Categories
Popcorn and Compliance

Popcorn and Compliance: Episode 4 – The Ghost of Frankenstein Declaring the Monster Dead Is Not a Control

This October, Tom Fox returns to one of his all-time favorites: Universal Pictures’ Classic monsters. Over the years, Tom has explored classics like Dracula, The Mummy, The Wolf Man, and The Invisible Man, as well as films by Val Lewton and Hammer Studios. This year, he wanted to return for a deep dive into the first five Frankenstein movies. He has considered, and will consider, the original Frankenstein, Bride of Frankenstein, Ghost of Frankenstein, and Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man. In this third episode, he considers what many viewers regard as the series’ best: Son of Frankenstein, released in 1939. This is the final film to feature Boris Karloff as Frankenstein’s Monster. In this exploration, Tom Fox uses his AI friends, Timothy and Fiona, to provide commentary.

Film Synopsis:

In The Ghost of Frankenstein, Boris Karloff leaves the role, and Lon Chaney Jr. takes over as the Monster, while Bela Lugosi returns as Ygor. After escaping another attempt by villagers to destroy them, Ygor brings the Monster to Ludwig Frankenstein, Henry Frankenstein’s other son. Ludwig initially wants nothing to do with his family’s disastrous legacy but inevitably becomes involved and develops a plan to cure the Monster through brain transplantation. Ygor and Ludwig’s disgraced colleague Bohmer secretly substitute Ygor’s brain for the intended healthy brain. Predictably, remediation becomes another catastrophe.

Key highlights:

  • Repeat failures indicate ineffective remediation.
  • Closing a finding does not mean fixing a finding.
  • Bohmer demonstrates management override and circumvention of controls.
  • COSO asks us to look at the whole control environment.
  • Root cause is more important than symptoms.

Popcorn and Compliance Takeaway: Declaring the Monster dead is not a control. You have to test whether he can get back up.

Timothy and Fiona are AI-generated voices courtesy of Notebook LM.

Categories
AI Today in 5

AI Today in 5: September 9, 2026, The Wiki Incident Edition

Welcome to AI Today in 5, the newest addition to the Compliance Podcast Network. Each day, Tom Fox will bring you 5 stories about AI to start your day. Sit back, enjoy a cup of morning coffee, and listen in to AI Today in 5. All from the Compliance Podcast Network. Each day, we consider five stories from the business world on compliance, ethics, risk management, leadership, or general interest in AI.

Top AI stories include:

  1. AI governance is the real test for compliance. (FinTech Global)
  2. The role of AI in manufacturing. (Deloitte)
  3. AI hacking WeChat. (NYT)
  4. OpenAI has a wiki ‘incident.’ (Reuters)
  5. Is AGI here? (Bloomberg)

My first work of general non-fiction is now out: Deluge Before Dawn, the story of the 2025 flood in Kerr County, Texas, which killed 119 people and devastated a county. It is a story of tragedy, heartbreak, survival, and resilience.

It is available on the following sites:

Amazon.com

Stoney Creek Publishing

Barnes and Noble

Texas A&M University Press

Bookshop.org

Google.Books

Walmart

This week only, the Kindle e-book version is available for $0.99 on Amazon.

Categories
AI Today in 5

AI Today in 5: June 2, 2026, The Exposing Yourself Edition

Welcome to AI Today in 5, the newest addition to the Compliance Podcast Network. Each day, Tom Fox will bring you 5 stories about AI to start your day. Sit back, enjoy a cup of morning coffee, and listen in to the AI Today In 5. All, from the Compliance Podcast Network. Each day, we consider five stories from the business world, compliance, ethics, risk management, leadership, or general interest about AI.

Top AI stories include:

  1. A compliance gap that can expose your AI systems. (FinTech Global)
  2. CT businesses face new AI law. (HBJ)
  3. Anthropic files to go public. (NYT)
  4. OpenAI sued by FL AG. (WSJ)
  5. Anthropic offers Mythos to the EU. (FT)

For more information on the use of AI in compliance programs, Tom Fox’s new book, Upping Your Game, is available. You can purchase a copy of the book on Amazon.com.

To learn about the intersection of Sherlock Holmes and the modern compliance professional, check out Tom’s latest book, The Game is Afoot-What Sherlock Holmes Teaches About Risk, Ethics and Investigations on Amazon.com.

Categories
Blog

When AI Becomes Evidence of Bad Governance: What CCOs and Boards Can Learn from Fortis Advisors

The Delaware Court of Chancery has handed compliance leaders and boards a timely lesson: generative AI is not a substitute for judgment, legal discipline, or governance. When leaders use AI to validate a predetermined objective, the technology does not reduce risk. It can become powerful evidence of intent, bad faith, and control failure.

A Cautionary Tale for Corporate Leaders

The recent Delaware Court of Chancery decision in Fortis Advisors, LLC v. Krafton, Inc. should be read by every Chief Compliance Officer (CCO), board member, general counsel, and corporate deal professional. The article describing the decision recounts a dispute in which a buyer, apparently unhappy with a substantial earnout obligation, turned to ChatGPT for advice on how to escape the economic consequences of the deal. According to the court’s account, the buyer then executed an AI-generated strategy designed to renegotiate the arrangement or take control from the seller management team. The court ultimately found that the buyer had wrongfully terminated key employees, improperly seized operational control, reinstated the seller’s CEO, and extended the earnout window to restore a genuine opportunity to achieve the payout.

The Real Compliance Lesson

For compliance professionals, the most important lesson is not that AI is dangerous. The lesson is that leadership can use AI in dangerous ways when governance is absent. That is a far more important point.

Too many organizations still approach AI governance as a technology problem. They focus on model performance, cybersecurity, or procurement review. Those are important issues, but this case reminds us that AI governance begins with human purpose. What question was asked? What objective was embedded in the prompt? What controls existed before action was taken? Who challenged the proposed course of conduct? Who documented the legal and ethical analysis? Those are compliance questions. Those are board questions.

Viewing the Case Through the DOJ ECCP Lens

This is also where the DOJ’s Evaluation of Corporate Compliance Programs (ECCP) provides a useful lens. The ECCP asks whether a company’s program is well designed, adequately resourced, empowered to function effectively, and actually works in practice. Put that framework over this fact pattern, and the governance gaps become painfully clear. Was there a control around the use of generative AI in strategic or legal decision-making? Was there escalation to legal, compliance, or the board when a significant earnout exposure was at stake? Was there any meaningful challenge function, or did leadership use AI as a convenient amplifier for a business objective it had already chosen?

The case suggests the latter. That should concern every board. Generative AI can be useful in brainstorming, summarizing, and scenario testing. But when executives use it to reinforce a desired outcome, particularly one touching contractual obligations, employment decisions, or post-closing governance rights, the tool can become a mechanism for rationalizing misconduct.

When AI Chats Become Discoverable Evidence

Worse, it creates a record. The Court notes that the AI chats were not privileged, were discoverable, and vividly underscored the buyer’s efforts to avoid its legal obligations. That point alone should stop corporate leaders in their tracks.

Many executives still treat AI chats as an informal thinking space, almost like talking to themselves. That is a serious mistake. Prompt histories, outputs, internal forwarding, and downstream use can all become evidence. If employees use public or enterprise AI tools to explore termination strategies, dispute positions, or ways around contractual commitments, they may be creating exactly the documentary record that plaintiffs, regulators, and judges will later find most compelling. In other words, the issue is not simply data leakage. It is discoverability, privilege erosion, and self-generated evidence of intent.

That is why CCOs and boards need to move beyond generic AI-use policies and build governance around high-risk use cases. The question should not be, “Do we allow ChatGPT?” The question should be, “Under what circumstances can generative AI be used in decisions involving legal rights, employee discipline, regulatory exposure, strategic transactions, or board-level matters?” If the answer is unclear, the company has work to do.

The M&A and Earnout Governance Lesson

The dealmaking lesson here is equally important. Earnouts are already fertile ground for post-closing disputes because they sit at the intersection of incentives, control, and timing. Buyers often want flexibility. Sellers want protection from interference. This case illustrates what can happen when a buyer attempts to manipulate operations in a way that affects the achievement of the earnout. The court not only found wrongful interference but also equitably extended the earnout period by 258 days and preserved a further contractual right to extend, thereby materially altering the deal’s economic landscape.

That is a governance lesson hiding inside an M&A lesson. Once a company acquires a business with earnout rights and operational covenants, post-closing conduct is no longer just integration management. It is compliance management. Interference with operational control, pretextual terminations, or actions designed to suppress performance metrics can lead to litigation, destroy value, and trigger judicial remedies that boards did not expect. CCOs should therefore insist that M&A integration playbooks include compliance review of earnout governance, decision rights, escalation protocols, and documentation standards.

Five Lessons for Boards and CCOs

What should boards and compliance officers do now? Here are five lessons.

  1. Govern the objective before you govern the tool. AI is only as sound as the purpose for which it is deployed. If leadership starts with a bad objective, AI can scale the problem. Boards should require management to define prohibited uses of AI in areas such as contract avoidance, pretextual employee actions, retaliation, and legal strategy without oversight by counsel.
  2. Treat high-risk AI prompts and outputs as governed business records. If a prompt relates to litigation, terminations, regulatory response, deal rights, or board matters, it should fall within clear policies on retention, review, and escalation. Employees need to understand that AI interactions may be discoverable and may not be privileged.
  3. Embed legal and compliance into consequential AI use cases. The ECCP emphasizes whether compliance has stature, access, and authority. That principle applies directly here. Strategic uses of AI that touch contractual rights, employment decisions, or fiduciary issues should not proceed without legal and compliance review.
  4. Build AI governance into M&A and post-closing integration. Earnout structures, operational covenants, and seller management rights are precisely the areas where incentives can distort behavior. Boards should ask whether integration teams have controls preventing actions that could be viewed as interference, manipulation, or bad-faith conduct.
  5. Document challenge, not just action. A single final decision does not prove good governance. It is proved by the process surrounding it. Was there dissent? Was there an analysis? Was there an escalation memo? Was there a documented rationale grounded in law, contract, and fiduciary duty? If not, the company may be left with a record that tells the wrong story.

Governance Must Come Before AI

In the end, this case is not really about a video game company. It is about a governance failure dressed in modern technology. Leaders appear to have used AI not to improve judgment, but to reinforce a course of conduct they already wanted to pursue. That is the compliance lesson. AI does not remove the need for fiduciary discipline, legal oversight, or ethical restraint. It makes those requirements more urgent.

For boards and CCOs, the mandate is clear. Governance must come first. Because when AI is used without guardrails, it does not merely create risk; it creates it. It can become the evidence.

Categories
Blog

Compliance Lessons from Bela Lugosi’s Dracula

As many of my readers know, I am a huge fan of the Classic Universal Picture Movie Monsters, focusing on the period from 1931 to the mid-1950s. In October, I traditionally use our Halloween-ending month to explore the Classic Universal Movie Monsters, along with other films from the Hammer Studio, those produced by Val Lewton, and those starring Vincent Price.  This year, I wanted to go back to basics by looking at the Classic Universal Movie Monsters, starting with Dracula and Frankenstein in 1931, followed by The Invisible Man in 1933, The Mummy in 1936, and ending with The Wolf Man in 1940.

Over the next five weeks, I will examine each of these movies through the lens of compliance and extract compliance lessons from each one. Today, I continue with the Classic Universal Movie Monster, Bela Lugosi’s version of Dracula. If you want to take a deeper dive into this movie in the podcast format, check out the special series on Popcorn and Compliance, hosted by my friends Fiona and Timothy. These podcasts will be posted alongside the blog post each Friday during October.

When Bela Lugosi first spoke the words, “I am Dracula,” in Tod Browning’s 1931 classic, audiences were mesmerized. His piercing stare, deliberate speech, and aristocratic charm redefined horror cinema. But beneath the gothic atmosphere lies something compliance professionals know all too well: the dangers of deception, unchecked power, and the failure to recognize risk until it’s too late.

The Lugosi Dracula is not just a horror film; instead, think of it as a parable of compliance. The Count operates as a smooth-talking third-party who gains access, conceals his true motives, and ultimately causes destruction when left unmonitored. For the corporate compliance professional, there are striking lessons in risk management, due diligence, and the importance of cultural awareness.

We continue our look at the Classic Universal Monster Movies by reviewing five key compliance lessons from the Lugosi Dracula.

1. Third Parties Are Your Greatest Risk

Dracula does not walk into London as a monster. He enters as an exotic nobleman, charming, well-spoken, and seemingly trustworthy. The people around him take him at face value. Only too late do they discover the truth: he is feeding off their lifeblood. This is the archetype of third-party risk. Business partners, agents, or distributors may present themselves as polished and reputable, but without thorough due diligence, they can bring immense legal and reputational risk.

Compliance takeaway: Treat every third-party relationship as a potential source of risk. Conduct due diligence, monitor relationships, and never rely solely on surface-level reputation. A charming exterior may conceal dangerous intentions.

2. Beware the Power of Influence

One of Lugosi’s most memorable traits is his hypnotic gaze. With it, he bends others to his will: Renfield, Mina, and Lucy, as each falls victim not by force, but by subtle manipulation. In the compliance world, influence is often exerted by powerful executives, dominant cultures, or high-performing employees. When individuals exercise undue influence, they can pressure others to bend the rules, ignore red flags, or accept unethical behavior as usual.

Compliance takeaway: Compliance officers must watch for undue influence in corporate cultures. Strong tone from the top matters, but so does tone in the middle. Employees must feel empowered to resist pressure, report concerns, and recognize when influence becomes coercion.

3. Risk Hides in the Shadows

Much of the horror in Dracula comes not from what is seen, but from what lurks in the shadows. The Count moves by night, unseen, exploiting darkness to conceal his actions. By the time victims realize what has happened, the damage is already done. This resonates with how misconduct often operates in organizations. Corruption, fraud, and abuse typically occur out of sight, through falsified invoices, shell companies, or hidden payments. By the time regulators or auditors arrive, the harm is already inflicted.

Compliance takeaway: Continuous monitoring and data analytics are the compliance professional’s tools for shining light into the shadows. Proactive detection: real-time alerts, AI-driven monitoring, and transactional reviews help catch misconduct before it metastasizes.

4. Cultural Blindness Increases Vulnerability

One of the early warnings comes from the locals in Transylvania, who beg Jonathan Harker not to go to Dracula’s castle. They know the legends, they understand the risks, and they offer charms for protection. Yet he dismisses them as superstition. This is a classic case of ignoring cultural risk signals. In multinational operations, compliance failures often occur when the headquarters dismisses local knowledge, customs, or warnings. By failing to respect the insights of those closest to the risk, organizations make themselves vulnerable.

Compliance takeaway: Listen to local voices. Local compliance officers, employees, and partners often see risks first. A compliance program that ignores or downplays its input is doomed to fail. Respecting cultural context is essential for effective risk management.

5. Complacency Enables Catastrophe

Finally, one of the key reasons Dracula thrives in London is that no one believes such evil could exist among them. Van Helsing recognizes the threat, but others mock him or rationalize the strange events. Denial and complacency give Dracula the space to flourish. In corporate compliance, complacency is equally dangerous. When companies assume “it can’t happen here,” they let their guard down. When managers dismiss warning signs as anomalies, they enable misconduct to spread. Complacency is the enemy of effective compliance.

Compliance takeaway: Compliance professionals must cultivate vigilance. Risk assessments should be ongoing, investigations must be taken seriously, and whistleblower reports must never be ignored. The moment an organization believes it is immune, it becomes most vulnerable.

Conclusion: Dracula in the Boardroom

Bela Lugosi’s Dracula is remembered for its elegance and terror. But for compliance officers, it offers something more: a reminder that risk often comes disguised as opportunity, that influence can corrupt, that danger thrives in shadows, that cultural insights matter, and that complacency kills.

Just as Van Helsing armed himself with crucifixes, garlic, and sunlight, compliance professionals must arm their organizations with due diligence, monitoring, cultural awareness, and vigilance. The Lugosi Dracula teaches us that evil is not always obvious; rather, it often comes in a tuxedo, with a charming smile and a foreign accent, promising value while draining the lifeblood of those who trust too easily.

The compliance professional’s mission is clear: don’t let Dracula through the door without asking the hard questions, shining the light into dark places, and ensuring that your organization is prepared for what lurks in the night.

Join us next Friday as we jump to 1940 and consider compliance lessons from Lon Chaney Jr.’s The Wolf Man.

Categories
Compliance Tip of the Day

Compliance Tip of the Day – Compliance Lessons from The Invisible Man

Welcome to “Compliance Tip of the Day,” the podcast that brings you daily insights and practical advice on navigating the ever-evolving landscape of compliance and regulatory requirements. Whether you’re a seasoned compliance professional or just starting your journey, our goal is to provide you with bite-sized, actionable tips to help you stay ahead in your compliance efforts. Join us as we explore the latest industry trends, share best practices, and demystify complex compliance issues to keep your organization on the right side of the law. Tune in daily for your dose of compliance wisdom, and let’s make compliance a little less daunting, one tip at a time.

This week concludes a 5-part series on compliance lessons from Classic Universal Movie Monsters, focusing on Claude Rains’ portrayal of Jack Griffin in The Invisible Man.

For more information on this topic, refer to The Compliance Handbook: A Guide to Operationalizing Your Compliance Program, 6th edition, recently released by LexisNexis. It is available here.

Categories
#RiskNYC Speaker Series

#Risk New York Speaker Series- Upping Your Game with Tom Fox

Join myself and hundreds of other GRC professionals in the city that never sleeps, New York City on July 9 & 10 for one of the top conferences around #Risk New York. current US landscape – shaped by evolving policies, rapid AI advancements, and shifting global dynamics – demands adaptive strategies and cross-functional collaboration.

At #RISK New York you will master the New Regulatory Reality by Getting ahead of US regulatory shifts and their impact. Conquer AI & Tech Risk by Safeguarding your organization in an AI-driven world and understand the implications of major tech investments. Navigate Financial & Crypto Volatility by Protecting assets and explore solutions in a dynamic market. Strengthen Your GRC Framework by Leverage governance, risk, and compliance for strategic advantage. Protect Digital Trust by Addressing challenges in cybersecurity, data privacy, and combating misinformation. All while meeting

In this episode of the Risk New York podcast series, Tom Fox introduces the upcoming Risk New York Conference, scheduled for July 9-10 at Fordham Law School. The conference, hosted by GRC World Forums, will focus on various aspects of risk management, including AI, tech risk, financial and crypto risk, and GRC frameworks. Tom discusses his keynote based on his book ‘Upping the Game’ and highlights key speakers and exhibitors, including Robert Clark from Howard University, Bill Coffin and Erica Alburn from Ecosphere, and Michael Rasmussen, known as the father of GRC. The episode emphasizes the significance of the conference and provides information on discounted tickets and other details available in the show notes.

Resources

#Risk Conference Series

#RiskNYC-Tickets and Information

Categories
Compliance Tip of the Day

Compliance Tip of the Day – Implementing Internal Controls

Welcome to “Compliance Tip of the Day,” the podcast that brings you daily insights and practical advice on navigating the ever-evolving landscape of compliance and regulatory requirements. Whether you’re a seasoned compliance professional or just starting your journey, our goal is to provide you with bite-sized, actionable tips to help you stay ahead in your compliance efforts. Join us as we explore the latest industry trends, share best practices, and demystify complex compliance issues to keep your organization on the right side of the law. Tune in daily for your dose of compliance wisdom, and let’s make compliance a little less daunting, one tip at a time.

How to implement an internal controls regime in your organization.

For more information on this topic, refer to The Compliance Handbook: A Guide to Operationalizing Your Compliance Program, 6th edition, recently released by LexisNexis. It is available here.

Categories
Blog

Compliance Lessons Learned: Building Meaningful Workplace Connections

In today’s business environment, compliance professionals are often praised for their pivotal role in fostering ethical, sustainable, and resilient corporate cultures. A recent HBR article, What Employers Get Wrong About How People Connect at Work, provides a compelling framework that compliance officers can integrate into their strategies to strengthen organizational integrity and trust.

The authors believe that connections in the workplace are commonly thought of as a single dimension that prioritizes interpersonal relationships with co-workers. However, the authors have identified that connections in the workplace are made up of four interrelated and essential elements: employee connections with their colleagues, leader, employer, and role. This more accurate and nuanced view of workplace connections has implications for how organizations can design intentional talent strategies to create workplaces where employees are committed, engaged, and performing. They introduce the CLEAR framework to help facilitate transformative workplace lessons. I have adapted their ideas for the compliance professional.

  • Colleague Connection: Compliance as a Collaborative Endeavor

In compliance, collaboration is non-negotiable. The CLEAR framework emphasizes the importance of trust and mutual support among colleagues, a principle that extends seamlessly into compliance programs. When employees feel connected to their peers, they are more likely to share insights and raise concerns, a cornerstone of effective whistleblowing mechanisms. For compliance professionals, this means building platforms and safe spaces for employees to collaborate. Initiatives like ethics roundtables or cross-departmental compliance champions can foster peer-to-peer connections, encouraging the open exchange of ideas and concerns about compliance issues.

  • Leader Connection: Ethical Leadership in Action

The article identifies leader connection as a key factor, noting that 70% of the variance in team engagement is attributed to managerial quality. For compliance professionals, this underscores the need for leadership at all levels to embody ethical conduct. Leaders who communicate, provide constructive feedback, and model ethical behavior are indispensable in embedding compliance into an organization’s DNA. You should work to train your business leaders to be compliance ambassadors. This means both senior managers and middle managers as well. Equip them with tools to integrate compliance into their everyday leadership practices, from reinforcing training to discussing real-world ethical dilemmas with their teams.

  • Employer Connection: Aligning Compliance with Corporate Values

A strong employer connection, where employees see their work as meaningful and aligned with organizational goals, is critical. Compliance professionals are central in shaping this narrative by linking ethical practices to the company’s mission. When employees view compliance as an enabler of corporate success rather than a hindrance, their engagement deepens. Positioning compliance as a competitive business advantage and using internal communications to highlight how ethical practices contribute to the organization’s reputation, financial health, and long-term success will further align your employees with your overall goal of doing business ethically and in compliance.

  • Role Connection: Engaging Through Purpose

Role connection thrives when employees find satisfaction in their work and see clear pathways for growth. Compliance means integrating ethical considerations into individual roles and responsibilities. Employees who understand how their job contributes to the company’s compliance goals are likelier to take ownership of ethical behavior. Here, your compliance team should work to tailor compliance training to individual roles. Move beyond generic programs to create targeted, role-specific training that shows employees how compliance intersects with their day-to-day responsibilities.

  • CLEAR Connections and the Return-to-Office Debate

The authors critique a narrow focus on colleague connections in return-to-office mandates, warning that neglecting other CLEAR elements can undermine employee engagement. For compliance teams, this presents a nuanced challenge. Remote work can dilute compliance oversight, but rigid in-office policies may harm trust and morale. This will allow your compliance function to adopt flexible compliance monitoring strategies. Use technology to maintain oversight while respecting diverse work arrangements and ensure employees feel trusted and supported regardless of where they work. 

  • The Patchwork Principle: Balancing Connection Needs

The authors propose the “patchwork principle,” urging leaders to adopt a portfolio of policies that reflect employees’ diverse connection preferences. Compliance teams can take inspiration from this approach to design policies that address various needs while ensuring alignment with regulatory requirements. The DOJ has long clarified that your compliance program should be based on your company’s compliance risks. This means you should customize your compliance program. Consider employee demographics, cultural nuances, and risk profiles when designing policies and procedures, ensuring they resonate across the organization.

Final Thoughts: CLEAR Insights for Compliance Success

The CLEAR framework challenges compliance professionals to think beyond policies and procedures, emphasizing the human connections that underpin ethical behavior. By fostering meaningful relationships across these four pillars, compliance leaders can build a culture that adheres to regulations and thrives on trust, engagement, and integrity.

Incorporating these lessons is not simply about compliance but redefining how organizations connect, collaborate, and succeed. By adopting these principles, compliance professionals can lead the way in creating workplaces that are not only compliant but also connected and committed to excellence.

Categories
FCPA Compliance Report

FCPA Compliance Report: Unlocking Financial Gains Through Proactive Compliance: Insights with Nicolas Tollet

Welcome to the award-winning FCPA Compliance Report, the longest running podcast in compliance. In this edition of the FCPA Compliance Report, Tom Fox cross post the first episode of a new podcast series from Nicolas Tollet, partner at Hughes, Hubbard and Reed

In this episode, Tollet delves into the substantial financial benefits stemming from robust compliance measures. Tollet recounts a company’s journey through two deferred prosecution agreements (DPAs) related to bribery and corruption allegations in Africa and Brazil, detailing how proactive compliance actions saved the company approximately $100 million. He emphasizes the crucial role of an independent monitor and in-depth compliance reviews in identifying and mitigating misconduct. Tollet explores the implementation of compliance policies and training programs, drawing comparisons with high-profile cases like Walmart’s FCPA settlement, to illustrate the long-term financial stability and operational integrity gained through early compliance investment.

Highlights in this Episode:

  • The First Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA)
  • The Second DPA and Lava Jato Investigation
  • Compliance as a Competitive Advantage
  • Detecting and Addressing Misconduct
  • Remediation and Strengthening Compliance
  • Financial Benefits of Compliance
  • Comparing with Walmart FCPA Case

 Resources:

Nicolas Tollet at Hughes Hubbard & Reed

Tom Fox

Instagram

Facebook

YouTube

Twitter

LinkedIn

For an audio/video version of the Compliance Kids book, Speaking Up is AWESOME, contact Tom Fox.