The FCPA, Financial Institutions and a Rude Awakening | Thomas Fox – JDSupra

As reported in today’s FCPA Blog, the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reported that the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is investigating “whether bank and private equity firms violated the [FCPA] in their dealings with sovereign wealth funds. The WSJ article noted that banks, such as Citigroup, and private equity firms, such as Blackstone Group Ltd., had received letters from the SEC requesting that they retain documents relating to such activities. At this point, the SEC letters did not state any specific allegations of bribery but indicated that such investigation was in “the early stages”. The WSJ article noted that several sovereign wealth funds had invested in banks or private equity firms in the past few years and “in some cases, the sovereign funds helped stave off the firms collapse.” The FCPA Blog quoted from itself by noting that in a 2008 post it had said: We’ve never seen empirical studies on the subject, but we’ve noticed that FCPA cases generally spring from industries that deal in scarce commodities — whatever those happen to be at any moment in history. It could be energy, telecommunications licenses, access to hospital patients, metals, food, cash and so on. . . . These days, a commodity in short supply is cash. Sovereign wealth funds have it and banks need it. Will the financial institutions succumb to market pressures? Will they abandon FCPA compliance to save their balance sheets? Some might . . . And if that happens, pin-striped tragedies are sure to follow. However, the issue which struck us was just how omnipotent two of our colleagues have been regarding the possible Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) exposure of entities which deal with sovereign wealth funds. We recently posted an article entitled “Private Equity and the FCPA”. In one of the comments to this post, our colleague Howard Sklar wrote, “One potential flip side of this—to my knowledge not yet the subject of any enforcement action—is whether ownership by a sovereign equity fund would turn someone into a “foreign official.” For example, Temasek Holdings is a Singapore government-owned fund. If it purchases a majority interest in a company, does that transform the employees of that company into “foreign officials?” It’s an open question. It sounds like he nailed it.

via The FCPA, Financial Institutions and a Rude Awakening | Thomas Fox – JDSupra.

Regulatory Watch: EU Directive Redraws PE and Hedge Fund Boundaries

(Westlaw Business) A new EU hedge fund directive has redrawn the boundaries of hedge fund and private equity business in the EU, banning asset stripping and excessive leverage whilst shedding light on the gory details of staff remuneration and trading strategies.

Unanimously voted into law by 513 Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) to 92 in opposition, the directive will dramatically shake up the operations of asset managers around the world, as private equity and hedge funds face curbs on leverage and capital ratios, as well as disclosure of their secretive trading strategies.

At its heart is an attempt to “provide a European internal market for AIFM [Alternative Investment Fund Managers], and a harmonised and stringent regulatory and supervisory framework for the activities of all AIFM, EU or non-EU, within the European Union.”

via Regulatory Watch: EU Directive Redraws PE and Hedge Fund Boundaries.

The 2010 Am Law 100 – The American Lawyer

It could have been worse. That,s the best that can be said for the performance last year of The Am Law 100, the top-grossing law firms in the nation. Three of the four key categories we,ve measured for 25 years–gross revenue, head count, and revenue per lawyer–fell, while profits per equity partner (PPP) barely increased by 0.3 percent, or $3,463, to $1.26 million.

But on average, even the bad results weren’t nearly as dire as many firms had feared just a year ago.

THE CHARTS

Gross Revenue

For the first Time since 1994, Baker & McKenzie surpassed Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom for the number one position on our gross revenue chart.

Revenue Per Lawyer

The downward trend continued for Am Law 100 firms in 2009 as more than half posted drops in revenue per lawyer (RPL), our best measure of a firm,s financial health.

Profits Per Partner (Top Ten)

Sixteen Am law 100 firms had profits per partner (PPP) of $2 million or more in 2009, the same number as in 2008.

Compensation – All Partners (Top Ten)

The average pay for a firm’s entire partnership, both equity and nonequity; in 2009, 42 Am Law 100 firms posted declines in CAP.

Value Per Lawyer (Top Ten)

Value Per Lawyer ranks firms by how efficiently they generate profits. For the fifth year in a row, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz tops our list.

via The Am Law 100 2010.