Categories
Blog

Deere’s FCPA Enforcement Action: Lessons on Corrupt Payments

We recently had a Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) enforcement action that reminded me that everything old is new again in anti-corruption compliance. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) FCPA enforcement action involving Deere has bribery schemes that were torn literally from the first decade of the 21st century as they involved gifts, travel, and entertainment. In other words, it was about a low set of hanging fruit that any compliance officer would see. Yesterday, I laid out the broad strokes of the Deere enforcement action. Today, I want to take a multipart look at the case and see what lessons the enforcement action can provide to the 2024 compliance professional.

As compliance professionals, we are all too familiar with the risks posed by bribery and corruption, especially in high-risk jurisdictions. The case involving Wirtgen Thailand’s bribery of government officials through direct cash payments and third-party agents is a stark reminder of how corrupt practices can infiltrate even well-established companies. Between 2018 and 2020, Wirtgen Thailand’s Managing Director and Finance Manager conspired to pay bribes to government officials in Thailand’s Department of Highways (DOH), Department of Rural Roads (DRR), and the Royal Thai Air Force (RTAF) to secure lucrative contracts, ultimately reaping illicit profits of $2.7 million.

This case offers valuable lessons for compliance professionals on the importance of monitoring, oversight, and due diligence—especially when dealing with third-party agents. In this blog post, I’ll summarize the key compliance lessons learned from the Wirtgen Thailand case and discuss actionable steps compliance officers can take to mitigate similar risks.

The Role of Leadership in Facilitating Bribery

One of the most glaring aspects of this case is the direct involvement of Wirtgen Thailand’s Managing Director. From instructing the Finance Manager to withdraw cash for bribes to coordinating payments with a third-party consultant, the Managing Director was a central figure in orchestrating the scheme. This demonstrates how misconduct at the leadership level can significantly increase the risk of non-compliance.

A key lesson for Compliance Professionals is that senior leadership buy-in is critical for an effective compliance program. When senior management is involved in unethical practices, it undermines the entire compliance framework. Compliance professionals must ensure that leaders are aware of the company’s anti-bribery policies and held accountable. This requires a top-down approach where ethics and compliance are ingrained in the corporate culture. Regular training for executives and a clear tone at the top are essential.

Cash Payments and Red Flags in Internal Communication

In this case, the Managing Director in Thailand explicitly instructed the Finance Manager to prepare envelopes filled with cash for government officials. The internal communication between the two, including text messages referencing “candy money” and specific instructions on how much to withdraw, left a clear paper trail of bribery.

The lesson for Compliance Professionals is that internal communications can provide early indicators of corrupt activities. Compliance officers should work closely with IT and HR departments to implement systems for monitoring suspicious communications, especially when they involve terms that could be euphemisms for illicit activities (e.g., “candy money”). It is also important to encourage employees to report any unusual communication patterns they observe through anonymous whistleblower channels.

Regular internal communications audits, especially in high-risk regions, can help detect bribery schemes early. Additionally, it is crucial to ensure that finance and accounting departments are well-trained on red flags, such as unusual cash withdrawals.

Third-Party Risks and Sham Commission Agreements

In this case, one of the most common methods of paying bribes was through a third-party consultant. Wirtgen Thailand signed sham commission agreements with a consultant who provided no legitimate services but acted as a conduit for bribes. These agreements facilitated payments of nearly $285,129 to government officials under the guise of commissions.

The lesson for Compliance Professionals in this area is that (once again) using third-party agents is one of the most significant risks in international business operations, particularly in jurisdictions where corruption is prevalent. Third-party consultants often act as intermediaries in bribery schemes, allowing companies to maintain plausible deniability. This makes third-party due diligence essential.

Compliance programs should include a thorough vetting process for third parties, including background checks, reputational risk assessments, and an analysis of the legitimacy of services provided. Red flags include vague service descriptions in contracts, unusually high commission fees, and the need for proper documentation.

But once again, appropriate vetting is not the end of the equation. It is crucial to establish ongoing monitoring of third-party relationships, including periodic reviews of commission payments and ensuring that the services provided match the fees being paid. This ongoing scrutiny can prevent third-party intermediaries from being used to facilitate bribery.

False Documentation and Fraudulent Reporting

Wirtgen Thailand’s Managing Director and Finance Manager created false documentation, including sham commission agreements and expense reports, to cover up their bribery scheme. They also submitted Applications for Approval of Commissions to other managers in Thailand to authorize these illicit payments.

Unfortunately, the lesson from Compliance Professionals is that fraudulent documentation is a common tactic used to conceal bribery and other forms of corruption. Compliance programs should include regular audits and reviews of documentation related to third-party payments, contracts, and expense reports. Any inconsistencies, missing information, or vague descriptions should be flagged for further investigation.

Furthermore, employees responsible for approving third-party payments or commissions should be trained to spot red flags and have clear guidelines on what constitutes a legitimate business expense versus a suspicious transaction. Compliance teams must also ensure that finance departments are fully integrated into the anti-bribery framework and are regularly monitored for compliance with anti-corruption policies.

Impact of Bribery on Business Outcomes

From 2018 to 2020, Wirtgen Thailand obtained $4.67 million in business from bribery, reaping illicit profits of approximately $2.7 million. While these figures may seem like a short-term business win, the long-term consequences—including legal penalties, reputational damage, and loss of shareholder trust—far outweigh any financial gains.

Compliance Professionals understand this final lesson but only sometimes articulate so the business folks understand the invidiousness of bribery and corruption. While bribery might provide a short-term competitive edge, the long-term damage to a company’s reputation and bottom line can be catastrophic. Compliance officers must work to foster a corporate culture that prioritizes ethical behavior over quick wins. This includes educating employees on the long-term risks of bribery, such as criminal penalties under anti-corruption laws, hefty fines, and the possibility of debarment from future government contracts. It is important to consistently communicate that ethical conduct is the right thing to do and the most sustainable business strategy.

The Wirtgen Thailand bribery case serves as a cautionary tale for compliance professionals. It underscores the importance of robust third-party due diligence, the need for strong leadership oversight, and the critical role that compliance programs play in preventing bribery and corruption. By learning from the failures in this case, compliance officers can better protect their companies from similar risks and reinforce a culture of integrity and ethical behavior across the organization.

Categories
Blog

Deere’s FCPA Case: Lessons on Gifts, Travel and Entertainment

We recently had a Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) enforcement action that reminded me that everything old is new again in anti-corruption compliance. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) FCPA enforcement action involving Deere has bribery schemes that were torn literally from the first decade of the 21st century as they involved gifts, travel, and entertainment. In other words, it was about a low set of hanging fruit that any compliance officer would see. Yesterday, I laid out the broad strokes of the Deere enforcement action. Today, I want to take a multipart look at the case and see what lessons the enforcement action can provide to the 2024 compliance professional.

Between 2017 and 2020, Wirtgen Thailand engaged in a series of corrupt practices aimed at securing government tenders from key agencies, including the Royal Thai Air Force (RTAF), the Department of Highways (DOH), and the Department of Rural Roads (DRR). These practices, including bribery, improper entertainment, and falsifying company records, clearly violated Wirtgen Group’s Code of Business Conduct. The total value of the tenders awarded due to these corrupt practices exceeded $6 million. Below is a detailed account of the amounts paid and the benefits conferred through these illicit activities.

Massage Parlors

Any expense reimbursement request submitted that references a ‘massage parlor’ would immediately raise a Red Flag and be set aside for additional investigation. (And you would be correct.) But in the Deere enforcement action, we had multiple trips for foreign government officials sent to massage parlors.

From late 2017 through 2020, Wirtgen Thailand routinely entertained government officials from RTAF, DOH, and DRR at various massage parlors in Thailand. These expenses were falsely documented as legitimate business costs and often rounded to appear less suspicious. Wirtgen’s Managing Director for Southeast Asia and the Managing Director of Wirtgen Thailand approved these expenses despite company policies that expressly forbid bribery or improper influence.

  1. RTAF. In November 2019 and March 2020, Wirtgen Thailand incurred expenses at massage parlors to entertain high-ranking RTAF officers involved in tender processes. A high-level RTAF officer responsible for drafting and awarding tenders was entertained on multiple occasions, resulting in Wirtgen Thailand winning two tenders in March and April 2020, valued at approximately $665,000.
  2. DOH. Wirtgen Thailand also engaged in similar activities to influence DOH officials. For example, in March 2017, a $15,000 expense was recorded for entertaining 15 members of a DOH tender committee at a massage parlor. Subsequent entertainment expenses, including those in July 2018 and December 2018, continued this pattern. As a result, Wirtgen Thailand secured multiple tenders, including a $2,303,294 tender in December 2018, a $498,567 tender in October 2019, and a $1,451,432 tender in November 2019.
  3. In December 2019, Wirtgen Thailand entertained DRR officials at massage parlors, incurring expenses of approximately $10,000. This effort paid off when DRR awarded Wirtgen Thailand a $1,283,905 tender in April 2020. Notably, two of the four DRR signatories on this tender had received entertainment from Wirtgen Thailand during the December 2019 visit.

In total, Wirtgen Thailand spent over $58,000 on improper massage parlor entertainment for government officials. These expenses were falsely recorded on the company’s books and records, often listed in round numbers with vague descriptions such as “entertainment.” This widespread bribery directly influenced the outcome of several tenders, leading to the award of contracts worth millions of dollars.

Bribery Through a Sightseeing Trip Disguised as a “Factory Visit”

In another scheme, Wirtgen Thailand paid for an elaborate eight-day sightseeing trip for four DOH officials and two of their spouses under the pretense of a “factory visit” to its facilities in Germany. However, the itinerary consisted of luxury sightseeing in Switzerland, with visits to Interlaken, Zermatt, and Lake Lucerne, shopping excursions, and stays in high-end hotels. The total cost of this trip was approximately $47,500.

During this period, Wirtgen Thailand submitted a bid on a DOH tender. After the trip concluded, Wirtgen Thailand was awarded a tender on October 16, 2019, valued at $498,567. A month later, on November 20, 2019, Wirtgen secured another tender worth $1,451,432. The trip and the subsequent awards were orchestrated without following Deere’s internal compliance procedures, which required detailed documentation and prior approval for such visits. The Managing Director for Southeast Asia knowingly approved these expenses, citing the need to “gain information and build rapport” with government customers.

What was wrong with these trips? Basically, everything. What makes all of this even more egregious is that the rules around gifts, travel, and entertainment for clients have long been known since at least 2007, when the Department of Justice (DOJ) issued Opinion Releases 07-01 and 07-02, which detailed the DOJ’s expectations for GTE going forward.

The key elements are:

  1. The purpose of the visit is to familiarize the delegates with the nature and extent of the requestor’s operations and capabilities and to help establish the requestor’s business credibility.
  2. The visit will last four days and will be limited to domestic economy class travel to only one U.S. operations site.
  3. The requestor also intends to pay for the six officials’ domestic lodging, local transport, and meals.
  4. The foreign government plans to pay the costs of the international airfare.
  5. The company did not select the delegates who would participate in the visit.
  6. The company will pay all costs directly to the providers; no funds will be paid directly to the foreign government or the delegates.
  7. The company will not pay any expenses for spouses, family, or other officials’ guests.
  8. Any souvenirs the requestor may provide to the delegates would reflect the requestor’s name and/or logo and be of nominal value.
  9. The Company will not fund, organize, or host any entertainment or leisure activities for the officials, nor will it provide the officials with any stipend or spending money.

Falsification of Records

The expenses related to both the massage parlor entertainment and the sightseeing trip were improperly recorded as legitimate business expenses in Wirtgen Thailand’s books. None of these activities complied with the company’s policies and procedures regarding interactions with government officials. Senior management routinely approved these expenses without adequate scrutiny, bypassing the company’s compliance framework.

As noted above in Opinion Release 07-01, “All costs and expenses incurred by the requestor in connection with the visit will be properly and accurately recorded in the requestor’s books and records.” This means that not only is it a requirement for companies to accurately record their legitimate travel expenses in their books and records, but it is also a separate violation when there is a failure to do so. Deere did not meet this standard.

The total value of the corrupt payments and benefits provided to RTAF, DOH, and DRR officials through these schemes amounted to over $105,500, while the total value of the tenders awarded to Wirtgen Thailand because of these illicit practices exceeded $6 million.

Wirtgen Thailand’s actions highlight a significant breakdown in compliance oversight and internal controls. The deliberate falsification of records and the use of bribery to secure government contracts violated the company’s own Code of Business Conduct and exposed it to severe legal and reputational risks. These events serve as a stark reminder to compliance professionals of the critical importance of robust compliance monitoring and the need for stringent enforcement of anti-bribery policies.

To prevent such violations, companies must ensure that their compliance programs are well-designed and actively enforced, with continuous monitoring to detect and address potential breaches. This case underscores the necessity of a proactive approach to compliance, where ethics and integrity are prioritized at every level of the organization.

Categories
Compliance Tip of the Day

Compliance Tip of the Day: Lesson from The John Deere FCPA Enforcement Action – Root Cause Analysis for Remediation

Welcome to “Compliance Tip of the Day,” the podcast where we bring 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 aim is to provide you with bite-sized, actionable tips to help you stay on top of your compliance game.

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.

Today, we review why a root cause analysis is the first step you should take before you begin the remediation of your compliance program.

Categories
Compliance Tip of the Day

Compliance Tip of the Day: Lesson from The John Deere FCPA Enforcement Action – Post Acquisition Integration

Welcome to “Compliance Tip of the Day,” the podcast where we bring 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 aim is to provide you with bite-sized, actionable tips to help you stay on top of your compliance game.

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.

In this episode, we review why post-acquisition integration is mandatory for any deal that closes.

Categories
Compliance Tip of the Day

Compliance Tip of the Day: Lesson from The John Deere FCPA Enforcement Action – Pre – acquisition Due Diligence

Welcome to “Compliance Tip of the Day,” the podcast where we bring 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 aim is to provide you with bite-sized, actionable tips to help you stay on top of your compliance game.

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.

Today, we review why pre-acquisition due diligence is so critical in any best practices compliance program.

Categories
Compliance Tip of the Day

Compliance Tip of the Day: Lesson from The John Deere FCPA Enforcement Action – Gifts, Travel and Entertainment

Welcome to “Compliance Tip of the Day,” the podcast where we bring 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 aim is to provide you with bite-sized, actionable tips to help you stay on top of your compliance game.

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.

The basics of GTE have been in place since 2007, in opinion Release 07-01. Pressure tests your GTE policies and procedures to make sure your compliance program still meets them.

Categories
Compliance Tip of the Day

Compliance Tip of the Day: Everything Old is New Again: The John Deere FCPA Enforcement Action

Welcome to “Compliance Tip of the Day,” the podcast where we bring 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 aim is to provide you with bite-sized, actionable tips to help you stay on top of your compliance game.

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.

Today we review the basics of the John Deere enforcement action and why it is so instructive for compliance professionals.

 

Categories
Blog

The John Deere’s FCPA Case: A Throwback to Compliance Fundamentals

In corporate compliance, some very basic compliance lessons are destined to be repeated. This was clear from the recently announced Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Foreign Corruption Practices Act enforcement action involving Deere (John Deere herein). The $9.9 million settlement between John Deere and the SEC involved FCPA violations at its Wirtgen Group subsidiary. It offers a stark reminder that even the most established companies can stumble over basic compliance principles. For those in the compliance community, this case highlights the importance of robust integration post-acquisition and serves as a throwback to classic FCPA pitfalls that should have been avoided.

The John Deere Case: A Synopsis

According to the SEC Press Release announcing the resolution, “From at least late 2017 through 2020, Wirtgen Thailand employees bribed Thai government officials with the Royal Thai Air Force, the Department of Highways, and the Department of Rural Roads to win multiple government contracts and also bribed employees of a private company to win sales to that company. The order finds that the bribes included cash payments, massage parlor visits, and international travel for government officials and private company employees. According to the SEC’s order, Wirtgen Thailand made approximately $4.3 million in profits” from these bribes. The improper payments were inaccurately recorded as legitimate expenses in Deere’s books and records.

The settlement resulted in John Deere paying $9.9 million in penalties and disgorgements. While the case details could easily be mistaken for a compliance nightmare from the early 2000s, it happened just last year, making it a timely cautionary tale for compliance professionals today.

The Importance of Post-Acquisition Integration

One of the most glaring issues in this case was John Deere’s failure to integrate Wirtgen’s operations into its compliance program swiftly. This lapse is a textbook example of the risks arising when companies fail to prioritize compliance during and after mergers and acquisitions. The SEC’s settlement order emphasized this point, making it clear that Deere’s delay in extending its compliance framework to Wirtgen created an environment where bribery and corruption could thrive unchecked.

This raises critical questions for compliance professionals: How quickly can we realistically integrate an acquired company into our compliance program? What resources are needed to ensure this integration happens efficiently? The answers to these questions are theoretical; they have real-world implications for preventing violations and avoiding costly enforcement actions.

The Role of Internal Controls and Red Flags

The SEC’s order also highlighted several internal control failures and red flags Deere’s compliance team should have caught regarding gifts, travel, and entertainment (GTE). Expense reports with round numbers, lack of detail in expense documentation, and including non-existent employees to justify expenses are all classic indicators of fraud and bribery. Yet, these obvious signs were missed—or worse, ignored. What makes all of this even more egregious is that the rules around gifts, travel, and entertainment for clients have long been known, since at least 2007 when the Department of Justice (DOJ) issued Opinion Releases 07-01 and 07-02, which detailed the DOJ’s expectations for GTE going forward.

This oversight suggests a deeper issue: a lack of robust internal audit and compliance mechanisms within Deere at the time. It is a stark reminder that strong internal controls are not just a regulatory requirement but essential tools for detecting and preventing unethical behavior. The lesson for compliance officers is to continually assess and strengthen these controls, ensuring they can identify red flags before they escalate into full-blown violations.

The Perennial Importance of Pre-Acquisition Due Diligence

Another critical aspect of this case is the apparent need for thorough pre-acquisition due diligence. The SEC’s order does not mention evidence of John Deere conducting such due diligence before acquiring Wirtgen, raising serious concerns about the company’s risk assessment process. In high-risk markets like Thailand, where corruption is pervasive, skipping or skimping due diligence can be costly.

Compliance professionals should take this as a reminder to prioritize comprehensive due diligence in any acquisition, especially when the target operates in regions of corruption risks. This includes reviewing the target’s compliance program and understanding its business practices, key relationships, and potential vulnerabilities. As Deere’s case demonstrates, failure to do so can expose a company to significant legal and financial liabilities.

Positive Steps and Root Cause Analysis

While the case against John Deere is filled with the company’s missteps, the company’s response post-settlement also offers some positive lessons. John Deere has enhanced its internal audit and compliance programs, including launching an in-house compliance podcast and a bi-monthly compliance newsletter. These initiatives reflect an effort to improve the company’s tone at the top and engage employees in ongoing compliance education.

Moreover, Deere’s commitment to conducting a root cause analysis is particularly noteworthy. We saw this set out by the DOJ in its enforcement action involving SAP earlier this year. Understanding the root causes of compliance failures is crucial for preventing future violations. In this case, the root cause seems to stem from a failure to integrate Wirtgen into John Deere’s compliance framework rather than from deficiencies in accounting or transparency. This distinction highlights the need for companies to identify compliance gaps and address the underlying issues that allow those gaps to exist in the first place.

For compliance professionals, the takeaway is clear: a robust root cause analysis is a vital component of any remediation effort. Whether conducted by the compliance team, internal audit, or an external party, this analysis should be thorough and inform subsequent risk assessments and program improvements.

Learning from the Past

In many ways, the John Deere case feels like a throwback to the early days of FCPA enforcement, when companies were still learning the ropes of anti-bribery compliance. The violations at Wirtgen Thailand are reminiscent of the kind of misconduct that the DOJ and SEC have warned against for over a decade, with the GTE issues mandated nearly 15 years ago. Yet, here we are in 2024, still grappling with the same basic issues.

The John Deere enforcement action serves as a sobering reminder that the fundamentals of compliance—strong internal controls, thorough due diligence, timely post-acquisition integration, and ongoing risk assessment—are as relevant today as they were 20 years ago. The challenge for compliance professionals is ensuring that these fundamentals are understood and deeply embedded in the company’s culture and operations.

Ultimately, the John Deere case is a call to action for the compliance community. It reminds us that even large, sophisticated companies can falter if they lose sight of the basics. It prompts us to revisit those basics in our organizations, ensuring that we are not just keeping up with the latest trends in compliance but also mastering the fundamentals that will protect our companies from tomorrow’s risks.

Categories
Compliance Into the Weeds

Compliance into the Weeds: Everything Old is New Again – The John Deere 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 compliance? Look no further than Compliance into the Weeds!

In this episode, Tom Fox and Matt Kelly take a deep dive into the recent Securities and Exchange Commission FCPA enforcement action involving John Deere.

The case centers on a $10 million civil penalty imposed by the SEC for bribery activities in the Thailand office of a newly acquired subsidiary, Wirtgen Group. This transgression spanned from 2017 to 2020, and despite having a code of business conduct, Wirtgen employees flouted rules by falsifying expenses, entertaining government officials at massage parlors, and engaging in a luxury sightseeing tour under the guise of a factory visit.

A critical issue was John Deere’s delayed integration of Wirtgen into its compliance program, leading to internal control lapses and obvious red flags in expense reports. Although Deere has since taken significant remedial actions, including firing culpable employees and enhancing its compliance and internal audit programs, the situation underscores persistent compliance challenges even for large, sophisticated firms. This episode serves as a reminder of the essential compliance lessons from past decades that firms must steadfastly adhere to.

Key Highlights:

  • Details of the Bribery Scheme
  • Internal Control Violations
  • Pre- and Post-Acquisition Due Diligence Issues
  • Remedial Steps and Improvements
  • Root Cause Analysis and Lessons Learned

Resources:

Matt in Radical Compliance

Tom

Instagram

Facebook

YouTube

Twitter

LinkedIn

Categories
10 For 10

10 For 10: Top Compliance Stories For The Week Ending September 14, 2024

Welcome to 10 For 10, the podcast that 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.

  • Albanian ex-PM indicted for corruption. (Reuters)
  • The Bibi Files. (The Guardian)
  • NYPD Police chief resigns. (NYT)
  • Will South Africa leave the FATF dirty money list in 2025? (Bloomberg)
  • Google and Apple face billions in back taxes in the EU. (NYT)
  • Slovakia loses corruption battle. (Politico)
  • John Deere settles FCPA allegations.   (WSJ)
  • Ex-Glencore employees plead not guilty. (FT)
  • PCAOB requires audit firms to bring in outside experts to oversee audit quality. (FT)
  • Hong Kong now high-risk? (WSJ)

Connect with Tom 

Instagram  Facebook  YouTube  Twitter  LinkedIn