Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977
Case study of internal control
Case study of internal control
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977
Bribery has always been a controversial issue, especially in the business world. Many argue that bribes are a necessary cost of doing business while others view them with distain, claiming that they are antiquated and create an unfair advantage. In the late 90’s, the problem reached a boiling point. Although laws such as the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act made bribery illegal in the United States, it still remained an international issue. Numerous skeptics claimed that violators of the act slipped through loopholes and that the law was not properly enforced. This law only applied to the United States, but bribery had become a worldwide concern. In 1998, the International Anti-Bribery and Fair Competition Act was enacted. The Act became law on November 10, 1998, however; it did not take effect until May 1, 1999.
The International Anti-Bribery and Fair Competition Act amends the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 and the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977. The Securities Exchange Act is a United States law which regulates the trading of securities in the secondary market. The secondary market involves sales that take place after a security is originally offered by an issuer which is typically a company (Sarkar). The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act is a United States law which prohibits paying bribes to foreign officials to retain or obtain business. It also requires companies to retain accurate records and books. Companies are also required to implement a system of internal controls which provides reasonable assurances that transactions are executed and assets are accessed and accounted for in accordance with management's authorization (U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission). The Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public...
... middle of paper ...
...ti-Bribery Act of 1998 Amends the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and Implements the OECD Convention Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials." Simpson Thatcher (1998): 1-16. Document. 2014 February 5. .
"The International Anti-Bribery and Fair Competition Act of 1998." 1998. Document. 6 February 2014. < http://www.justice.gov/criminal/fraud/fcpa/docs/antibribe.pdf>.
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. SEC Charges Johnson & Johnson With Foreign Bribery. 2011. Web. 7 February 2014. .
—. SEC Charges KBR and Halliburton for FCPA Violations. 19 February 2009. Web. 7 February 2014. .
—. Spotlight on Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. 14 November 2012. Web. 20 February 2014. .
When dealing with corruption, first question to ask or to clarify is what corruption is. NSW Research (2002) describes corruption anything from gaining materialistically by virtue of position (for eg. getting a special discount at stores) to engaging in ‘direct criminal activities’ (eg. selling drugs). Newburn (1999) believes that there is a thin line between the definition of ‘corrupt’ and ‘non-corrupt’ activities as at the end, it is an ethical problem. For common people, however, bribery generalises corruption.
Corruption is an individual and institutional process where there is a gain by a public official from a briber and in return receives a service. Between the gain and the service, there is an improper connection, (Thompson p.28). The two major categories of bribery is individual and institutional corruption. Receiving personal goods for the pursuit of one’s own benefit is personal fraud. An example of individual distortion is the financial scandal involving David Durenberger. Organizational corruption involves “receiving goods that are useable primarily in the political process and are necessary for doing a job or are essential by-products of doing it,” (Thompson p.30). An instance of institutional fraud is the Keating Five case. There are also times where there is a mixture of both individual and organizational corruption in a scandal. An example of this diverse combination is James C. Wright Jr. actions while he was the Speaker of the House.
The cons to the argument for saying the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act is obsolete is discussed in the article With Wal-Mart Claims, Greater Attention on a Law by Charlie Savage. In this article Charlie Savage argues that the FCPA has always been a useful tool in stopping corruption but in recent years with companies becoming more globalized other countries gradually adopted similar laws, the United States has started to enforce it more strictly. The dollar amount of fines imposed by the Justice Department and the Securities and Exchange Commission has increased even more, including a record-setting $800 million paid by Siemens in 2008. Enforcement under the act has soared, from just two enforcement actions in 2004 to 48 in 2010. There are currently at least 100 open investigations, specialists estimate.
"The Halliburton Loophole." New York Times 3 Nov. 2009: A28(L). Biography in Context. Web. 5 May 2014.
I would like to propose the following changes and/or additions to the Security and Exchange Commission’s regulations. These changes are in regards to the last ten years of corporate fraud in the financial world involving such companies as Enron, WorldCom, Tyco, and Xerox. The primary changes include the addition of a Reserve Bond and an adjustment in the Bounty Payment program. Secondary changes include a Board of Directors mix-up program for securities companies, and SEC involvement in external auditing.
Many people know about or have witnessed this corruption taking place and numerous attempts to rid of it have been made. It is not an easy task attempting to bring justice to where justice should be made. There ...
With the development of international business, more and more companies get large profits in multinational cooperation, also led to a serious corruption problem at the same time. One of the most famous is the Siemens scandal. Although there are many laws to stop transnational bribery, many companies have to rely on bribes to win contracts. Some managers consider the social resources are limited and the distribution exist competition. A bribe is the easy way to obtain the resources that the companies original may not get. Furthermore, some of the company 's products have serious quality problem, the leaders of production will bribe prosecutors. Then the products into the market smoothly, however, this behavior will lead to unfair competition
Corruption is a persistent problem that plagues the world and it knows no boundaries. Transparency International defines it as the “abuse of entrusted power for private gain” (2013). For the purposes of this thread, ‘corruption’ is defined as any individual, collective, or structural act or process that permits the use of public authority or position for private gain. This definition captures the broad and many ways individuals and institutions abuse power and the public trust. In regard to whistleblowing, much conflict stems from the context in which the whistleblower is viewed.
Farrar, John H., and Susan Watson. "Self-Dealing, Fair Dealing And Related Party Transactions--History, Policy And Reform." Journal of Corporate Law Studies 11.2 (2011): n. pag. EBSCO. Web. 21 Oct. 2013.
In the business industry, there are ethical dilemmas that occur on a daily basis. Some ethical dilemma can include stealing or even having fraudulent documents in order to get an unfair advantage within the organization. Another ethical dilemma that has been brought into the light is bribery. What makes bribery unique is that in various parts of the world, bribery has become an acceptable behavior whereas other parts of the world people would consider that as unethical behavior. In order to understand what is acceptable or not when trying to bribe public officials, we must understand the principles of what is considered to be ethical or unethical.
Bribery is wrong, and it would be almost instinctive to point at the benefits of impartially functioning public servants and incorrupt corporations to our democratic society as justification. However, in this imperfect world where bribery is rife in varying degrees, is it possible to express this notion convincingly? Certainly 'because the UK Bribery Act says so' is far less persuasive to a council planning office in Shanghai than in London, and indeed in compliance with section 7 of the Bribery Act 2010 which relates to commercial offences, it is essential that this question is engaged with on a corporate scale and without assertion through dogma. Accordingly, this essay will argue that elements wrong with bribery are inclusive of both moral and economic considerations. Moreover, in conjunction with international mandates, advent of aggressive legislation such as that of the UK Bribery Act 2010 is representative of global efforts to eliminate bribery. Hence, it follows that bribery can never be considered a normal part of business because it is economically unsustainable in the long term.
There are hundreds of different corporation crimes out there, that corporations are doing daily. However, the main corporation crime that will be focused on is that of the anti-trust offense. The anti-trust offense, is a deterrent to the competition to sure the far economic system with other corporations. Instead the anti-trust offense amongst the other corporations to sell goods at a reasonable price is a restriction. In theory this completive against each other, so that it ensures that a consumer is getting the best prices possible. Unfortunately, when a corporation uses this tactic it hurts the entire economic system. Furthermore, anti-trust acts are designed to promote and protect the competition, against the anti-trust offenses
The typical example of bribery in countries, where it is seems to be normal, is paying for vote on elections. Political party in this situation offers some amount of money to citizens in exchange of their vote for this party. In this case, self-interest of people to a new government is distorted, because some destitute are rather to receive gift and vote for politician, who participates in
The existence of bribery and unethical behavior is rampant in the world market and may not change overnight. The question of bribery has been distilled in business literature as a question of ethics. In this situation at the airport with the customs officer, it is important to distinguish between business ethics and personal ethics. In a business ethics situation, the Foreign Corruption Practices Act would prohibit offering any bribe to the custom office – for example to free a shipment of goods that was lost in red tape (Pitman & Sanford, 2006). Most companies also have policies against bribery as well. In this situation, however the main issue at hand is that of personal ethics. When in a situation where your company is unknown and there is no business being conducted, normal business ethics and laws (including FCPA) do not apply only personal ethical standards.
Legal: Corrupt practices undermine the rule of law, weakens trust in public institutions and challenges democratic principles. According to the Corruption of foreign public officials Act, there are many legal fees and penalties to those who break any part of the act, which include; jail time, fines, and a bad reputation on the individual and the company (Government of Canada, 2014) . Corruption can affect every sector and level of the government, from the top executive, legislative and judicial branches down to regional and local officials, thereby reducing its efficiency.