According to recent estimates, state-owned enterprises (SOEs) account for over 10% of the world’s GDP and more than a fifth of the world’s largest companies.The increasing presence of SOEs in the global...
FCPA Fines Skyrocket to New Heights, Signalling Continued Pressure on Anti-Bribery Corruption Risk Management Programmes So far, 2020 has been a year of extraordinary events. The COVID-19 pandemic shut...
A new report from the European Banking Authority (EBA) warns that payments firms and banks in the EU often insufficiently identify and manage the risk of money laundering and terrorist financing, despite...
When it comes to business, it’s important to have high standards—especially when evaluating risk and protecting your reputation. To do so requires a comprehensive due diligence process that’s powered by...
With the rise of mandatory due diligence legislation, it is no longer sufficient for compliance officers to screen a third party for indicators of bribery and corruption alone. Effective due diligence...
A multinational telecommunications company has pleaded guilty to breaching the anti-bribery provisions of the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and must pay a $206 million penalty. In this blog, we look at the judgement by the US Department of Justice, and highlight the legal, financial, reputational and strategic risks of a compliance failure. We also outline how Nexis® Solutions can help companies to improve their due diligence process to mitigate these ever-growing risks.
The $206 million settlement was announced by the US Department of Justice (DOJ) on 2nd March. But to understand it fully we need to go back to 2019, when the telecommunications company paid a penalty of over $520 million to resolve the US regulator’s investigation into alleged bribery of government officials and falsification of records in China, Vietnam, Indonesia, Kuwait and Djibouti.
As part of the 2019 settlement, the Sweden-based company entered into a Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA) with the DOJ. DPAs allow companies to defer being prosecuted if they meet certain conditions. In this instance, the conditions were:
Now, nearly four years later, the DOJ found that the company “breached the DPA by violating the agreement’s cooperation and disclosure provisions”. The regulator cited three main compliance failures:
The outcome is that the company will now plead guilty to the original charges which had been deferred. It must also pay over $206 million in fines, and the independent compliance monitor which was imposed in 2019 will be extended by a further year.
DPAs are becoming more widely used by global regulators to incentivize companies to improve their compliance and due diligence processes, and voluntarily disclose any evidence of wrongdoing uncovered by these processes. If a company is granted a DPA, it can defer a criminal conviction and may receive a reduced fine if it complies with the conditions imposed.
For example, in December 2022 the US Department of Justice announced a settlement of $160 million with a conglomerate based in the US over alleged bribery in Brazil. The regulator noted that this amount reflected a 25% reduction on the possible fine to recognize that the company proactively disclosed new evidence and subsequently strengthened its compliance program.
The US has further strengthened the incentives offered to companies for compliance and cooperation by updating its Corporate Enforcement Policy in January 2023. We are seeing the same trend across Europe – the French regulators agreed a DPA (known as a “CJIP”) with an aerospace firm in November 2022, while the UK’s Serious Fraud Office brokered three DPAs in 2021.
But this latest fine by the DOJ shows there is no room for companies to be complacent. Even if they have been awarded a DPA, they will subsequently face significant costs if they do not make genuine efforts to strengthen their compliance approach and carry out thorough due diligence on their activities and those by third parties. The same risk applies to any company, even if they are not under investigation.
This case should serve as a warning that a perceived failure of due diligence or compliance exposes a company to a multiplicity of risks. This includes:
Additional damage to this company’s reputation was inflicted by a recent statement by the US Attorney General Damian Williams. He said, “the company’s breach of its obligations under the DPA” indicate that it “did not learn its lesson, and it is now facing a steep price for its continued missteps.” Consumers, employees and investors increasingly want to work for companies that can demonstrate an ethical approach to business, and this censure from a senior US lawmaker is unlikely to instill this confidence.
Companies need to mitigate the legal, financial, strategic and reputational risks of a failure of regulatory compliance and due diligence. The best way to do this is by leveraging data and technology to strengthen your due diligence process. This will help you to better detect any indication of wrongdoing happening within your business or by a customer, supplier or other third party.
Nexis Solutions helps firms to implement a more efficient and effective due diligence process to identify and mitigate third party risk by providing companies with authoritative data from the most relevant sources. This includes news data, PEPs and sanctions, watch lists; ESG risk scoring; company information, and more.
We support firms to deploy technology across these sources to improve their approach to due diligence and risk management. For example: