friday roundup.

Scrutiny Alerts


According to this report “ZTE, the Chinese telecom giant that pleaded guilty three years ago to violating U.S. sanctions against Iran and North Korea, is the subject of a new and separate bribery investigation by the Justice Department […] The new investigation … centers on possible bribes ZTE paid to foreign officials to gain advantages in its worldwide operations. […] [N]ews reports, documents and at least one lawsuit filed in recent years have accused ZTE of corruption in more than a dozen countries, including Algeria, Liberia, Kenya and Zimbabwe.” (See here for a 2018 post regarding ZTE).

Continue Reading

DOJ Releases Memo Titled “Evaluating A Business Organization’s Inability To Pay A Criminal Fine Or Criminal Monetary Penalty”


Prior posts here and here highlighted several Foreign Corrupt Practices Act enforcement actions in which a company received a reduction in the settlement amount based on a claimed inability to pay. In certain instances, it appears as if the DOJ / SEC were duped (see here for example).

Thus, yesterday’s release of this non-binding DOJ policy memo titled “Evaluating a Business Organization’s Inability to Pay a Criminal Fine or Criminal Monetary Penalty,” while not FCPA specific, is FCPA relevant.

Continue Reading

It’s Ridiculous That Walmart Has A Monitor, Nevertheless The Monitor Agreement Is Interesting


As highlighted in prior posts here and here, in October 2018 the DOJ released a new monitor policy titled “Selection of Monitors in Criminal Division Matters.”

The memo was not Foreign Corrupt Practices Act specific, but FCPA relevant as it established “standards, policy, and procedures for the selection of monitors in matters being handled by Criminal Division attorneys” and “shall apply to all Criminal Division determinations regarding whether a monitor is appropriate in specific cases and to any deferred prosecution agreement (“DPA”), non-prosecution agreement (“NPA”), or plea agreement between the Criminal Division and a business organization which requires the retention of a monitor.”

Continue Reading

FCPA Flash Podcast Must Listen: A Conversation With Recently Departed DOJ FCPA Unit Assistant Chief Ephraim Wernick Regarding The Walmart Monitor, The Long Time Periods Associated With FCPA Scrutiny, And Other Issues

Podcast Logo

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 Ephraim (Fry) Wernick who recently joined Vinson & Elkins after departing from the DOJ as Assistant Chief of the FCPA Unit. While Wernick was not involved in the Walmart matter during his tenure at the DOJ, he has plenty to say about the enforcement action including the imposition of a monitor during the podcast. Wernick also discusses the long time periods associated with FCPA scruitny and highlights two things about the DOJ’s FCPA unit and its enforcement program that he believes are not well understood or appreciated by the business community or FCPA bar. In short, the podcast is a must listen.

Continue Reading

Powered by WordPress. Designed by WooThemes