Call 855-808-4530 or email GroupSales@alm.com to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Over the past few years, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has taken notable steps to advance the axiom that the business community and law enforcement are “partners, not adversaries.” In November 2017, DOJ promulgated its Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) Corporate Enforcement Policy, which is incorporated into the Justice Manual (formerly known as the United States Attorneys Manual). The FCPA Corporate Enforcement Policy was intended to promote fairness and predictability in FCPA corporate enforcement and to incentivize self-reporting. Through a series of policy announcements, the DOJ expanded and clarified the reach of the FCPA Corporate Enforcement Policy — first as “nonbinding guidance” in corporate criminal cases outside the context of the FCPA, and later as applied to successor FCPA liability in mergers and acquisitions (M&A).
By Joseph F. Savage Jr. and Christopher J.C. Herbert
In an environment of aggressive federal prosecution and regulation both businesses and public officials are challenged to identify the permissible line between proper financial transactions — things like campaign contributions and business entertainment — and unlawful payments. And, in what the First Circuit called a “novel theory of Hobbs Act extortion,” public officials now have to struggle with the scope of permissible advocacy — when does advocacy for constituents become extortion?
By Harry Sandick and Tara Norris
Part One of a Two-Part Article
In its recently ended October Term 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court decided several notable criminal law decisions that will have a meaningful impact on white-collar practitioners’ work and, importantly, offer clues regarding the movement of the criminal law in subsequent terms. In this two-part article, we review several of the key decisions and consider their implications, both for practitioners in this area and for Court-watchers interested in future Court decisions.
By Robert J. Anello and Richard F. Albert
SEC Chairman Jay Clayton recently announced a change in how the SEC will consider requests for waivers of certain serious collateral consequences that would otherwise result from settlement of an SEC enforcement action. These collateral consequences, often referred to as “bad actor” or “bad boy” provisions, can vary greatly and may disqualify an entity from conducting certain business or utilizing certain means to offer securities.
By Juliet Gunev
Canadian Clean Fuel Technology Company and Former CEO Pay $4.1 Million to Settle China Related FCPA Case