The recent Barclays Foreign Corrupt Practices Act enforcement action was based on alleged improper internship and hiring practices (see here and here for prior posts).
In the enforcement action, the SEC acknowledged that the company had several compliance policies and procedures to mitigate risk in this area.
For instance, the SEC stated: “Barclays promulgated anti-bribery and corruption policies that included prohibitions on providing employment in exchange for business.”
This prior post highlighted the SEC’s recent $6.3 million Foreign Corrupt Practices Act enforcement action against Barclays – the latest FCPA enforcement action focused on alleged improper internship and hiring practices primarily involving the financial services industry.
This post continues the analysis by highlighting additional issues to consider.
Timeline
In its March 1, 2016 annual report, Barclays disclosed:
First, it was BNY Mellon Corp. in August 2015 for $14.8 million (see here and here for prior posts). Then, it was Qualcomm in March 2016 for $7.5 million (see here and here for prior posts). Then, it was JPMorgan in November 2016 for $202.6 million (see here, here, and here for prior posts). Then, it was Credit Suisse in July 2018 for $77 million (see here and here for prior posts). Then, it was Deutsche Bank in August 2019 for $16.2 million (see here and here for prior posts).
Next up in Foreign Corrupt Practices Act enforcement actions (mostly targeting the financial services industry) focusing, in whole or in part, on internship and hiring practices being a form of bribery is Barclays as the SEC announced that the U.K. bank with shares traded on the NYSE will pay approximately $6.3 million to “settle charges that it violated the FCPA by hiring the relatives and friends of foreign government officials in order to improperly influence them in connection with its investment banking business.”
ING
Netherlands-based ING NV, a company with shares listed on the New York Stock Exchange, recently disclosed:
“ING Bank is the subject of criminal investigations by Dutch authorities regarding various requirements related to the on-boarding of clients, money laundering and corrupt practices. ING Groep has also received related information requests from U.S. authorities. ING Groep and ING Bank are cooperating with such ongoing investigations and requests. It is currently not feasible to determine how the ongoing investigations and requests may be resolved or the timing of any such resolution, nor to estimate reliably the possible timing, scope or amounts of any resulting fines, penalties and/or other outcome, which could be significant.”
Scrutiny alerts and updates, reinstated, and for the reading stack. It’s all here in the Friday Roundup.
Scrutiny Alerts and Updates
Och-Ziff
The company recently disclosed the following regarding its long-standing FCPA scrutiny.
“As previously disclosed, since 2011, we have been investigated by the SEC and the DOJ concerning possible violations of the FCPA and other laws. While we are unable to predict the full scope, duration or outcome of the SEC and DOJ investigations, based on discussions with the SEC and DOJ, we believe that the government will pursue civil and criminal sanctions. We are in discussions with the SEC and DOJ concerning resolution of these matters. We accrued $200.0 million in the first quarter of 2016 in connection with the disclosed investigations and recorded an additional charge of $214.3 million in connection with the disclosed investigations for the second quarter of 2016. The probable estimated loss, which totals $414.3 million, may be subject to change based on the terms of any final settlement with the SEC and DOJ relating to those matters.”
