Four Ways to Minimize Multi-Jurisdictional Risk When Settling FCPA Charges with the DOJ or SEC

It used to be that a corporation that wished to resolve claims of anti-corruption violations simply had to negotiate a settlement with U.S. authorities.  Until recently, most countries have been content to leave the United States to enforce the FCPA without venturing into the anti-corruption waters themselves.  Yet recent multi-jurisdictional developments in anti-corruption law – such as an increase in the enforcement of anti-corruption laws by foreign countries – have complicated companies’ abilities to settle anti-corruption investigations with certainty and predictability.  Indeed, foreign investigations following DOJ and SEC settlements have been increasing steadily, including investigations arising out of the Siemens, Panalpina and Bonny Island FCPA settlements.  This enforcement trend highlights the need for careful strategic planning, on a multi-jurisdictional level, for handling anti-corruption investigations and settlements.  In a guest article, Charles F. Smith and Gary DiBianco, both partners at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, and Brittany Parling, a Skadden associate, discuss trends in multi-jurisdictional enforcement of anti-corruption laws and lay out four factors companies should consider when negotiating and evaluating settlements in a multi-jurisdictional context.

To read the full article

Continue reading your article with an ACR subscription.