Categories
Daily Compliance News

Daily Compliance News: September 14, 2023 – The What Could Go Wrong Edition

Welcome to the Daily Compliance News. Each day, Tom Fox, the Voice of Compliance, brings you compliance-related stories to start your day. Sit back, enjoy morning coffee, and listen to the Daily Compliance News. All from the Compliance Podcast Network. Each day, we consider four stories from the business world: compliance, ethics, risk management, leadership, or general interest for the compliance professional.

Stories we are following in today’s edition of Daily Compliance News:

  • Head of China’s top insurer jailed for corruption. (BBC)
  • Musk headed to arbitration against Wachtell. (Reuters)
  • PE plunges into NIL. (FT)
  • Tech leaders school Congress on AI. (NYT)
Categories
Daily Compliance News

Daily Compliance News: September 12, 2023 – The Paying Attention Edition

Welcome to the Daily Compliance News. Each day, Tom Fox, the Voice of Compliance brings to you compliance-related stories to start your day. Sit back, enjoy a cup of morning coffee, and listen in to the Daily Compliance News. All, from the Compliance Podcast Network. Each day we consider four stories from the business world, compliance, ethics, risk management, leadership, or general interest for the compliance professional.

  • EU’s massive money-laundering problem. (AML Intelligence)
  • Will doctors pay cuts lead to more corruption in China. (Bloomberg)
  • CFTC cracks down on De-Fi over crypto. (WSJ)
  • What is the secret to good management? (FT)
Categories
Daily Compliance News

Daily Compliance News: August 31, 2023 – The Switzerland AML Edition

Welcome to the Daily Compliance News. Each day, Tom Fox, the Voice of Compliance, brings you compliance-related stories to start your day. Sit back, enjoy a cup of morning coffee, and listen to the Daily Compliance News, all from the Compliance Podcast Network. Each day, we consider four stories from the business world: compliance, ethics, risk management, leadership, or general interest for the compliance professional.

·       Goldman Sanctioned for ephemeral messaging compliance failures.  (WSJ)

·       NIST framework and AI.  (Bloomberg Law)

·       China crackdowns rip through healthcare industry corruption. (FT)

·       Switzerland unveils money-laundering crackdown. (FT)

Categories
Compliance Into the Weeds

Compliance into the Weeds: 3M FCPA Enforcement Action

The award winning, Compliance into the Weeds is the only weekly podcast which takes a deep dive into a compliance related topic, literally going into the weeds to more fully explore a subject. Looking for some hard-hitting insights on sanctions compliance? Look no further than Compliance into the Weeds! In this episode, Tom and Matt consider the recent FCPA enforcement action involving the Chinese business unit of 3M.

The importance of post-event documentation and monitoring in preventing fraud and corruption cannot be overstated, as highlighted by the recent FCPA incident involving 3M China. Tom believes that while training and control environment adjustments are crucial, they may not be enough to prevent misconduct if individuals are determined to commit such acts. He emphasizes the need for hard evidence, such as post-event documentation, and recommends looking to the heavily regulated pharmaceutical sector for guidance.

Matt stresses the importance of rigorous post-event documentation to ensure the legitimacy of business activities. Both Fox and Kelly gained these insights from their extensive experience in the field of compliance and their analysis of various fraud cases. To learn more about their unique perspectives on post-event documentation and monitoring, join them on this episode of the Compliance into the Weeds podcast. 

Key Highlights

·      Background facts

·      GTE in FCPA enforcement actions

·      What happens when conduct is done secretly

·      Concerns over the use of messaging apps

·      Lessons Learned

 Resources

Matt in LinkedIn

Tom –blog post on the FCPA Compliance and Ethics Blog

Instagram

Facebook

YouTube

Twitter

LinkedIn

Categories
Blog

3M in China-Where Secret Travel = FCPA Violations

You know that when the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) uses the word ‘secretly’ when discussing a corporate program, it is a seriously not good look. That is certainly the case in the recently announced Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) enforcement action involving 3M’s Chinese business unit. In an Order, outlining the facts and FCPA violations it stated, “During the Relevant Period, a former 3M-China marketing manager (the “Marketing Manager”) colluded with two China-based travel agencies (the “China Travel Agencies”) to secretly provide Tourism Activities for Chinese Government Officials during Educational Events. The Marketing Manager was aided in the scheme by several employees in 3M-China’s sales, marketing and professional services departments.” [emphasis supplied] For its ‘secret’ scheme without admitting or denying the SEC’s findings, 3M agreed to pay $4.5 million in prejudgment interest and disgorgement and a civil penalty of $2 million or a total of $6.5 million.

Background

The Order recited that certain 3M-China Employees targeted influential officials of Chinese state-owned enterprises and Chinese Government Officials for attendance at overseas Educational Events and, in collusion with the China Travel Agencies. To facilitate this scheme, 3M-China Employees would create a travel itinerary that included various legitimate business, training and marketing activities for submission to 3M-China’s compliance personnel for approval. However there were “alternate itineraries (the “Alternate Itineraries”)” planned which consisted of various Tourism Activities at or near the location of the Educational Events. There were free travel and lodging provided which “were designed to improperly induce the Officials to purchase 3M products, and violated company policy.”

Interestingly, the 3M-China Employees circulated the Alternate Itineraries through hand delivery or personal WeChat accounts or ephemeral messaging. The 3M-China Employees asked the participants to keep the agenda hidden, and falsified internal compliance documents so that the Tourism Activities were not shown to be planned as part of the overseas trip.

There were several indicia which demonstrated the travel was not for business purposes but for recreational purposes. From the Order it stated

(a) Tourism Activities were scheduled at the same time as the Educational Event activities;

(b) the ostensibly Educational Events were in English, and the trips included Chinese Government Officials who neither understood English nor had adequate translation services;

(c) at times Chinese Government Officials missed whole days of the Educational Event or simply never attended at all; and

(d) Certain Chinese Government Officials also requested Tourism Activities as part of the overseas trip.

To fund these illegal activities, 3M-China Employees would at times work with the collusive China Travel Agencies to inflate their billing invoices for ostensibly legitimate expenses such as  travel costs. In other instances, the 3M-China Employees submitted unpermitted invoices directly to the China Travel Agencies for reimbursement rather than to 3M China. Finally, the China Travel Agencies, with the support of the 3M-China Employees, at times directed that 3M-China’s distributors pay for portions of the non-reimbursable expenses. Rather stupidly from a legal and compliance perspective, 3M China employees measured the impact that this corruption had on sales. They tracked the effect of providing overseas travel on 3M-China’s sales to SOE Customers. One 3M-China Employee tracked post-trip sales “to ensure they were consistent with 3M-China’s sales goals. Most amazingly “3M-China management asked for the “return on investment” from an Educational Event (i.e. the effect of providing health care officials with overseas travel on sales to the SOE Customer) by comparing sales figures before and after an Educational Event.”

Finally, “from at least 2014 through 2017, 3M-China paid nearly $1 million to fund at least 24 trips for Chinese Government Officials that included Tourism Activities. The costs of these trips were improperly recorded in 3M’s books and records as legitimate business expenses, without any indication that they included Tourism Activities. As a result of the above conduct, 3M improperly benefited by at least $3.5 million from increased sales.”

Discussion

There are several key lessons to be garnered from this FCPA enforcement action. One key lesson from this case is that if your organization is paying for attendance at educational events, the value of rigorous post-event documentation, such as sign-in sheets and attendance verification is critical. By ensuring that officials were present at the events they are paid for, transparency is enhanced, and corruption can be prevented as your employee base will know that compliance is providing oversight and monitoring. This approach draws from the pharmaceutical sector, which has implemented stringent event monitoring practices.

The importance of post-event documentation and monitoring extends beyond coruption prevention. It also plays a crucial role in compliance efforts. By thoroughly documenting events and activities, companies can demonstrate their commitment to ethical business practices and compliance with regulations. This documentation serves as evidence of due diligence and can be invaluable in audits and investigations.

However, compliance professionals must strike a balance between the level of control and the resources required for documentation. While it is essential to have robust controls in place, excessive bureaucracy can hinder efficiency and productivity. Finding the right balance is crucial to ensure compliance without impeding business operations.

Another challenge lies in the use of ephemeral messaging, as seen in the Three M China case. Ephemeral messaging platforms, which automatically delete messages after a certain period, can raise concerns about transparency and compliance. While these platforms may have legitimate uses in private communications, their use in a corporate setting can be seen as a less than transparent attempt to conduct business ethically. Compliance professionals should carefully consider the implications of using such platforms and evaluate whether they align with their organization’s compliance objectives.

Data analytics also play a significant role in post-event documentation and monitoring. By leveraging advanced analytics tools, companies can detect patterns and anomalies that may indicate fraudulent activities. For example, multiple payments to the same vendor by different entities within the extended enterprise can be a red flag worth investigating. Implementing robust data analytics capabilities can enhance the effectiveness of post-event monitoring and help identify potential compliance risks.

In conclusion, the 3M China FCPA enforcement action underscores the importance of post-event documentation and monitoring in fraud prevention and compliance efforts. Rigorous documentation practices, inspired by the pharmaceutical sector’s approach, can enhance transparency and prevent corruption. However, finding the right balance between control and efficiency, addressing challenges associated with ephemeral messaging, and leveraging data analytics are crucial for effective post-event documentation and monitoring. By prioritizing these factors, companies can strengthen their compliance programs and mitigate the risks associated with fraudulent activities.

Categories
10 For 10

10 For 10: Top Compliance Stories For the Week Ending August 19, 2023

Welcome to 10 For 10, the podcast which brings you the week’s Top 10 compliance stories in one podcast each week. Tom Fox, the Voice of Compliance brings to you, the compliance professional, the compliance stories you need to be aware of to end your busy week. Sit back, and in 10 minutes hear about the stories every compliance professional should be aware of from the prior week. Every Saturday, 10 For 10 highlights the most important news, insights, and analysis for the compliance professional, all curated by the Voice of Compliance, Tom Fox. Get your weekly filling of compliance stories with 10 for 10, a podcast produced by the Compliance Podcast Network.

·       Ukraine ABC lessons from Afghanistan. (NPR)

·       Paxton allegedly created fake Uber account to engage in corruption.  (Texas Tribune)

·       Inotiv facing FCPA issues around importing monkeys for research. (WSJ)

·       BNSF tries to settle massive data privacy claim.  (Reuters)

·       Federal corruption investigation heating up in Ohio. (Ohio Capital Journal)

·       SEC Whistleblower Program growing pains.  (WSJ)

·       African Development Bank not using ABC funds. (FT)

·       Aide to Madagascar leader arrested for corruption.  (FT)

·       Grupo Aval settles FCPA enforcement action. (WSJ)

·       Health care corruption sweep in China. (South China Morning Post)

You can check out the Daily Compliance News for four curated compliance and ethics related stories each day, here.

Connect with Tom 

Instagram

Facebook

YouTube

Twitter

LinkedIn

Categories
Daily Compliance News

Daily Compliance News: July 26, 2023 – The Farewell to the Bird Edition

Welcome to the Daily Compliance News. Each day, Tom Fox, the Voice of Compliance brings to you compliance-related stories to start your day. Sit back, enjoy a cup of morning coffee, and listen in to the Daily Compliance News. All, from the Compliance Podcast Network. Each day we consider four stories from the business world, compliance, ethics, risk management, leadership, or general interest for the compliance professional.

  • EY General Counsel calls it quits. (FT)
  • Musk ditches the Twitter bird. (BBC)
  • Chinese official given death sentence for accepting bribes. (Barron’s)
  • UBS fined for Credit Suisse imbroglio over Archegos. (NYT)
Categories
Daily Compliance News

Daily Compliance News: July 25, 2023 – The Ted Cruz Be Damned Edition

Welcome to the Daily Compliance News. Each day, Tom Fox, the Voice of Compliance brings to you compliance-related stories to start your day. Sit back, enjoy a cup of morning coffee, and listen in to the Daily Compliance News. All, from the Compliance Podcast Network. Each day we consider four stories from the business world, compliance, ethics, risk management, leadership, or general interest for the compliance professional.

  • Chinese fight seed corruption. (WSJ)
  • UM Law bans using ChatGPT in applications. (Reuters)
  • Another ex-con embraces compliance. (WSJ)
  • Barbie No. 1 movie for the weekend. (NYT)
Categories
Daily Compliance News

Daily Compliance News: July 10, 2023 – The Meta, Threads and Anti-trust Edition

Welcome to the Daily Compliance News. Each day, Tom Fox, the Voice of Compliance brings to you compliance-related stories to start your day. Sit back, enjoy a cup of morning coffee, and listen in to the Daily Compliance News. All, from the Compliance Podcast Network. Each day we consider four stories from the business world, compliance, ethics, risk management, leadership, or general interest for the compliance professional.

  • Labor Party to back global ABC court. (The Guardian)
  • Chinese ABC probe moves to an advanced stage. (FT)
  • Did a sheriff’s corruption lead to a mass shooting? (Houston Chronicle)
  • Meta, Threads, and anti-trust. (NYT)
Categories
Blog

Phillips FCPA Enforcement Action: The Risks with Distributors – Part 1

Last week the Amsterdam based Koninklijke Philips N.V. (Philips) agreed pay more than $62 million to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to resolve charges that it violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) with respect to conduct related to the sales of medical diagnostic equipment in China. This case is yet another recent FCPA enforcement matter involving distributors. It demonstrates once again some of the inherent risks in a distributor sales model, as opposed to the model traditionally seen as the highest risk, the commissioned sales-agent. (Shout out to Harry Cassin at the FCPA Blog for breaking the story to the compliance community.)

According to the SEC Press Release announcing the matter, “Philips’ subsidiaries in China, cumulatively referred to in the order as Philips China, used special price discounts with distributors that created a risk that excessive distributor margins could be used to fund improper payments to government employees.” Equally significant was that the “SEC’s Order also found that employees, distributors, or sub-dealers of Philips’ subsidiaries in China engaged in improper conduct to influence hospital officials to draft technical specifications in public tenders to favor Philips’ products.” The SEC pointed to two examples, “in one instance, a district sales manager at Philips China provided funds to a hospital director in return for the director’s assistance in the procurement process, and, in another instance, Philips China employees discussed tailoring technical specifications for a public tender with hospital directors so that only Philips China and two other manufacturers would qualify for the bid.” As a result of its conduct, Philips was unjustly enriched by approximately $41 million.

I. Introduction

According to the Order, in “China the majority of hospitals and other healthcare providers are state-owned enterprises. These government-owned entities purchase the majority of their diagnostic imaging equipment through public tenders. By 2016, the majority of Philips China’s sales were made indirectly through authorized distributors or sub-dealers engaged by the authorized distributors. By 2018, 91% of Philips’ diagnostic imaging revenue in China was earned through this indirect sales channel.”

Philips China aggressively grew its diagnostic imaging business, winning public tenders in an increasingly competitive market. Phillips was aggressive in its pricing discounts to do so. According to the Order, “in some transactions, at the request of distributors, Philips China provided special pricing discounts on the health technology equipment that it sold to its distributors. However, Philips China’s approval processes and its recording of the special pricing discounts were not subject to sufficient internal accounting controls to ensure appropriate management authorization of the discounts.”

II. The Corruption Schemes

  1. The Hospitals

The Order related that in multiple transactions between 2014 through 2019, Philips China employees, distributors, or sub-dealers engaged in improper bidding practices to increase the likelihood that Philips China’s distributors or their sub-dealers were awarded public tenders to sell medical equipment to government-owned hospitals. There were three general prongs to these bribery schemes. The employee responsible for writing the technical specifications, in consultation with a bidder such as Phillips would provide that same bidder “with a competitive advantage in the public tender prior to the opening of the bidding period” by providing the information to the bidder prior to the formal beginning of the bidding process.

Another scheme was to draft specifications which would meet that bidder’s equipment “to increase the likelihood that the selected manufacturer would qualify for the winning bid.” In the final bribery scheme the “hospital employee directed the winning bidder or its distributor or sub-dealer to prepare the manufacturer’s bid and also two additional accompanying bids to meet the three-bid requirement of public tenders and give the appearance of legitimacy.” Further, “Phillips China employees who participated in the conduct described above included district sales managers, sales employees, and employees in the technical group that supported sales.”

  1. Phillips Responses

The SEC Order pointed to three examples of bribery schemes engaged in by Philips in response to the corruption perpetrated by the health care providers.

a. Bribes for Inside Information

In one example a Philips China district sales manager for Hainan Province delivered approximately $14,500 directly to the home of a director of the hospital’s radiology department in return for the director’s assistance in the procurement process. With the inside information obtained through this payment, “the sales team discussed the specifications to be included in the bid with the relevant hospital director, and its distributor prepared an accompanying bid with another manufacturer’s products.” It ended with a “procurement award for two Philips devices valued at $4.6 million.”

b. Bribes to Obtain Unlawful Influence

In another example, the decision-making directors at a hospital discussed tailoring the technical specifications with Philips China employees so that only Philips China and two other manufacturers would qualify to compete in the bidding process. In October 2017, a Philips China distributor won the bid to sell two Philips devices to the hospital. This tender was won as a result of inappropriately influencing the tender specifications, netting Philips a tender valued at $475,000.

c. Excessive Discounts Provided to Distributors

In perhaps the most classic distributor bribery model, Philips China’s use of special price discounts with distributors created the risk that excessive distributor margins could be used to fund improper payments to employees of government-owned hospitals. The SEC Order did not specify the amount of the discounts or how it differed from the standard (if any) discount provided to Philips distributor.

Join us tomorrow where we consider Philips lack of internal controls, the fine and penalty, the recidivism of Philips and any potential Department of Justice (DOJ) enforcement action.