Features
Corporate FCPA Enforcement in the Era of Trump
<b><I>Part Two of a Two-Part Article </I></b><p>As the penalties being extracted by the United States from multinational corporations for violations of anti-corruption statutes have skyrocketed in recent years, an increasing number of other countries have begun to pass or enhance their own laws prohibiting, among other things, bribery of foreign officials, and have increased the financial penalties applicable to businesses that violate those laws.
Features
The DOJ's FCPA Pilot Program Wins Some White-Collar Praise, to a Point
Weighing the risks of self-reporting a bribery violation or hiding it has always been a thorny issue for companies. And that's the dilemma at the heart of the DOJ's pilot program for violations of the FCP). While the one-year program has made companies a little more trusting of prosecutors, the decision to self-report a foreign bribe is no less gut-wrenching, according to FCPA lawyers.
Features
Corporate FCPA Enforcement in the Era of Trump
<b><I>Part Two of a Two-Part Article </I></b><p> As the penalties being extracted by the United States from multinational corporations for violations of anti-corruption statutes have skyrocketed in recent years, an increasing number of other countries have begun to pass or enhance their own laws prohibiting, among other things, bribery of foreign officials, and have increased the financial penalties applicable to businesses that violate those laws.
Features
Corporate FCPA Enforcement in the Era of Trump
<b><I>Same Old, Same Old</I></b><p><b><I>Part One of a Two-Part Article</I></b><p>Based on President Trump's remarks as a candidate, one might anticipate a marked drop-off in FCPA enforcement. Other evidence, however, convincingly suggests the trend of increased international cooperation and direction of enforcement resources in the FCPA arena is likely to continue.
Need Help?
- Prefer an IP authenticated environment? Request a transition or call 800-756-8993.
- Need other assistance? email Customer Service or call 1-877-256-2472.
MOST POPULAR STORIES
- Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the RoughThere is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.Read More ›
- The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance ProgramsThe parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.Read More ›
- Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar InvestigationsThis article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.Read More ›
- Supreme Court Asked to Assess Per Se Rule Tension in Criminal AntitrustIn recent years, practitioners have observed a tension between criminal enforcement of the broadly written terms of the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 and the modern Supreme Court's notions of statutory interpretation and due process in the criminal law context. A certiorari petition filed in late August in Sanchez et al. v. United States, asks the Supreme Court to address this tension, as embodied in the judge-made per se rule.Read More ›
- Restrictive Covenants Meet the Telecommunications Act of 1996Congress enacted the Telecommunications Act of 1996 to encourage development of telecommunications technologies, and in particular, to facilitate growth of the wireless telephone industry. The statute's provisions on pre-emption of state and local regulation have been frequently litigated. Last month, however, the Court of Appeals, in <i>Chambers v. Old Stone Hill Road Associates (see infra<i>, p. 7) faced an issue of first impression: Can neighboring landowners invoke private restrictive covenants to prevent construction of a cellular telephone tower? The court upheld the restrictive covenants, recognizing that the federal statute was designed to reduce state and local regulation of cell phone facilities, not to alter rights created by private agreement.Read More ›
