Baum Hedlund Aristei & Goldman changed its name to Wisner Baum in January 2023.

FCPA Bribery Act

The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act

The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), also known as the Bribery Act, is a federal law that:

  • Prohibits any corporation with business holdings in the United States (also known as an “issuer”) from bribing a foreign official or committing other criminal acts in order to obtain or maintain business.
  • Requires issuers to keep accurate records of transactions and the handling of assets, and maintain a system of internal accounting controls to monitor transactions and insure they are properly recorded.

The law is jointly enforced by the U.S. Department of Justice and the Securities and Exchange Commission, as both agencies serve to protect consumers and investors and maintain a fair marketplace. Whistleblowers play an important role in assisting with the enforcement of FCPA provisions. Under the Dodd-Frank Act, whistleblowers may receive a reward of between 10 and 30 percent of the amount recovered in FCPA claims.

Anti-Bribery Provisions

The FCPA prohibits offers and payments, promises to pay, the authorization of the payment of any money, or offer, gift, or promise to give, or the authorization of the giving of anything of value to any foreign officials, political parties, party officials, or candidates for political office in another country, for the purpose of influencing their acts and decisions in order to assist the issuer or business entity “in obtaining or retaining business for or with, or directing business to, any person.”

The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act also prohibits any citizen, resident, national, partnership, joint-stock company, unincorporated organization, business trust, or sole proprietorship that makes the United States its home base for business (also known as a “domestic concern”) from engaging any of these forms of corrupt conduct.

Intermediaries or third parties are not permitted to make corrupt payments on behalf of “issuers” or “domestic concerns” with the knowledge that the payment will go directly or indirectly to a foreign official since this is simply a cloaked attempt to bribe a foreign official. In addition, the FCPA prohibits foreign companies from making corrupt payments to a government official while in the United States.

Accounting Provisions

In order to accomplish its anti-bribery goal, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act also requires companies with registered securities in the U.S. to keep accurate records of all company transactions and maintain an accurate accounting system. Issuers are required to make and keep books, records, and accounts that accurately “reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the issuer.” Accounting transparency rules operate to prevent companies from concealing payments from required public disclosure.

Exceptions and “Affirmative Defenses” to the FCPA

The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act also contains several exceptions to its record keeping and bribery provisions:

  • Persons are criminally liable for violations of accounting standards only when they “knowingly circumvent or knowingly fail to implement a system of internal accounting controls or knowingly falsify any book, record, or account….” The key word here is knowingly. The intent of the law makers was that penalties be imposed for intentional efforts to deceive, not for insignificant or technical infractions or inadvertent conduct.
  • Facilitating or expediting payments that were made to expedite or secure the performance of a routine governmental action by a foreign official, political party or party official are not violations of the FCPA.

Affirmative Defenses” – It can be argued that no violation of the FCPA has occurred when the payment, gift, offer, or promise of anything of value that was made was “lawful under the written laws and regulations of the foreign official’s, political party’s, party official’s or candidate’s country”, or the payments, gifts, offers and promises made were “reasonable and bona fide expenditures” and were directly related to a) the promotion, demonstration, or explanation of products or services or b) the execution or performance of a contract with a foreign government or agency. The act mentions travel and lodging expenses as one example.

Penalties for Violating the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act

Violations of Anti-Bribery Provisions
Criminal Fines Civil Penalties
Businesses up to $2 million up to $10,000
Individuals up to $250,000; 5 years imprisonment up to $10,000
Violations of Accounting Provisions
Criminal Fines Civil Penalties
Businesses up to $25 million up to $500,000
Individuals up to $5 million; 20 years imprisonment up to $100,000

Businesses that violate the anti-bribery provisions of the FCPA can be punished with criminal fines up to $2 million and civil penalties up to ten thousand dollars. Individuals who violate the law may receive criminal fines up to $250K and/or imprisonment up to 5 years, and civil penalties up to ten thousand dollars. Businesses that violate the accounting provisions of the FCPA can be fined up to $25 million and receive civil penalties up to a half a million. Individuals who violate accounting provisions may receive criminal fines up to $5 million and/or imprisonment up to 20 years, as well as civil penalties up to $100,000. Under the Alternative Fines Act, criminal fines may be increased to twice the financial gain resulting from the anti-bribery or accounting violation.

Call (855) 948-5098 or fill out our online form to get in touch with our whistleblower attorneys.

The Role of the Whistleblower in FCPA Law

The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act law does not directly address the rewards and protections available to FCPA whistleblowers. However, under Dodd-Frank, the Securities and Exchange Commission is required to pay eligible whistleblowers who provide the agency with “original information” (derived from the whistleblower’s independent knowledge or analysis and not known by the Commission from any other source) with between 10 percent and 30 percent of the monetary sanctions imposed by the SEC following the successful enforcement of a judicial or administrative action, provided those penalties exceed $1 million. Given the potential size of fines that can be imposed on FCPA violators, in large cases the awards can be substantial.

The Dodd-Frank Act also includes protection for whistleblowers. The law prohibits employers from discharging, suspending, threatening, harassing, directly or indirectly, or discriminating against a whistleblower in any manner as a result of lawful whistleblower acts in providing information to the SEC or assisting an SEC investigation related to their information.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act also contains provisions that prohibit employers from retaliating against whistleblowers. Under the law, an employee who is the target of retaliation may file a complaint with the Department of Labor and is eligible for reinstatement, back pay and other compensation.

The SEC has created rules that govern the administration of its whistleblower program. Two are particularly important for whistleblowers.

  • Whistleblowers are encouraged to make internal reports to their companies and are eligible for awards even if they first provide their original information to the company itself and the company then informs the SEC of the violations. Under this provision, the whistleblower is credited with all the information provided by the company to the SEC, even information generated by the company’s internal investigation. This can sometimes expand the scope of the case and increase the amount of the whistleblower’s award. Whistleblowers have 120 days to report information to the SEC after first reporting internally and are treated as if they had reported to the SEC at the earlier reporting date.
  • Whistleblowers may report violations to the SEC anonymously but to do so they must have an attorney represent them in connection with their submission. Potential FCPA whistleblowers should contact an attorney experienced in this complex area of law before taking action to ensure that their rights are protected and that they receive any reward to which they are entitled.

History of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act

In the mid 1970’s investigations by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) revealed that more than 400 American companies admitted making over $300 million in corrupt payments and bribes to foreign officials in government and politics.

A 1977 report prepared for the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce revealed that those companies included many of the largest in the U.S., with at least 117 ranking among Fortune magazine’s top 500 U.S. corporations.

According to the report, high foreign officials were bribed to secure favorable action by foreign governments and “facilitating payments” were made to ensure that government functionaries completed certain ministerial or clerical duties.

Among the adverse consequences of such payments were anticompetitive effects on domestic companies, lawsuits, the seizure of valuable assets overseas, and “severe foreign policy problems for the United States.” In Italy, alleged payments by Lockheed, Exxon, Mobil Oil and other corporations to officials of the Italian government jeopardized U.S. foreign policy in that nation and the entire NATO alliance.

Congress passed the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FPCA) in 1977 in an effort to stop these corrupt practices and restore the integrity of American businesses at home and abroad. The FCPA was signed into law by President Jimmy Carter on December 19, 1977. The law addressed two principal areas of concern – the bribing of foreign officials to achieve or maintain business, and the need for transparent accounting systems.

The FCPA was amended in 1988 in response to several criticisms of the original bill. The amendments were signed into law as Title V of the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988. One goal of the changes was to ensure that only deliberate “knowing” falsification of records or evasions of internal accounting controls– not unintentional or unwitting conduct – would be punished.

Other amendments addressed the fact that in some nations it was customary and lawful for a government official to accept a fee or payments in the course of doing business with the government. The 1988 amendments made facilitating such payments permissible if the purpose “is to expedite or to secure the performance of a routine governmental action.” Exceptions to the anti-bribery provisions were also created for payments or expenditures that were made to promote products and services.

It was widely viewed that the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act put U.S. companies at a disadvantage when competing with foreign companies in nations that did not have similar anti-bribery laws. This was addressed in 1997 when member countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) signed the “Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions.” OECD members agreed to make it a criminal offense for any person to bribe a foreign official to “obtain or retain business or other improper advantage in the conduct of international business.”

The following year, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act was amended to conform to the OECD Convention. An anti-bribery provision regarding foreign companies was added to the FCPA law, which made it illegal for foreign companies or persons to pay such bribes while conducting business in the United States. The amendments also broadened the law’s jurisdiction to include FCPA violations that take place outside the United States and expanded the definition of prohibited acts to include those made to secure “any improper advantage.”

Call (855) 948-5098 to schedule a consultation and learn about your options.

Contact Us Today

No Fees Unless We Win
  • Please enter your first name.
  • Please enter your last name.
  • +1
    Please enter your phone number.
    This isn't a valid phone number.
  • Please enter your email address.
    This isn't a valid email address.
  • Please enter your city.
  • Please make a selection.
  • Please make a selection.
  • Please make a selection.
  • Please enter a message.
  • Whistleblower Settlement $18 Million Settlement

    Wisner Baum secured an $18 million settlement against the Boeing Company for overcharging the U.S. government on aircraft maintenance.

  • Whistleblower Settlement $8.5 Million Settlement

    Wisner Baum secured an $8.5 million whistleblower settlement against Neuroscience/ Pharmasan Labs for improper billing over unnecessary or questionable tests.

  • Whistleblower Settlement $8.45 Million Settlement

    Wisner Baum obtained an $8.45 million settlement against MB2 Dental Solutions for improper billing and kickbacks.

  • Whistleblower Settlement $6.5 Million Settlement

    Wisner Baum obtained a $6.5 million settlement against San Diego Hospice for healthcare fraud.

  • Whistleblower Settlement $1.2 Million Settlement

    Wisner Baum secured a $1.2 million settlement against Bizlink Technology for underpaying custom fees.

  • Whistleblower Settlement $1.3 Million Settlement

    Wisner Baum secured a $1.3 million Whistleblower settlement against West Alabama Emergency Physicians for medicare fraud.

  • Best Law Firms 2023
    Best Law Firms 2023

    A ranking in The U.S. News – Best Lawyers® “Best Law Firms” is widely regarded by both client and legal professionals as a significant honor. It is considered the most reliable, unbiased source of legal referrals anywhere.

  • The Truck Safety Coalition
    The Truck Safety Coalition

    Wisner Baum is proud to be a sponsor of The Truck Safety Coalition, a a group of caring individuals dedicated to reducing the number of deaths and injuries caused by truck-related crashes. Our support enables them to help families and save lives.

  • California Powerhouse
    California Powerhouse

    Law360 recognizes law firms that have a strong regional presence, working on important matters within their home state. “[Wisner Baum] possesses a David v. Goliath-sized slingshot while seeking justice for everyday citizens it believes were harmed or killed through corporate wrongdoing.”

  • Elite Trial Lawyers
    Elite Trial Lawyers

    NLJ and American Lawyer Media honor law firms and attorneys as Elite Trial Lawyers for their cutting-edge legal work on behalf of plaintiffs in practice areas ranging from mass torts to securities litigation.

  • Listed in Best Lawyers
    Listed in Best Lawyers

    Best Lawyers is the oldest and most respected peer-review publication in the legal profession. A listing in Best Lawyers is widely regarded by both clients and legal professionals as a significant honor, conferred on a lawyer by his or her peers.

  • AV Top Ranked Law Firm
    AV Top Ranked Law Firm

    Less than one-half of one percent of firms across the nation have achieved this ranking. A firm must have a high percentage of lawyers who have achieved the prestigious AV® Preeminent rating by Martindale-Hubbell®.

  • Verdicts Hall of Fame
    Verdicts Hall of Fame

    The National Law Journal inducted Wisner Baum into the Verdicts Hall of Fame for obtaining the $2 billion landmark verdict in the Roundup cancer case of Pilliod et al. v. Monsanto. The verdict was #1 in California and #2 in the U.S. in 2019 and is #9 in American history.

  • Super Lawyers
    Super Lawyers

    Super Lawyers is a rating service of outstanding lawyers from more than 70 practice areas who have attained a high-degree of peer recognition and professional achievement.

  • National Trial Lawyers Top 100
    National Trial Lawyers Top 100

    The National Trial Lawyers Top 100 recognized the law firms of Wisner Baum, the Miller Firm and Audet & Partners with the 2019 Trial Team of the Year award (in the Mass Torts category) for their work in the groundbreaking case of Dewayne “Lee” Johnson v. Monsanto Company.

  • AV Preeminent Peer Review Rated
    AV Preeminent Peer Review Rated

    An AV® rating reflects an attorney who has reached the heights of professional excellence. The rating signifies the highest legal ability, and very high adherence to professional standards of conduct, ethics, reliability, and diligence.

  • Avvo 10.0 Rating
    Avvo 10.0 Rating

    Wisner Baum is proud to have all of its lawyers listed in Avvo, a legal directory connecting people in need of legal services with lawyers and connecting lawyers to lawyers. Eight of our attorneys have earned a 10.0 perfect rating with Avvo.

  • Top Jury Verdict in <br> CA and USA
    Top Jury Verdict in
    CA and USA ranks our $2 billion verdict in Pilliod et al. v. Monsanto as the biggest verdict in California and the second largest verdict in the U.S. in 2019. It is the ninth largest verdict in U.S. history.

  • Lawdragon 500 Leading Plaintiff Consumer Lawyers
    Lawdragon 500 Leading Plaintiff Consumer Lawyers

    Published annually, the Lawdragon 500 Leading Plaintiff Consumer Lawyers list recognizes the “best of the best” in this area of the law through nominations, research, and review by a board of their peers.

  • Product Liability Practice Group of the Year
    Product Liability Practice Group of the Year

    In 2020, Law360 honored the law firms ”behind the litigation wins and major deals that resonated throughout the legal industry.” It recognized our success in several landmark cases.

  • Top Personal Injury Jury Verdict in California
    Top Personal Injury Jury Verdict in California

    In 2018, our $289 million Johnson v. Monsanto verdict was the largest personal injury verdict in California. also ranked it #2 among all verdicts in California and #10 in the nation.

  • Bar Register of Preeminent Lawyers
    Bar Register of Preeminent Lawyers

    The Bar Register is the definitive guide to the most distinguished law firms in America. It includes only those select law practices that have earned the highest rating in the Martindale-Hubbell Law Directory and have been designated by their colleagues as preeminent in their field.


Firm Reviews

What Our Clients Are Saying
  • I Can’t Imagine a Better Law Firm

    “Multiple lawyers recommended Wisner Baum to me and I have been consistently impressed with the quality of their work.”

    - Best Law Firms Survey
  • They Are About Changing the Systems...

    “Wisner Baum are not only amazing attorneys but more importantly, they are activists. They are about changing the systems which got us into trouble in the first place. They understand their role in the process of making change.”

    - Kim Witczak
  • Top Legal Minds in the Country

    “The Wisner Baum firm has some of the top legal minds in the country; they are driven, determined, trustworthy, ethical and passionate.”

    - From Best Lawyers® Best Law Firms
  • Diligent & Professional Representation

    “Thanks to your efforts I was able to recover from a tragic experience and turn my life around for the best.”

    - W.T.
  • Our Best Interest Was Always Number One on Your List

    “A special thank you to your Spanish-speaking staff for the extra effort put into this case. The language barrier was never a problem, and we are so very thankful to them. Your name holds much respect in our family.”

    - G.C. & C.C