pauses enforcement of ban on bribing 
foriegn officials 
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/02/10/trump-doj-foreign-corrupt-practices-act-pause.html
Top Poster of the Day:
kaamrev
Current Registered Users: 30,967
Downvoting is banned
Pinging is banned
No posting after curfew
Suggesting that a person's posts are pinned or has not been suspended due to sexual favors is forbidden
Count_Sprpr's word is law
/h/drama SETTINGS /h/drama MODS /h/drama LOG /h/drama EXILEES /h/drama FOLLOWERS /h/drama BLOCKERS
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Reddit comments assure me that this is the most corrupt thing ever to happen on earth. But I asked ChatGPT if reputable sources had criticisms of the law. Here's what it told me:
1. Extrajudicial Enforcement & Overreach
Economists and Legal Scholars' Views: Critics argue that the FCPA's extraterritorial reach leads to an overextension of U.S. power. The FCPA applies to both U.S. companies and foreign firms listed on U.S. stock exchanges, regardless of where the bribery takes place. This has led to concerns that the U.S. is using the FCPA to impose its legal standards on foreign companies operating in their own countries.
Reputable Critics: Some economists claim that the enforcement of the FCPA interferes with the sovereign rights of foreign countries, particularly when U.S. authorities penalize foreign firms under U.S. law for actions that may be culturally accepted in the firms' home countries.
2. Vague Language and Overly Broad Application
Ambiguity in the Law: The language of the FCPA is often seen as vague, especially when defining what constitutes a "bribe" or "corrupt intent." This vagueness has led to concerns that companies may unintentionally violate the law, particularly in situations involving hospitality, gift-giving, and interactions with foreign officials.
Economists' Take: Some argue that this lack of clarity can harm U.S. businesses, as they may incur legal fees and face reputational damage from FCPA investigations even if they did not intend to engage in corrupt behavior.
3. Impact on Competitive Advantage
Economic Consequences: The FCPA has been criticized for putting U.S. companies at a competitive disadvantage relative to foreign companies, particularly in industries where bribery and informal practices are widespread. For example, some developing countries have economies where paying bribes is often a part of doing business. Critics, including economists like Kenneth Rogoff (Harvard economist), have suggested that the FCPA forces U.S. firms to adhere to stricter anti-bribery standards than their competitors from countries with less stringent laws.
Politicians' Concerns: U.S. politicians, particularly those with interests in global trade, have voiced concerns that the FCPA may harm U.S. firms' ability to compete in markets where corruption is more common. These critics argue that the law could lead to U.S. businesses losing lucrative contracts to foreign firms that are not subject to similar regulations.
4. Unequal Enforcement
Selective Prosecution: Some critics have pointed out that enforcement of the FCPA is inconsistent, with certain industries or companies being more heavily scrutinized than others. For example, major multinational corporations with extensive resources are often subject to investigations, while smaller companies or firms from countries with weaker enforcement mechanisms may not be held to the same standards.
Political Influence: Some politicians have argued that the FCPA's enforcement is politically motivated, with the law sometimes being used to target geopolitical rivals or to exert influence over foreign governments.
5. Overly Harsh Penalties
Economic Impact on Companies: Critics also argue that the penalties for violating the FCPA are too severe. The fines imposed on companies found guilty of violating the law can be enormous, and there are often additional costs associated with legal fees, compliance measures, and reputational damage.
Economists' Concerns: Some economists argue that the severity of these penalties can disproportionately harm the global competitiveness of U.S. businesses. In industries such as energy, pharmaceuticals, or telecommunications, where international competition is fierce, U.S. companies may find it difficult to compete with firms from countries that do not have similar anti-corruption laws.
6. Global Economic Impacts
International Trade and Investment: There are concerns that the FCPA could deter U.S. businesses from engaging in certain international markets, particularly in regions where corruption is endemic. Some economists believe that the law may create a barrier to trade, especially in countries where paying bribes is a standard business practice.
Impact on Developing Economies: Some politicians and economists argue that the FCPA could harm the development of emerging economies. For instance, businesses may avoid investments in countries with high corruption risks, which could limit economic growth in those regions. This criticism is often coupled with the idea that the FCPA's punitive approach does not take into account the broader socioeconomic factors that contribute to corruption in these regions.
7. Calls for Reform
Reputable Advocates for Reform: Various legal scholars and economists have called for reforms to the FCPA to address some of the above issues. These include clearer definitions, better guidance on what constitutes a violation, more consistent enforcement, and adjustments to penalties to ensure that they do not disproportionately impact U.S. firms' global competitiveness.
In summary, while the FCPA has been praised for promoting ethical business practices and setting an international standard against bribery, the criticisms center around concerns regarding its extraterritorial reach, vague definitions, potential to harm U.S. business competitiveness, and inconsistencies in enforcement.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
So here's the thing, in certain markets it's customary to bribe or do a kickback or buy some kind of really nice gift for somebody after a deal and it's just their fricking custom, so the FCPA can really hammer you if you're not careful with that shit. Add the fact that the FCPA also will punish you for a crime alleged to have been conducted in a completely different country—well it's it's kind of a pain.
Now, as far as I know federal government officials are still obviously subject to 5 C.F.R. § 2635.203(b) and (c) so this has no effect on them.
And the FCPA is still there, he just says he won't enforce it. It could be enforced at a later date by the other side of the pendulum
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Yea, that seems to be the gist of it. And he didn't scrap it, though this could be a prelude to that or to some on-paper-only enforcement. But, at least at this stage, it's just a review of something they view as having been overly heavy handed and harmful in the past.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context