Question to ponder, scrutiny alerts and updates, Caremark, and for the reading stack. It’s all here in the Friday roundup.
Question to Ponder
If publicly-traded companies can put law enforcement to its burden of proof in peer countries, why do publicly traded companies (nearly universally) roll over and play dead when the subject of U.S. law enforcement inquiries?
Apparently not, scrutiny updates, silly offensive use, and not credible. It’s all here in the Friday roundup.
Apparently Not
This May 2017 post asked whether Sinovac might become the first Chinese issuer to resolve an FCPA enforcement action after the SEC began an inquiry regarding certain bribery and corruption issues in China.
Apparently not as the company recently announced:
Former SEC FCPA Unit Chief Kara Brockmeyer on declinations and voluntary disclosure, Wal-Mart’s global chief ethics and compliance officer on increased standardization in global anti-corruption efforts, scrutiny updates, French first, and for the reading stack.
It’s all here in the Friday Roundup.
Former SEC FCPA Unit Chief Kara Brockmeyer On Declinations and Voluntary Disclosure
Brockmeyer is profiled in this recent Corporate Crime Report Q&A. (See here for a recent FCPA Flash podcast with Brockmeyer).
A long, long time ago (September 2009 to be exact) FCPA Professor highlighted how Chinese companies were increasingly seeking to raise capital in the U.S. and by registering securities in the U.S. becoming subject to a variety of U.S. laws including the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.
There has never been an FCPA enforcement against a Chinese-based issuer, but that could change.
This post highlights the FCPA scrutiny of Beijing-based Sinovac Biotech, a company with shares traded on NASDAQ, including its recent disclosure that it is unable to file its annual report because of a bribery internal investigation.
