TRACE Matrix Re-evaluates Business Bribery Risk Across the Globe
The anti-bribery standard setting organization has released its 2017 TRACE Bribery Risk Matrix.
October 13, 2017 at 05:33 PM
7 minute read
Globe world flags. Credit: niroworld-Fotolia
Businesses looking to evaluate the likelihood that inroads into a foreign market will result in a high risk of bribery now have an updated tool for making these determinations. The latest edition of the TRACE Bribery Risk Matrix from anti-bribery standard setting organization TRACE International was released Thursday.
Along with the new matrix came some new intel on which countries pose the most danger and which are the safest as far as avoiding bribery is concerned.
TRACE first issued its matrix in 2014, and the tool has been expanded this year to include a wider range of sources for its risk-score calculations. Scores for each country are calculated based on four factors: 1) the nature and extent of government interaction with the private sector; 2) the existence of anti-bribery laws and how they are enforced; 3) governmental transparency; and 4) the strength of civil society's ability to monitor and expose corrupt behavior.
“The overarching goal [of the matrix] is to get information to companies that will help them with their risk assessments,” said Alexandra Wrage, president and founder of TRACE.
“[Companies] are using it as a part of their algorithm as they start to figure out how much due diligence to do in a country, how much training to do in a country, how much auditing to do in a particular country,” she added.
This year's matrix named the top five riskiest countries to do business as Somalia, Venezuela, Turkmenistan, North Korea and South Sudan. Somalia was at the very bottom of the barrel with a score of 88 out of 100, with 100 being the most risky possible score.
On the other end of the anti-bribery spectrum were Sweden, New Zealand, Norway, Finland and the U.K., with Sweden as the least dangerous country for bribery with a score of 5 out of 100. Finland and the U.K. are newcomers to the top of the list this year.
Robert Clark, manager of legal research at TRACE, said in an email that the U.K.'s appearance in the top five has to do with an increase in the degree to which it publicizes laws and government data as well as the high ratings for the effectiveness of civil society oversight in the nation.
He said that the U.K. also “registered improvement with respect to bribery expectation and anti-bribery laws.”
Another notable takeaway from the report was that two of the world's most populous and economically dynamic countries, China and India, appear to be moving in opposite directions when it comes to bribery risk. China has become riskier on the matrix, explained Clark, while India has gotten less risky.
He attributed part of the increased risk in China to the country's reluctance to crack down outside its own borders.
“In the case of China, at least part of this has been they are not enforcing their anti-bribery laws outside the country so Chinese companies going overseas are not having Chinese laws enforced against them,” he noted.
Clark said that India has made improvements in the anti-bribery space both through a “super robust civil society” and a reduction in the sorts of red tape that can incentivize bribery and corruption. “India has had a sort of infamous bureaucracy for a long time, and they've made improvements on that,” he said.
So where does the U.S. fall on the anti-bribery matrix? The score this year was 17 out of 100. Wrage said that there could be shifts in the way anti-bribery laws are enforced with the new administration in the White House, but it's too early to come to definite conclusions or for changes to be accurately reflected on the TRACE matrix.
Globe world flags. Credit: niroworld-Fotolia
Businesses looking to evaluate the likelihood that inroads into a foreign market will result in a high risk of bribery now have an updated tool for making these determinations. The latest edition of the TRACE Bribery Risk Matrix from anti-bribery standard setting organization TRACE International was released Thursday.
Along with the new matrix came some new intel on which countries pose the most danger and which are the safest as far as avoiding bribery is concerned.
TRACE first issued its matrix in 2014, and the tool has been expanded this year to include a wider range of sources for its risk-score calculations. Scores for each country are calculated based on four factors: 1) the nature and extent of government interaction with the private sector; 2) the existence of anti-bribery laws and how they are enforced; 3) governmental transparency; and 4) the strength of civil society's ability to monitor and expose corrupt behavior.
“The overarching goal [of the matrix] is to get information to companies that will help them with their risk assessments,” said Alexandra Wrage, president and founder of TRACE.
“[Companies] are using it as a part of their algorithm as they start to figure out how much due diligence to do in a country, how much training to do in a country, how much auditing to do in a particular country,” she added.
This year's matrix named the top five riskiest countries to do business as Somalia, Venezuela, Turkmenistan, North Korea and South Sudan. Somalia was at the very bottom of the barrel with a score of 88 out of 100, with 100 being the most risky possible score.
On the other end of the anti-bribery spectrum were Sweden, New Zealand, Norway, Finland and the U.K., with Sweden as the least dangerous country for bribery with a score of 5 out of 100. Finland and the U.K. are newcomers to the top of the list this year.
Robert Clark, manager of legal research at TRACE, said in an email that the U.K.'s appearance in the top five has to do with an increase in the degree to which it publicizes laws and government data as well as the high ratings for the effectiveness of civil society oversight in the nation.
He said that the U.K. also “registered improvement with respect to bribery expectation and anti-bribery laws.”
Another notable takeaway from the report was that two of the world's most populous and economically dynamic countries, China and India, appear to be moving in opposite directions when it comes to bribery risk. China has become riskier on the matrix, explained Clark, while India has gotten less risky.
He attributed part of the increased risk in China to the country's reluctance to crack down outside its own borders.
“In the case of China, at least part of this has been they are not enforcing their anti-bribery laws outside the country so Chinese companies going overseas are not having Chinese laws enforced against them,” he noted.
Clark said that India has made improvements in the anti-bribery space both through a “super robust civil society” and a reduction in the sorts of red tape that can incentivize bribery and corruption. “India has had a sort of infamous bureaucracy for a long time, and they've made improvements on that,” he said.
So where does the U.S. fall on the anti-bribery matrix? The score this year was 17 out of 100. Wrage said that there could be shifts in the way anti-bribery laws are enforced with the new administration in the White House, but it's too early to come to definite conclusions or for changes to be accurately reflected on the TRACE matrix.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllContract Software Unicorn Ironclad Hires Former Pinterest Lawyer as GC
2 minute readHow Amy Harris Leverages Diversity to Give UMB Financial a Competitive Edge
5 minute readAuditor Finds 'Significant Deficiency' in FTC Accounting to Tune of $7M
4 minute readDog Gone It, Target: Provider of Retailer's Mascot Dog Sues Over Contract Cancellation
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250