Lawyer: Hedge Funds Must Heed Foreign Corrupt Practices Act | FINalternatives

What is the Foreign Corrupt Practices act and why should you be concerned about it?  Matthew Reinhard of the Washington, D.C.-based law firm Miller & Chevalier, says FCPA penalties have increased “exponentially” over the past decade and could pose a significant economic risk to investment managers. Reinhard would know—he focuses his practice on white collar crime, internal investigations and complex civil litigation and has conducted internal investigations into allegations of FCPA violations. He spoke to FINalternatives’ recently about the implications of the FCPA for private equity and hedge fund managers.

via Lawyer: Hedge Funds Must Heed Foreign Corrupt Practices Act | FINalternatives.

A Triumvirate of FCPA Resources | Thomas Fox – JDSupra

The three articles are: (1) “Complying With the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act: A Practical Primer”, authored by the University of Chicago Law School’s Corporate Lab, co-sponsored by Microsoft, and published by the ABA Global Anti-Corruption Task Force; (2) “The IP Practitioner’s ‘Cheat Sheet’ to the FCPA and Travel Act: Introducing the IP FCPA Decision Tree”, authored by Doug Sawyer and T. Markus Funk and published in the BNA Bloomberg Patent, Trademark & Copyright Journal; and (3) “Breaking Down the FCPA, Travel Act, and UK Bribery Act”, by T. Markus Funk, published in BNA Bloomberg White Collar Crime Report.

via A Triumvirate of FCPA Resources | Thomas Fox – JDSupra.

BHP Billiton to stem corporate corruption | Bizcommunity.com

Mail & Guardian Online reports that global mining, oil and gas company BHP Billiton is working to stem corporate corruption in-house and among its local business associates – who received in early January an “anti-corruption expectations” notification from Billiton.

The document, which requires signed acknowledgement of receipt, summarises the company’s anti-corruption policy, which bans everything such as “gifts, travel, entertainment, meals or other things of value” that might improperly influence a government official to “facilitation payments”, defined as “small payments made to government officials to expedite routine actions”.

BHP Billiton SA spokesperson Johnny Dladla said the company’s code of conduct and internal policies prohibit corruption. “Specifically, our policies specify risk assessment and due diligence requirements for engaging business partners who interact with others on our behalf,” he said. Although the action is commendable, experts say that moves such as these by large multinationals are because of tougher international legislation, such as the United Kingdom’s Bribery Act, introduced last year, and The United States’s Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), introduced in the late 1970s, are being enforced more actively.

via BHP Billiton to stem corporate corruption.

How to Keep Your Company Off of the Government’s Naughty List | Corporate Counsel (Ryan McConnell & Katelyn Richardson)

The holiday season is here. The 2010 U.K. Bribery Act is on the books. And enforcement of the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) is on the rise. Gift baskets began arriving in the corporate mailroom weeks ago. But holiday gifts can raise conflict of interest issues and may be viewed as bribery depending upon the intent of the giver and value of the gift. Recent bribery cases against companies involving gifts include Alcatel-Lucent, RAE Systems, and Innospec. In-house counsel should ensure their corporate gift policy protects the company from government scrutiny.

Gifts can be particularly problematic for antibribery compliance programs. Thirty-eight countries have adopted the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s Antibribery Convention and enacted laws against foreign bribery. Both the FCPA and the U.K. Bribery Act prohibit gifts intended to influence decisions to award business or gain an improper benefit from foreign political or government officials, including employees of state-controlled entities. The U.K. Bribery Act and the U.S. Travel Act both outlaw commercial bribery involving gifts intended to influence business decisions.

via How to Keep Your Company Off of the Government’s Naughty List.

It’s Time To Stop Data Protection Being Cited As An Obstacle To Doing Good | Opinion | The Lawyer

A postman can’t deliver mail because it needs to be signed by the recipient: a tiny baby.

·      Most tragically, a utility company can’t contact social services about a vulnerable elderly couple whose gas was cut off, and who later died in their unheated home.

These are just some of the myths associated with the Data Protection Act.  It is about time people stopped wrongly using the Act to blame things and as an excuse.

In 2009, the Deputy Information Commissioner said: “The Data Protection Act does not impose a blanket ban on the release of personal information.  What it does do is require a common sense approach.  It should not be used as an excuse by those reluctant to take a balanced decision.  The Act plays a very important role in protecting all our personal information and gives us all important rights.”  Absolutely right.

continued @  It’s Time To Stop Data Protection Being Cited As An Obstacle To Doing Good | Opinion | The Lawyer.

In-House Compliance Requires Company-Wide Efforts | Corporate Counsel

When Frances McLeod and Greg Mason need to find missing money or probe a company’s compliance programs, they construct and analyze large datasets of the company’s financial transactions. About 75 percent of their global forensic accounting business is driven by compliance and enforcement issues, particularly those related to the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA)—a priority area for U.S. regulators, and a top concern for general counsel.

Even though they’ve consulted with corporations and assessed market risks the world over, McLeod continues to be amazed by gaps in company compliance programs that bear on bribery and illicit payments. “There are a lot of companies that still don’t get it,” says McLeod, who worked in investment banking and on international banking and money-laundering investigations before co-founding Forensic Risk Alliance, a consultancy, in 1999.

via In-House Compliance Requires Company-Wide Efforts.

Government Misconduct in FCPA Prosecution May Impact Other Cases | National Law Journal

A federal judge’s dismissal of convictions in a high-profile Foreign Corrupt Practices Act case because of prosecutorial misconduct has prompted a defense attorney in a related prosecution to challenge the government’s case against his client.

U.S. District Judge Howard Matz in Los Angeles on Dec. 1 threw out the convictions of Lindsey Manufacturing Co. and two of its senior executives on charges that they paid an intermediary to bribe two officials of a Mexican utility in violation of the FCPA. Matz cited numerous instances of prosecutorial misconduct, including an FBI agent’s false statements to the grand jury and false information in affidavits submitted for search and seizure warrants.

via Government Misconduct in FCPA Prosecution May Impact Other Cases.

Reform the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act | National Law Journal

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is lobbying Congress to amend the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act to lessen the financial burden on U.S. companies doing business in foreign countries. That burden has cost U.S. companies upwards of a trillion dollars and has made our nation less competitive in the world marketplace. Unfortunately, the most important amendment suggested by the Chamber is likely to make the problem worse. There is a better and simpler solution.

The FCPA is our nation’s effort to prevent companies from bribing government officials to secure business in a foreign country. Companies found guilty of paying bribes, or of failing to accurately describe the bribes in their financial records, have had to pay billions of dollars in fines and have faced the possibility of debarment from government contracts. Why so much money? Under U.S. law, companies are responsible for the acts of their employees even if management is unaware of the employee’s conduct. A typical scenario involves a company executive hiring a foreign consultant to help negotiate a contract with a particular ministry for the sale of a product or service. Unknown to management, the consultant’s fee includes a bribe to a foreign official.

Although intended to level the playing field, the FCPA has actually made it harder for U.S. companies to compete in the marketplace. Money that a company could have used to hire employees, build plants and market its products has been diverted to efforts to show that any illegal conduct was the act of a rogue employee.

If the bribe is uncovered, the company has no defense to criminal liability. Even though the bribe was not authorized by management, no one in management was aware of the bribe and the bribe was specifically against company policy, the company is criminally responsible. The only thing the company can do is try to convince the government not to charge it with a crime.

How does a company do this? Primarily by showing the U.S. Department of Justice that the company had a compliance program designed to prevent such conduct. Companies must evaluate their business environment to identify areas where unlawful conduct might occur. Such an evaluation must include an examination of the business culture of the foreign nation and even a boots-on-the-ground investigation of the company’s foreign partners or intermediaries. Companies must promulgate policies that detail permitted and prohibited practices, and employees must receive regular training on permitted practices and the penalty for noncompliance.

via Reform the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.

SEC’s Sought-After Powers May Not Affect FCPA – Corruption Currents – WSJ

New powers sought by the Securities and Exchange Commission seem likely to have a limited effect on the agency’s enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.

As the Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday, SEC Chairman Mary Schapiro is seeking to impose much larger penalties on financial firms and individuals that commit fraud, after U.S. District Judge Jed S. Rakoff spurned a $285 million settlement between the SEC and Citigroup. That pact addressed civil-fraud charges that the New York company failed to disclose to investors its role in selecting investments in a $1 billion mortgage-bond deal that it was simultaneously betting would fail.

In a letter sent to senators late Monday, Schapiro asked Congress to pursue legislation that changes the legal formulas used by the agency to calculate penalties. Her proposals would allow the SEC to impose fines up to nine times greater than the maximum currently allowed by U.S. law. But the new formula wouldn’t apply to the primary tool used by the SEC in FCPA enforcement: disgorgement of profits.

Under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the SEC is authorized to pursue ill-gotten gains obtained through violation of federal securities law, a penalty called disgorgement. Disgorgement is a so-called “equitable remedy,” meaning the SEC is only allowed to recover the approximate amount earned from the crimes. Disgorgement is not intended to be punitive, but acts as a deterrent to illegal profit (See here for a good explanation).

The SEC has increasingly relied on disgorgement in its ramped-up enforcement of the FCPA. In April, Johnson & Johnson disgorged $48.6 million in profits including  prejudgment interest to settle allegations that it violated the FCPA. The drug maker also paid a $21.4 million criminal penalty to the Department of Justice as part of a coordinated settlement.

While the SEC can and does levy civil fines for FCPA violations, it usually chooses disgorgement from its toolbox of civil penalties. Danforth Newcomb, counsel at Shearman & Sterling LLP, said that reliance stemmed, in part, from increased coordination with the Justice Department and foreign law enforcement authorities on FCPA settlement proceedings.

via SEC’s Sought-After Powers May Not Affect FCPA – Corruption Currents – WSJ.