There Are Several Legal And Moral Implications When Expanding

According to Benston (1977) an unaware public pays for government-required accounting disclosure. Sunstein (1999) claims that disclosure of information allows the federal government to control public and private conduct. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act Over the decades accounting regulations have come from various sources. The Securities and Exchange Commission as well as the Internal Revenue Service and Interstate Commerce Commission are examples of regulatory bodies that promulgate accounting regulations. A more recent example occurred during the 1970s. During the Watergate era there were a number of investigations, some of which affected American business. One of the investigations, conducted by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in 1975, revealed that 19 publiclyheld corporations had made illegal campaign contributions and that these contributions were made from cash accounts that had not been recorded on the corporation’s books. (Heldack, 1977) This prompted the SEC to launch an investigation into what were considered ―questionable payments.‖ What came out of the investigation was that many U.S. multinational corporations were making hundreds of millions of dollars in ―questionable payments‖ to foreign officials to obtain business. As a result, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) was unanimously adopted by Congress in 1977. Bribery of foreign officials to obtain business for the corporation

The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act has been pursued by government agencies recently as the SEC, the FBI, and Department of Justice are cracking down on international business corruption. Companies are working harder at expanding economically in the market by doing business with individuals and other companies in foreign countries. Foreign countries are not always in compliance with US laws and regulations, causing US companies who deal with them issues with compliance on the home front. Because of these ongoing issues congress decided to introduce the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and to prosecute foreign companies for corrupt activities within the United States. The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act is a federal law that was amended in 1977,

Each of these jurisdictions works together to keep aspects of FCPA from being violated. This law is not always prohibiting all payments to the foreign officials. The FCPA has an exception for anti-bribery prohibitions and that is called “ routine government action.” This exception is also given the names “facilitating” or “ grease payment.” The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act defines this “routine government action” as for a foreign official to perform in obtaining permits, licenses, or other official documents that enable then to do business in that country, processing government papers such as visa and work orders, protection services and conducting inspections, and anything that has similar nature (6). The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) has two affirmative defenses and they consist of assertion that payment in question was lawful under the laws of the foreign country, and the assertion that the payment was valued a bona fide expenditure (6). This affirmative defense is aimed to be for the issuer, domestic concern, or other person. In this affirmative defense there must be some type of written law authorizing or supporting the payment. The penalties for violating the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act are different from the provision that they fall under. For an individual and it is from the anti bribery

Since 1977, the anti-bribery provisions of the FCPA have applied to all U.S. persons and certain foreign issuers of securities. With the enactment of certain amendments in 1998, the anti-bribery provisions of the FCPA now also apply to foreign firms and persons who cause, directly or through agents, an act in furtherance of such a corrupt payment to take place within the territory of the United States.

While reading this case analysis, The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act came into discussion as an underlying factor in Weihardt’s decision. The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act was enacted for the purpose of making it unlawful for certain classes of persons and entities to make payments to foreign government officials to assist in obtaining or retaining business. This practice applies to Weinhardt in the fact that he was given the opportunity to give Lee a bribe to obtain Lees’ business.

Author Scott Nette clearly explains that in July 2007, Anthony Tesvich, Melissa Tesvich, James P. Robinson and Ronald K. Jonston was Investigated, charged and convicted on the Foreign Corrupt Act. “The Foreign Corrupt Act States that it is illegal for an US person, entity and certain applicable foreign entity to make and/or accept bribes or offer any inducement for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business with an US firm.” – Scott Nette

There are many corporate organizations that have expanded their business opportunities outside of the U.S. Consequently, these global organizations are required to conform to The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977 (FCPA). Under the FCPA, anti-bribery and accounting provisions exist for companies to identify unlawful acts and comply with requirements by maintaining accurate records of transactions and implementing internal controls. (DoJ, 2015a, FCPA: An Overview section, para. 2-3).

The impact the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act had on society was pleasant since it restored buyer confidence in the United States and restored the integrity of the United States market by implementing honesty in transactions. Yet it imposed too many disadvantages for the economy and corporations. The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act focuses on large fraudulent payments made by a business, therefore anyone involved in the financial, accounting, and executive department are impacted the most. Other major stakeholders affected include the board of directors, shareholders, employees, government officials involved, and foreign officials or foreign companies involved. Everyone is affected because the codes of conduct, and the companies’ values needed

The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977 (FCPA) evolved from investigations by the Office of the Special Prosecutor that provided evidence of illegal acts perpetrated by U.S. firms in foreign lands. More than 400 U.S. companies admitted to making questionable payments to various foreign governments and political parties as part of an amnesty program (U.S. Department of Justice http://www.usdoj.gov). Given the environment of the 1970s and the proliferation of white-collar crimes (e.g., insider trading, bribery, false financial statements, etc.), particularly the payments made to foreign officials by corporations, Congress felt obligated to introduce legislation that led to the act. Congress's objective was to restore confidence

Each foreign country has its own antitrust laws that must be complied with when exporting. They reflect the nation's commitment to an economy based on competition. This provides consumers with goods and services at the lowest price that an efficient business can profitably offer. The Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice enforces foreign antitrust issues in the Federal Court. Riordan has provided its employees with intensive training so they understand it is unlawful for a U.S. firm to pay or offer to pay money or give anything of value to any foreign official for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business. For example, a person charged with violation of the anitbribery provision of this Federal Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) may try to use the defense that the payment was lawful under the written laws and regulations of the foreign country or that the payment was associated with demonstrating the product. Prosecution under federal criminal laws in the Federal Court can be subject to imprisonment and fines. Riordan personnel are aware that if a person or company is found in violation of the FCPA, they can be banned from doing business with the federal government and can be suspended the right to do business in the U.S.

More specifically, in 1988 Congress amended the law to add two affirmative defenses, “the local law defense and the reasonable and bona fide promotional expense defense” (“A Resource Guide to the FCPA…”, 2012, p.3). This makes it okay for businessmen or businesswomen to get money to travel for promotion of products or services and make corrupt bribes prosecutable under local law. The addition also requested that the President negotiate a international treaty to prohibit bribery in international business transactions (“A Resource Guide to the FCPA…”, 2012, p.3-4). The FCPA was later amended in 1998 again, and expanded the law to include payments made to secure “any improper advantage”, create a definition for “foreign official” and made penalties

an agent of the company offered a bribe and it is shown that the company failed to create and maintain a corporate culture that required compliance with the laws against bribing foreign public officials.

Mexico is one of the largest and most open economies in the world. It has only a handful of strategic sectors or industries not yet open to private investment. Mexico is forecasting an economic growth rate between 2% and 3% over the next fiscal year so it is important to understand the different aspects of what is involved with doing business in Mexico. Basic geographical information, cultural diversity, and proper business etiquette will all play a large role in business operations.

By offering specific approaches of how to get prepared for and minimize the potential issues aroused by the higher power distance and high uncertainty avoidance feature of Mexican culture, we emphasized the importance for companies to be fully aware of the condition of the country and to come up with some ideas to deal with the potential problems before sending any employee to the country. We also compared the institutional factors of Mexico and U.S. and their implications for global business. For example, companies need to be prepared for corruption in Mexico and establish policies or rules as to relevant situations. Regarding the limitation of this report, due to time and resource limitation, we didn’t make a further exploration of subcultures within Mexico society. Although Mexican culture as a whole bears the features we mentioned in the report, it is quite possible that different cultures exist in different areas, industries and social classes. Therefore, we suggest companies conduct more specific researches on cultures of particular regions, industries or occupations when

According to The United States Department of Justice, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act “was enacted for the purpose of making it unlawful for certain classes of persons and entities to make payments to foreign government officials to assist in obtaining or retaining business”. Therefore, Mike O’Brian is facing both an ethical and legal dilemma. If O’Brian is to provide $100,000, plus a “ten percent commission on future parts-and-service revenues”, and agrees with this stipulation, he will be committing an illegal act to both obtain and retain the sales business in Africa. O’Brian has limited options as to making a decision and how he will do so. By keeping the contract offer in place, O’Brian will face ethical dilemmas and will need to determine who he will carry out the sale while obtaining his commission.