As highlighted in this previous post, in mid-2017 Uber came under Foreign Corrupt Practices Act scrutiny.
The company disclosed: “We received requests from the DOJ in May 2017 and August 2017 with respect to an investigation into allegations of small payments to police in Indonesia and other potential improper payments in other countries in which we operate or have operated, including Malaysia, China, and India.”
Earlier today, Uber disclosed:
Scrutiny alerts, when the dust settles, and beefing up. It’s all here in the Friday roundup.
Scrutiny Alerts
Uber
As highlighted in this prior post, Uber has been under FCPA scrutiny since mid-2017 and this prior post discussed how the company’s FCPA scrutiny is following a typical path. In connection with its pending initial public offering, Uber recently formally disclosed in this registration statement the following:
All instances of Foreign Corrupt Practices Act scrutiny have a “point of entry” – an occurrence which gives rise to initial FCPA scrutiny.
From there, FCPA scrutiny often expands into other business dealings, other countries, etc. This dynamic is a major reason why pre-enforcement action professionals fees and expenses are often the largest financial ramification of FCPA scrutiny, exceeding (often by multiples) settlement amounts in an actual FCPA enforcement action.
Approximately three weeks ago, it was reported (see here) that Uber Technologies was under FCPA scrutiny.
The Wall Street Journal reports:
“The Justice Department has taken preliminary steps to investigate whether managers at Uber Technologies Inc. violated [the FCPA]. […] It is unclear whether U.S. authorities are focused on one country or examining activities in multiple countries where the company operates. An Uber spokesman confirmed the company is cooperating with the Justice Department on the preliminary investigation. […]
Under former Chief Executive Travis Kalanick, the eight-year-old company spread rapidly to more than 70 countries around the world in part by giving regional teams authority to adapt to local markets and expand as quickly as possible, sometimes flouting local laws. In South Korea and France, for example, it was found to violate transportation laws.”
