In Part 1 of this series, FCPAméricas discussed the unknowns related to eventual enforcement of Brazil’s new Anti-Bribery Law. In this post …
The Unknowns of Brazil’s New Anti-Bribery Law (Part 2: How Will the Statute’s Provisions be Interpreted?)
Brazil’s new Anti-Bribery Law, signed into law in August, has already generated much attention. And with good reason. It makes highly innovative changes to Brazil’s laws, including the establishment of …
I often marvel at some of the stories which come up in the context of Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) investigations and enforcement. If you made up some of the things which are reported, I fear that people might find you simply crazy.
We do not know for sure why Tyco received only a non-prosecution agreement instead of a deferred prosecution agreement, or how it avoided a monitor. But the treatment is notable. Matteson Ellis explores reasons why Tyco didn’t get a harsher punishment.
Tyco agreed to a robust corporate compliance program that either currently exists or will be implemented in the future. This corporate compliance program is somewhat different than most of the 13 minimum best practices compliance regimes reported in DPAs and NPAs since the Panalpina DPA of November 2010. Thomas Fox reviews what it consists of.
FCPA professor Mike Koehler provides us with a round up of all things FCPA. There’s talk of Wal-Mart, recent survey results, quotes from former DOJ employees, and more.
FCPA professor Mike Koehler discusses Pfizer’s situation with the DOJ and SEC and poses the question, given the allegations against Pfizer (as opposed to entities Pfizer acquired) and given what Pfizer has done over the past eight years, are the “enhanced compliance obligations” truly necessary?
Last week, the SEC announced a Foreign Corrupt Practices Act books and records and internal controls enforcement action against Oracle Corporation.
With the enforcement action, the dilution of FCPA enforcement has reached a new level. The only allegations against Oracle itself is that it failed to audit distributor margins against end user prices and that it failed to audit third party payments made by distributors. It is common for large multinational companies to have hundreds, if not thousands, of distributors. Because of this, audits Oracle was held liable for not conducting are not practical or cost-effective absent red flags suggesting improper conduct. The SEC did not allege any such red flag issues.
FCPA professor Mike Koehler highlights notable issues in the Pfizer/Wyeth FCPA enforcement action.