Regulatory: Establishing an effective FCPA and anti-corruption compliance program in Latin America
Over the past few years, U.S. government enforcement agencies have substantially increased the number of investigationsand resulting enforcement actionsof companies and individuals in Latin America over alleged violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA).
March 14, 2012 at 05:30 AM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Over the past few years, U.S. government enforcement agencies have substantially increased the number of investigations—and resulting enforcement actions—of companies and individuals in Latin America over alleged violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). Of particular importance—the number of FCPA prosecutions with a Latin American component is also increasing, indicating that government regulators are taking a hard look at alleged violations of the FCPA in Latin America. Specifically, in 2010 and 2011, the Department of Justice (DOJ) disclosed approximately 44 FCPA and related enforcement actions, with 14 of them, or 32 percent, having a Latin American component.
For a multi-national company operating in Latin America, the challenges inherent in conducting operations in multiple countries, with multiple cultures and languages, are compounded if the company does not have an FCPA and anti-corruption compliance program that is tailored to respond to risks associated with each country within which the company operates. The need for a robust and effective compliance program is paramount in Latin America, where many of the countries have poor perception of corruption rankings within Transparency International's annual Corruption Perception Index. In fact, should FCPA non-compliance occur, enforcement authorities will factor the absence of FCPA policies and procedures into their view of the matter and their assessment of appropriate fines and penalties.
Latin America, which is made up of South America, Central America, the Caribbean and Mexico, consists of approximately 20 countries. While there is no unifying definition of the countries that make up Latin America, the general consensus is that the term Latin America refers broadly to all of the Americas south of the U.S. where the Spanish or Portuguese languages prevail.
To be sure, the languages are substantially similar in Latin American countries. The risk associated with potential FCPA violations, however, varies significantly from country to country. This is so because of the varied political and socio-economic conditions in each of the Latin American countries within which a multi-national company may operate. Indeed, while six of the seven largest countries in Latin America are Spanish-speaking, they each operate under vastly different political systems and socio-economic conditions. The political systems range from democratic republics in Mexico, Peru, Colombia, Chile and Argentina to a near dictatorship in Venezuela.
When reviewing and assessing the effectiveness of a compliance program, it is vitally important that the multinational company understand whether a company employee is negotiating with a private individual or a “foreign official” within each country. U.S. government agencies have taken an expansive view regarding the definition of foreign officials. According to the U.S. government, a “foreign official” covers a broad range of persons—from an elected official to an employee of state-owned or state-controlled enterprises.
Moreover, even if a foreign company is not wholly owned by a foreign state, the U.S. government may still consider it an “instrumentality” of a foreign government if the government exercises substantial control over the entity. Thus, a company's compliance program must be able to identify and appropriately respond to risks associated with a company employee negotiating with a “foreign official” or with the “instrumentality” of a foreign government.
Understanding the local political and socio-economic landscape within which each country that a multinational corporation operates in Latin America will thus be critical in reviewing and assessing the effectiveness of the company's FCPA and anti-corruption compliance program.
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
© 2025 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 AllCrypto Industry Eyes Legislation to Clarify Regulatory Framework
SEC Official Hints at More Restraint With Industry Bars, Less With Wells Meetings
4 minute readTrump Fires EEOC Commissioners, Kneecapping Democrat-Controlled Civil Rights Agency
Trending Stories
- 15th Circuit Strikes Down Law Barring Handgun Sales to Adults Under 21
- 2Commonwealth Court Overturns Zoning Board’s Denial Based on Merger Doctrine and Unnecessary Hardship Questions
- 3De-Mystifying the Ethics of the Attorney Transition Process, Part 2
- 4Being a Profession is Not Malarkey
- 5Bring NJ's 'Pretrial Opportunity Program' into the Open
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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