Posted on 03/13/2017 5:02:29 AM PDT by Bodega
The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act supports America’s fight against international business bribes and corporate favors.
Intended to promote American business and foreign-policy ideals around the world, and give US companies a tool to battle corruption abroad, it has also helped other countries crack down on bribery, and has extracted billions of dollars in fines.
The FCPA makes it illegal for US companies and people working abroad to engage in corrupt acts such as bribing officials. It bans foreign firms and people from doing the same in the US. American companies must keep accurate, transparent records and not hide payments in “off-the-books” accounts.
Trump has dubbed the FCPA a “horrible law” that stifles American businesses trying to work abroad. “It puts us at a huge disadvantage,” he told CNBC in 2012. As president, he has killed a rule to crack down on foreign bribery by US energy companies, refused to release his tax returns, and canceled ethics training for White House staff.
But under US president Donald Trump, it may lose its bite, according to anti-corruption activists, Democrat lawmakers, and legal experts. At worst, some worry, he could try to repeal it altogether.
They have cause for their concern. Trump has dubbed the FCPA a “horrible law” that stifles American businesses trying to work abroad. “It puts us at a huge disadvantage,” he told CNBC in 2012. As president, he has killed a rule to crack down on foreign bribery by US energy companies, refused to release his tax returns, and canceled ethics training for White House staff.
Finally, Trump has nominated Jay Clayton, a Wall Street defense lawyer, to head the Securities and Exchange Commission. The SEC enforces the FCPA along with the Department of Justice (DoJ). In 2011 Clayton co-wrote a lengthy paper criticizing the law and its “zealous” enforcement.
It ensures executives aren’t paying bribes or doling out favors to government officials, and creates a culture of zero tolerance and leniency, he said. Every year, Microsoft does an internal audit of its business in corruption-prone countries, using the FCPA guidelines and principles, and while it means more paperwork, “you know there are double eyes on everything.”
What happens if the FCPA is weakened? Not much, at first, FCPA advocates say. Big multinationals already have strict anti-bribery procedures, and it’s not worth the reputational damage they’d suffer if they engage in bribery, Wrage argues. Plus, they risk falling foul of other countries’ anti-bribery laws, which many are enforcing thanks in no small part to the FCPA. Britain, in particular, launched 29 bribery investigations in 2016—second only to America’s 118—and earlier this year slapped Rolls Royce with £671 million in penalties.
It is the “at first” I worry about. Many behaviors urk me, but not much makes me more angry then being lied to or taken advantage of or being cheated. I hope we as a nation are not seen as doing these things either personally or in our businesses. I really don’t want Trump&Co to get rid of the FCPA as I understand it. And If I am wrong, for heaven’s sake, tell me how exactly.
FCPA is an impediment to trade and should be abolished. Such moralizing is a world class joke.
Halvedang is the quintessential snowflake, cosmopolitain, and journolist wannabe. It should be known that he has absolutely nothing good to say about Trump.
Bribery always has and always will exist. We call it by different names, e g. lobbying, donations, but it is still bribery.
But, I will agree with Donald Trump on one thing. This country is inundated with corruption, especially within the political class of this country. I would much rather we conquer that then concern ourselves with the corruption happening in other countries. Kind of like the pot calling the kettle black in my opinion.
A look at the Quartz website is somewhat troubling as well. I question what their motivations and true attitude towards Trump really are.
Please elaborate.
If you are convinced that the “FCPA is an impediment to trade and should be abolished.”
Please expound on that thought and share why you think that is the case.
What do we have to loose if it is kept in place and what do we have to gain by it’s abolishment?
How is shady dealing good for trade?
What are your experiences that you believe back up your opinion on this?
Essentially, in my opinion, the FCPA puts in place at least some restrictions on “pay for play” for US companies doing business internationally. I don’t personally feel the companies with the most money they are willing to throw around should be given preferential treatment or have a blind eye turned to questionable practices.
Bribery always has and always will exist. We call it by different names, e g. lobbying, donations, but it is still bribery.
Look at the USA. No country can run HUGE trade deficits and have almost nil import tariffs, which flies in the face of common sense and the will of the America people, without our own government being totally corrupt. To the core.
The Clinton foundation (and it’s many iterations) is a prime example.
The first one that came to my mind.
That which is Shady Dealing in the mind of a moralistic American is the norm in many parts of the world and has been since the beginning of time. It is hard to compete as an American when followed into a customer’s office by a competitor salesman from another country carrying a briefcase full of money.
By not being able to trade within the norms of the customer’s country American firms lose out to competitors.
It is especially true here where Hillary Clinton et al are world famous for hiding the bribes
No, bribery is a much bigger issue in many countries than ours, and something their citizenry have to minimize in order for them to develop their economy and achieve prosperity. Allowing bribery may aid individual companies trying to compete against other bribers, but it is especially fraught for the US, which is too often seen as bigfooting it into these countries anyway.
Better to give up that slight disadvantage for some US firms and not incite resentment and retaliation against our country more broadly—something that some of our military would no doubt end up losing their lives over.
I am well aware of what does and how the FCPA works, I have been doing business internationally for many years.
Ethical behavior is not merely a moralistic American norm, it is a goal to be aspired to. I don’t personally ever feel constrained by the FCPA in my business dealings because I have no need to engage in unethical behavior to gain or keep business.
What do you feel Americans in general have to gain by the elimination of the FCPA?
If the goal is to bring jobs back to the US, how is the elimination of the FCPA going to further that agenda?
I lived and traded overseas most of my adult life in Asia, Europe and Africa. Before and after the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. It didn’t stop bribery and corruption. It did insure that the Japanese, Germans and our other competitors were more competitive and open about their paying of bribes and commissions. It looses us a lot of business. It forces US companies into making arrangements that get around it and profits various agents and consultants. It still goes on. The US business person is put in a legal bind and is forced out if knowledge of transactions. So companies use foreigners to do business in their place.
There is no good solution. I hated the corruption, but it was obvious that most other countries let it go on. If you think it doesn’t just name a country and I can give you examples.
I have no solutions.
Thanks for your reply.
A lot of truth in what you say about making third parties a lot of money finding legal ways to work the system and comply with US law.
I guess my view is colored in part by the fact that making corruption and bribery easier is never a good thing.
If bribery becomes legal then the expectation from those on the receiving end goes up a little more for what they should get in exchange for what should be an above-board business deal.
The lower the bar is set the lower others will sink below it.
Americans in general are not very much affected. Companies trying to export goods made by American workers would benefit. The incidence of such an event is not possible to evaluate but is nevertheless present. what benefit do Americans obtain.... none.
There is another equal goal...... exporting American stuff. That is not related to the handcuffs of FCPA except negatively.
Taken as a whole, American jobs are not going to return. Rather, new jobs are going to be created. We will not make paint brushes any more. We may make furniture again when the regulations are eliminated. We will probably not have a very large textile industry again. We will not sew clothing again on a grand scale.
Finally, I was actively involved in export trade for 30 years and still keep a hand in, barely. So far as I can remember, it was never necessary to bribe an official.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.