Tag: NYT

Categories
Blog

Will Trump Suspend FCPA Enforcement in Venezuela?

Now that I have your attention with this clickbait title, I want to explore today what the Venezuelan imbroglio may mean for compliance professionals and energy companies who are looking at either entering the Venezuelan market or, in many cases, re-entering it after the not invasion (since it was not a military action authorized by Congress); not a police action (that the Korean War takes the moniker); but the capture of President Maduro and his wife to purloin Venezuela’s oil. As noted by New York Times (NYT) columnist Thomas Friedman today, “It is now clear that Trump’s priority in capturing President Nicolás Maduro of Venezuela was not to make that country safe for the restoration of democracy but to make it safe for the restoration of American oil companies’ dominance over Venezuelan oil extraction.”

But there are multiple obstacles to the US getting to and removing Venezuelan oil. As the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) noted, “But getting foreign companies to flock back to Venezuela will be a massive challenge. Chevron is the only major U.S. oil company and the country’s largest foreign investor. Other oil executives will be forced to gauge the stability on the ground in a country where the industry has fallen into disarray after more than two decades of mismanagement and corruption.” Economically, it may make little to no sense.

Corruption and PDVSA

But from the compliance perspective, there is the issue of corruption. As I wrote back in 2017, “Of all the stench from corruption, not much is more odious than that from the Venezuelan state oil company Petróleos de Venezuela SA (PDVSA). Whether it is shaking down contractors for Rolex watches to schedule a meeting, requiring a bribe to get payments on outstanding invoices, or simply good old-fashioned cash to get on a bid list, PDVSA is perceived to be one of the most institutionally corrupt energy companies around.”

How President Trump plans to get the Venezuelan oil out of the country is not known at this point. But unless he orders US energy companies to put boots on the ground to rebuild PdVSA’s decrepit infrastructure, those same companies will have to deal with the same corrupt PdVSA officials.

In the context of Venezuela’s reopening to Western energy investment, President Trump’s decision to pause enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) reflected a broader strategic pivot toward what his administration calls economic competitiveness and national security. His Executive Order issued in early 2025 directed the Department of Justice (DOJ) to halt new FCPA investigations for at least 180 days while it reviewed enforcement priorities on the premise that strict anti-bribery enforcement, as it has traditionally been applied, “impedes U.S. foreign policy objectives” and disadvantages American companies relative to global competitors. The policy rationale was that, in markets perceived as corrupt or opaque, rigorous FCPA enforcement has historically dissuaded US firms from competing effectively, particularly against foreign rivals who do not face the same legal constraints. This argument, which resonated with a strand of populist economic nationalism, frames FCPA enforcement as a barrier to energy companies securing strategic resources, such as Venezuelan oil, rather than as a purely ethical safeguard.

From a compliance professional’s lens, this recalibration had two implications. On one hand, it might reduce the immediacy of DOJ scrutiny for conduct in jurisdictions like Venezuela, where corruption risk is endemic. On the other hand, the suspension does not abolish the law; FCPA remains on the books, and enforcement priorities can flip with the political winds or through congressional action. Moreover, the suspension could embolden local partners or intermediaries to push for irregular payments under the assumption that US enforcement is weak, creating significant red-flag risks for energy companies seeking to operationalize robust controls aligned with the DOJ’s Evaluation of Corporate Compliance Programs (ECCP) standards. Even under a relaxed enforcement regime, a strong compliance program grounded in the ECCP’s emphasis on risk-based design, continuous monitoring, and senior-management accountability remains a critical commercial and legal hedge.

Compliance Going Forward

One of the most important takeaways for compliance professionals confronting Venezuela is the necessary shift from reflexive risk avoidance to disciplined risk management. Mike DeBernardis told me that the modern compliance mandate “is no longer to say ‘no’ when risk is high; it is to say ‘yes, if’ the risk can be identified, structured, and controlled.” This is not a philosophical shift. It is explicitly embedded in the ECCP, which does not reward companies for avoiding difficult markets but instead evaluates how effectively they manage risk in precisely those environments.

In the Venezuelan energy context, this means compliance must be deeply embedded in the business strategy from the outset. Compliance professionals must fully understand the proposed energy project, including its commercial objectives, operational footprint, and timelines. They must map every anticipated interaction with the Venezuelan state, particularly with state-owned enterprises, regulators, customs authorities, and security services.

From there, compliance professionals must identify where corruption pressure is most likely to arise, not in theory but in practice, based on how the business will actually operate. Only then can bespoke controls be designed to address those specific risks. The ECCP repeatedly emphasizes that effective compliance programs are well-designed, adequately resourced, and genuinely empowered. This is where compliance earns its seat at the strategy table. If compliance is engaged only after contracts are signed and capital committed, its ability to influence outcomes is sharply diminished, and the program is far more likely to fail under real-world pressure.

If initial program design is the foundation, continuous monitoring is the load-bearing structure. Energy operations in Venezuela will not tolerate static compliance approaches built around annual certifications or periodic check-the-box reviews. The ECCP explicitly asks whether companies test the effectiveness of their controls and whether they respond promptly and meaningfully to issues as they arise. In a high-risk jurisdiction like Venezuela, corruption risk will evolve rapidly as political conditions, counterparties, and regulatory expectations shift. Compliance programs must therefore be dynamic.

This requires live monitoring of payments, invoices, and reimbursements, particularly those involving third parties and state-linked entities. It requires regular compliance check-ins with project teams operating on the ground and under real-time pressure. It also requires targeted audits that focus narrowly on high-risk transactions rather than broad, generic reviews that miss the point. When red flags appear, swift remediation is essential, including the authority to pause transactions or relationships when necessary. Friction with the business is inevitable in this environment. Under the ECCP, however, that friction is not evidence of failure. It is evidence of independence, effectiveness, and seriousness of purpose.

For energy companies, Venezuela may well be worth the risk. The size of the opportunity, particularly in hydrocarbons, may make disengagement an increasingly unrealistic option. For compliance professionals, however, the mandate is clear and unforgiving. Programs must be designed with the assumption that pressure will occur, that shortcuts will be suggested, and that local counterparts may view compliance as negotiable.

Effective programs anticipate misconduct rather than react to it, and they are built to withstand scrutiny not only from local stakeholders but also from US enforcement authorities looking back months or years later. This requires compliance professionals to think and act as strategic risk managers, not policy custodians. They must insist on visibility into business decisions, demand resources commensurate with risk, and maintain the authority to intervene when necessary.

In the Venezuelan context, success will not be defined by the absence of issues but by how quickly and credibly the organization detects and addresses them. That approach is not merely about satisfying regulatory expectations. It is about protecting the company’s people, assets, and reputation in one of the most challenging operating environments in the world. That is not just compliance. That is strategic risk management at its purest and most demanding.

Categories
Blog

From a Wake to Global Greatness: Compliance Lessons from the Creation of Les Misérables

The New York Times recently ran an article on the creation of the play Les Misérables. When the show premiered at London’s Barbican Theatre in 1985, the creative team celebrated with champagne and optimism. But by the next morning, that optimism had curdled. Critics savaged the show, The Evening Standard called it a “glum opera,” and The Daily Mail mocked it as “ripples of cheap sentiment.” Yet forty years later, the musical has become a global juggernaut: 15,500 London performances, translations into 22 languages, and productions across 53 countries.

How did a project that began as a critical failure turn into one of the most beloved works of modern theatre? The answer lies in the same principles that define a strong corporate compliance program: resilience, continuous improvement, and purpose-driven leadership. Today, I want to use this most beloved story behind Les Misérables (Les Miz) to explore lessons for compliance professionals seeking to build programs that endure, inspire, and transform.

Act I: Facing the Critics – Resilience in the Face of Failure

Producer Cameron Mackintosh had just 48 hours after opening night to decide whether to fund a West End transfer. With negative reviews piling up, the rational business decision might have been to pull the plug. But Mackintosh did not because he listened to a different source of data: the public. Within days, the Barbican box office was inundated with calls. Demand skyrocketed. Word of mouth triumphed over the headlines. Mackintosh saw that passion and persistence, not panic, should guide his decision-making. (IE., Cool, Calm, and Collected)

For compliance officers, this moment is instructive. Programs often face early resistance: executives skeptical of costs, employees fatigued by training, or media narratives about “bureaucracy over business.” Like Mackintosh, compliance leaders must look beyond the immediate criticism and focus on long-term trust indicators: employee engagement, internal reporting rates, and cultural alignment. As John Caird, one of the show’s co-directors, later recalled, “It was two or three days of worry. Then it became apparent this thing was unstoppable.” That’s what resilient leadership looks like. It is the courage to hold the line until values prove their worth.

Act II: Reinvention and Collaboration – Building Through Continuous Improvement

The original French production of Les Misérables was a creation of Claude-Michel Schönberg and Alain Boublil. It was little more than “a series of tableaux.” To bring it to London, Mackintosh assembled a powerhouse team: Caird, Trevor Nunn, and poet James Fenton. Together, they reshaped the story, studied Victor Hugo’s 1,400-page novel, and discovered a central truth: the conflict between forgiveness and justice.

When the scene of Jean Valjean stealing silver from a bishop was reimagined to include the bishop’s forgiveness, the show found its soul. As Caird put it, “Sewing God into the show was what animated the characters.”  In compliance terms, that’s equivalent to finding your “why.” Many programs begin as checklists: rules, policies, and audits. But the real power comes when compliance discovers its animating purpose: integrity, fairness, and the belief in redemption.

And the Les Misérables team did not stop improving. Even weeks before opening, they were rewriting scenes and composing new music. The haunting ballad “Bring Him Home,” for instance, was added at the eleventh hour to showcase Colm Wilkinson’s voice. A lyric change from “the song of common men” to “the song of angry men” captured the fire of revolution and made the anthem unforgettable. That kind of iterative creativity mirrors modern compliance practice. Programs thrive when they are dynamic. When risk assessments lead to policy refinements, when whistleblower feedback reshapes processes, and when technology brings fresh insight into employee behavior. Continuous monitoring and improvement are not simply boxes to check; instead, they are the lifeblood of sustained success.

Act III: Mission, Meaning, and the Power of Emotion

What ultimately made Les Misérables unstoppable was not just the music or the staging. It was emotion and story. The raw humanity of people struggling against injustice. Audiences from Shanghai to São Paulo connected to Jean Valjean’s redemption, Fantine’s suffering, and the students’ defiance on the barricades. The musical’s emotional resonance even crossed from stage to real life. During the Tiananmen Square protests in 1989, members of the Los Angeles cast watched the news backstage, then went out to sing “Do You Hear the People Sing?” with renewed intensity. “We were singing to empower them,” one actor said.

That is what great art and great compliance can do: inspire people to act on their values. A compliance culture isn’t sustained by fear of enforcement but by belief in purpose. When employees see compliance not as control but as conscience, they become part of something larger. Les Misérables endures because its story is universal. As Caird reflected, “Deep down, so many members of the audience feel the same sense of fate or destiny about their own life journeys.” Compliance, too, speaks to that inner struggle, doing the right thing when no one’s watching, holding fast to integrity under pressure, and believing that redemption is possible even after mistakes.

Act IV: Governance, Adaptation, and Global Legacy

Even as Les Misérables became a global brand, its creative and business stewards never lost sight of governance. The show’s licensing model ensures consistent quality worldwide. Each local production is supported by an extensive oversight network, a framework that any compliance professional would recognize as a control environment.

The show’s adaptability has also been key to its longevity. From Paris to London, from Broadway to Shanghai, the creative team allowed for local variation without losing the show’s ethical and emotional core. For compliance, the essence of risk-based design is adapting policies and procedures to the local context while maintaining global standards.

The duality of consistency and flexibility is the hallmark of resilient compliance systems. Whether you’re dealing with data privacy laws in the EU or anti-bribery rules in emerging markets, the goal is the same: uphold integrity, but adapt intelligently.

Curtain Call: The Compliance Lessons from Les Misérables

Forty years on, Les Misérables remains not just a musical but a movement. Its improbable rise from derision to dominance reflects the same principles that make compliance programs succeed in the long run. Here are three key lessons for today’s compliance professionals:

1. Resilience Over Reputation. Critics will come, whether they are journalists, executives, or employees, and they will be skeptical of compliance initiatives. What matters is endurance. Listen to feedback, adapt when necessary, but stay rooted in purpose. Like Mackintosh, bet on the long-term power of doing what’s right, not what’s popular.

2. Continuous Reinvention Is Compliance Excellence. Les Misérableswas refined until every lyric and note supported the story. Similarly, compliance programs must be living systems. They must constantly be assessed, tested, and evolved. Success comes not from a perfect launch but from perpetual improvement.

3. Emotion and Ethics Drive Engagement. What made Les Misérablesunforgettable was not its spectacle but rather its soul. The same applies to compliance. Rules deter misconduct; stories inspire integrity. Embed humanity into your messaging. Celebrate courage. Encourage second chances. Compliance is not about fear. It is about belief.

Final Encore

From the opening-night “wake” to four decades of standing ovations, Les Misérables proves that greatness often begins in adversity. For compliance professionals, the lesson is clear: Build programs with purpose, persistence, and passion. Like Valjean himself, a great compliance culture does not just survive, it redeems, inspires, and endures.

Categories
Blog

Culture, Controls, and Consequences: Why Compliance Should Address Abuse Before It Escalates

When we discuss “fraud, waste, and abuse” in the corporate compliance world, fraud often takes center stage. Fraud is the deliberate deception of knowingly submitting false information for personal or corporate gain. Waste is easier to define: the careless or inefficient use of resources. But abuse? Abuse sits in that murky middle ground. It may not rise to the level of criminal fraud. Still, it represents conduct that undermines the ethical framework of the organization and erodes trust in systems designed to manage risk.

In many ways, abuse is the most insidious of the three. It thrives in the shadows, often justified by employees as “harmless” or “making up for what the company owes me.” Yet left unchecked, abuse not only costs organizations real money but also paves the way for outright fraud. One of the clearest examples of abuse today lies in employee expense reimbursement, a process now under siege by the rise of AI-generated fake receipts.

Today, we continue our week-long exploration of the role of a Chief Compliance Officer (CC) and corporate compliance function in fighting fraud, waste, and abuse. Today, we explore what abuse means, how expense reimbursement schemes illustrate the problem, why weak controls allow abuse to metastasize into fraud, and what compliance professionals can do to address it. We use a real-world example of AI creating fraudulent expense reimbursements to demonstrate how the task has become more difficult and why a corporate compliance function must be even more vigilant.

Defining Abuse in the Compliance Framework

Abuse is often defined as the use of authority, processes, or resources in a manner that is inconsistent with accepted business practices, resulting in unnecessary costs or unfair advantages. Unlike fraud, abuse does not always involve intent to deceive. Instead, it often reflects opportunistic behavior, such as stretching policies to personal advantage, exploiting loopholes, or rationalizing misconduct.

In the context of compliance, abuse is the “gateway drug” to fraud. An employee who casually exploits the expense system, rounding up mileage, submitting duplicate claims, or fabricating receipts for lost expenses, may start with small infractions. But over time, the lack of consequences emboldens greater misconduct.

One only needs to look back at the sordid story of GSK in China to recall that employee expense reimbursement can lead to catastrophic consequences for an organization.

Expense Reimbursement Abuse: The AI-Receipt Problem

As the New York Times (NYT) recently reported, employees are increasingly turning to generative AI tools to create realistic fake receipts. This is abuse in action. It often begins innocently enough: an employee loses a legitimate receipt and turns to an AI chatbot to recreate it. They may even rationalize the act as necessary to be reimbursed for actual money spent.

But the abuse does not stop there. Once the employee realizes the system can be gamed and that compliance or finance fails to detect the fraud, they repeat the behavior. In one case, an employee submitted AI-generated receipts for hotels and airfare in Bangkok, despite never traveling there.

The ACFE in its most recent Report to the Nations confirms the scale of the issue:

  • 13% of occupational fraud cases involve inflated or invented expenses.
  • Median loss per case: $50,000.
  • 30% of fraudulent receipts detected by one major auditing tool are now AI-generated.

What makes this a prime example of abuse is not just the false documentation. It is the culture of permissiveness that allows employees to cross the line between mistake, abuse, and eventually fraud.

How Lack of Controls Fuels Greater Fraud

The absence of strong internal controls around expense reimbursement is fertile ground for abuse. Companies that rely on manual review or outdated systems may not be equipped to detect sophisticated fakes. AI has supercharged this risk. Where once an employee might need Photoshop skills to doctor a receipt, now anyone with a chatbot can generate a convincing fake in seconds.

Weak controls create three distinct risks for compliance:

1. Normalization of Misconduct

Employees who “get away” with small abuses normalize this behavior, eroding ethical culture. “Everyone does it” becomes the rallying cry.

2. Escalation to Fraud

Abuse begets fraud. What begins as recreating a lost taxi receipt morphs into fabricating entire trips, complete with hotels, meals, and airfare never taken.

3. Regulatory and Legal Exposure

Inflated or fabricated expense claims, especially involving government contracts or international operations, can trigger False Claims Act liability, FCPA scrutiny, or other regulatory action.

Ultimately, compliance officers should view expense reimbursement abuse as more than an administrative nuisance. It is a leading indicator of deeper cultural weakness and a flashing red light for greater fraud risk.

Building a Compliance Response

How should compliance professionals address abuse in expense reimbursement systems? Three principles stand out:

  • Leverage Data and Technology: Just as employees use AI to fabricate receipts, compliance teams must deploy AI to detect them. Expense auditing platforms now compare metadata, font spacing, and behavioral patterns to identify suspicious submissions.
  • Strengthen Policy and Training: Clear guidance is essential. Employees should know that even “recreating” a lost receipt is prohibited, and repeated violations will trigger disciplinary action. Training should emphasize that abuse is not a victimless act; it drains resources and undermines trust.
  • Promote a Speak-Up Culture: Abuse thrives in silence. Anonymous hotlines, visible accountability, and consistent follow-through on reports send the message that integrity matters.

Five Key Takeaways for Compliance Professionals

1. Abuse Is the Gateway to Fraud

Abuse often sits in the gray space between negligence and intentional misconduct. An employee may rationalize using a fake receipt as a harmless way to recover legitimate expenses, but once this behavior is accepted, it erodes the organization’s integrity. Abuse teaches employees that rules can be bent without consequence. Over time, this rationalization escalates, leading to outright fraud. Compliance professionals must recognize abuse not as minor misconduct but as the earliest sign of a deeper cultural problem. Treating abuse seriously, through policy, training, and accountability, prevents small acts of dishonesty from snowballing into systemic fraud that damages the enterprise.

2. Expense Reimbursement Abuse Is Rising

Expense abuse has always been a problem, but the introduction of generative AI has made it easier and more scalable. Employees no longer need technical expertise in Photoshop to fabricate documents. Today, they can generate convincing receipts in seconds, often indistinguishable to the human eye. Cases of employees submitting AI-generated receipts for trips never taken highlight just how quickly this abuse can escalate. For compliance teams, this shift means that traditional manual review is no longer enough. Organizations must anticipate that abuse in expense systems is increasing both in volume and sophistication, and they must respond accordingly.

3. Weak Controls Enable Misconduct

Compliance professionals recognize that robust internal controls are the foundation of effective fraud prevention. When expense systems lack proper oversight, they create opportunities for abuse to thrive. Employees quickly learn where controls are lax, whether through inconsistent auditing, inadequate documentation requirements, or poor segregation of duties. Without strong controls, small abuses go unchecked, and employees feel emboldened to escalate their misconduct. Worse still, regulators may interpret weak controls as evidence of willful blindness or negligence, thereby exposing companies to additional liability. Compliance officers must ensure expense reimbursement processes are fortified with modern controls that prevent, detect, and remediate abuse at every level.

4. Technology Must Match the Threat

The same tools employees use to commit expense abuse can be harnessed by compliance to stop it. AI-generated receipts may look convincing, but advanced auditing tools can detect subtle inconsistencies in formatting, metadata, and behavioral patterns. Expense management platforms now deploy machine learning to flag unusual submissions, such as repeating server names or meals in fabricated restaurant receipts. Compliance professionals must advocate for investment in these technologies to stay ahead of evolving threats. Without matching technology to the risk, organizations remain vulnerable. Ultimately, AI must be part of the compliance toolbox to counteract the AI-enabled abuse already occurring.

5. Culture Is the Ultimate Control

No amount of technology or policy will succeed without a culture that values accountability. Abuse thrives in environments where misconduct is ignored, rationalized, or dismissed as “just the cost of doing business.” By contrast, cultures where leadership models ethical behavior, encourages reporting, and rewards integrity create natural barriers to abuse. Compliance must work hand in hand with leadership to embed accountability into daily operations. When employees see that even small abuses are addressed, they understand the seriousness of compliance expectations. A healthy culture sends the clearest message: abuse will not be tolerated, and integrity is non-negotiable.

Abuse Is Fraud’s Precursor

Fraud, waste, and abuse are often discussed as a package, but compliance professionals must pay special attention to abuse. It is the gray zone where rationalizations take root, where misconduct begins small, and where organizational culture is tested. Expense reimbursement systems offer a cautionary tale: without proper controls and accountability, abuse can quickly evolve into systemic fraud.

Compliance officers who ignore abuse risk far more than inflated receipts. They risk cultivating an environment that fosters fraud. The lesson is clear: treat abuse as seriously as fraud, because in practice, one leads inexorably to the other.

Categories
Sports and Compliance

Sports and Compliance – Kyle Brasseur on Outsourcing Sports Journalism

Welcome to the Sports and Compliance podcast. For the longest time, I have wanted to have a podcast on the intersection of Sports and the World of Compliance and Ethics, both for those stories as they play out on the Sports Page and for the lessons they provide to business executives and compliance professionals. In this podcast series, I am joined by one of the top compliance commentators around, Stephen Martin, CCO at Skillsoft. Together, we will use our love of sports and competition to discuss current ethical issues in sports, look at compliance through a sports lens, and determine how the world of sports and its stories can guide the compliance professional. In today’s episode, Tom takes a solo turn behind the microphone to visit with Kyle Brasseur, EIC at Compliance Week and recovering sports journalist. The New York Times recently announced that it was outsourcing its entire sports department to the Athletic.

As Boston sports fans passionately hold their journalists accountable, Tom and Kyle discussed the implications of this shift, the importance of beat writers, and the need for well-rounded journalism skills to transition between disciplines. They also highlighted the importance of handling layoff announcements with respect and sensitivity to show those affected the necessary dignity. This conversation provides insight into the controversy of outsourcing sports journalism and its potential effects on the quality of content readers receive.

Key Highlights

·       Beat Reporting Role

·       Boston Sports Fans

·       Outsourcing Sports Journalism

·       Sports Journalism Transitions

·       Layoff Announcements

Categories
Blog

War in Ukraine: Part 1 – KYC, Who Is in Your Supply Chain and Third Parties

Almost all of the world has condemned the Russian invasion of the Ukraine and I will add my small voice to that condemnation. In trying to choose what to write, I did not want to emphasize the better the geopolitical commentary, so I decided to focus on how this invasion and its attendant fallout might impact compliance professionals and programs. At this point Russia has limited its attacks to Ukraine but my fear as more EU, other Western allies and the US respond with arms and technical support to the Ukraine government and army, we might see Russia unleash its cyber warfare specialists on those who are supporting Ukraine with material and other support. This week I am going to write about some of the issues a Chief Compliance Officer (CCO) needs to think about now. Today, I consider Russia.
The list of sanctions is growing as the situation on the ground becomes more intense and dynamic, so you need to be in constant contact with your operations, sales and supply chain functions. At this point, you should probably add Belarus to that list as they appear to be the only other country actively supporting Russia at this point. Given the US, EU and UK sanctions that have been levied and likely will be sanctioned over the next few days and weeks, at this point your organization probably needs to prepare for a full ban on sales from your organization into Russia. Russia (and Belarus) appears to be headed to the same list as North Korea and Iran and your business needs to ready.
Know Your Customer
One of the first thing every CCO needs to do right now is determine what goods, products or services flow from, through or to Russia. This means knowing who your customers are and where they are located. If you have not stopped selling to any Russian companies now you probably need to stop tomorrow. But this inquiry does not stop or even start at the Russian border. It means any products which might go into Russia through any of your sales channels. Do you have distributors? What countries are they in? Same inquiry for resellers. Any entity that can get your company’s products into Russia needs to be determined now. Make preparations now to cease all business.
Time for your legal department to start looking at every force majeure clause in every contract. Because of where I live, I have looked at force majeure clauses almost every hurricane season and I cannot remember one that did not include a war clause. I rewrote many such clauses to make such pandemic and other health emergencies covered. But your corporate legal department needs to be ready to invoke them under the war clause.
Who is in Your Supply Chain?
The same level of inquiry you put into KYC right now should go into your Supply Chain. Obviously if you have suppliers in Russia, you need to be prepared to jettison that relationship. However even if you do not formally or legally terminate those relationships, your organization needs to be ready for serious disruptions for any components you may be depending on for your company’s products. But once again it is not simply your direct suppliers. If you have never done a deep dive into at least five levels of your supply chain, NOW is the time do so. If there are base materials or component parts coming to your organization from that part of the world anywhere in your supply chain, you had best appreciate that risk sooner rather than later. The Financial Times (FT) has reported that Russia “is also an important source of metals used in manufacturing such as nickel, titanium, palladium and aluminium. Titanium is needed by aircraft and aero-engine manufacturers such as Boeing, Airbus and Rolls-Royce, while palladium is used in catalytic converters, electrodes and electronics.” Indeed, 14% of the world’s aluminium comes from Russia.
Even if you can still have the parts manufactured, you still must bring them to your manufacturing facilities, either in the US or Europe. Thomas L. Friedman, writing in the New York Times (NYT), said, “if Poland just halts truck and rail traffic from Russia to Germany, “as it should,” it would create immediate havoc for Russia’s economy, because the alternative routes are complicated and need to go through a now very dangerous Ukraine. Anyone up for an anti-Putin trucker strike to prevent Russian goods going to and through Western Europe by way of Poland? Watch that space. Some super-empowered Polish citizens with a few roadblocks, pickups and smartphones could choke Russia’s whole economy in this wired world.” If the fighting continues much longer, we will begin to see major transportation disruptions spreading not only from Russia and Ukraine but also to eastern Europe.
Third Parties 
At this point, I hope that ever CCO knows who their third-party sales agents are and that they are monitored on a regular basis. I also hope this same level of knowledge extends down to other third parties such as distributors, joint venture (JV) partners or other types of business relationships in Russia. Indeed the Washington Post announced BP was pulling out of its JV with Rosneft. But more than simply those direct relationships, you can sell your organization’s products into Russia through resale. When was the last time, you looked at your End User report? If it has been more than a few months, I would suggest that you move such a review to the top of your list early this week.
Every multinational organization needs to be fully engaged on these matters and a host of others. Michael Peregrine, writing in Forbes.com last week, said that corporate boards can perform the dual role of both governance and providing support to senior management. Indeed, they may well be obligated to do so. For every CCO reading this I would suggest you call the head of your compliance committee, tell them what you are doing, see what information they want and ask what resources they might be able to provide to you now.
Tomorrow, I will review some issues when looking at Ukraine.

Categories
Daily Compliance News

February 16, 2022 the Remington Pays Edition


In today’s edition of Daily Compliance News:

  • Jury rejects Palin claim. (WaPo)
  • Prince Andrew settles.  (BBC)
  • Zucker partner forced out at CNN. (NYT)
  • Remington settles with Sandy Hook families for $76MM. (WSJ)
Categories
Daily Compliance News

February 15, 2022 the Dinobabies Edition


In today’s edition of Daily Compliance News:
·      IBM senior management tried to get rid of older employees.  (NYT)
·      Judge Rakoff will dismiss Palin lawsuit against NYT.   (NYT)
·      Mazars USA pulls Trump Org financial statement approvals. (NYT)
·      End of Olympics? (NYT)

Categories
Daily Compliance News

August 26, 2019-Uber got lost edition

In today’s edition of Daily Compliance News:

  • How Uber lost its way. (NYT)
  • J&J faces judgment over opioid crisis . (FT)
  • Mandatory company praise. What could go wrong? (FT)
  • Doing business with the world’s 2nd largest economy? Better start making contingency plans. (NYT)
Categories
This Week in FCPA

This Week in FCPA-Episode 149 – the White Privilege edition

After a week hiatus, the lads are back. While debating white privilege and the Varsity Blues scandal, they also take a look at some of this week’s top compliance and ethics stories which caught their collective eyes this week.

  1. Guilty pleas begin in the Varsity Blues scandal. Antonio Blumberg report in the Huffington Post. For those who did not plead guilty, additional charges filed. Melissa Korn reports in the Wall Street Journal. Jay interviews Justin Paperny about the Varsity Blues sting, in Corporate Compliance Insights. For one of the best and fullest explanations of the white privilege component, see Caitlan Flanagan’s article in The Atlantic.
  2. Does your company lack integrity? Mike Volkov gives 5 signs which show it does, on Corruption, Crime and Compliance.
  3. Standard Chartered joins the $1 bn fine club. Emily Flitter reportsin the New York Times. Jon Rusch takes a deep dive in Dipping Through Geometries.
  4. What is the intersection of DD and AI? Merritt Smith considers in the FCPA Blog.
  5. OFAC enforcement action demonstrates need for pre-acquisition due diligence? Lawyers from Paul, Weiss in the NYU Compliance and Enforcement Blog.
  6. What is ethical AI? Tom Austin explores on the Analyst Syndicate.
  7. What are the shifting reasons for FCPA enforcement? Kevin Keller on the Global Anti-corruption Blog.
  8. What are the risks to investors in Uber? Shannon Bond reports in the Financial Times. (sub req’d)
  9. This week Tom explores the intersection of Shakespeare and Compliance through the lens of King Lear. Check out the following: Part 1-Innovation;Part 2– Changing Your Focus; Part 3– Engaging Your Audience; Part 4-a Different Interpretation; and Part 5-The Fool.The podcast is available on multiple sites: the FCPA Compliance Report, iTunes, JDSupra, Panoplyand YouTube. The Compliance Podcast Network is now also on Spotify and Corporate Compliance Insights.

Tom Fox is the Compliance Evangelist and can be reached at tfox@tfoxlaw.com. Jay Rosen is Mr. Monitor and can be reached at jrosen@affiliatedmonitors.com.
For more information on how an independent monitor can help improve your company’s ethics and compliance program, visit our sponsor Affiliated Monitors at www.affiliatedmonitors.com.

Categories
This Week in FCPA

This Week in FCPA-Episode 148 – the Hope Springs Eternal edition

As Opening Day near and the Astros are predicted to unseat Jay’s Red Sox to win the 2019 World Series, both lads are eternally hopeful for their hometown heroes. While debating this issue, they also take a look at some of this week’s top compliance and ethics stories which caught their collective eyes this week.

  1. Former Hong Kong official sentenced for FCPA violations. Harry Cassin reports in the FCPA Blog. Matthew Goldstein reports on how to reduce your FCPA sentence in the New York Times.
  2. SEC awards two whistleblowers $50MM. Kristin Broughton in the WSJ Risk and Compliance Journal. Matt Kelly takes a deep dive in Radical Compliance. Doug Cornelius gets snarky in Compliance Building. Jonathan Marks weighs in on Board and Fraud.
  3. Jonathan Ruschand William Weaver debate whether corruption can be measured. Both on the FCPA Blog.
  4. Was it fraud or was it incompetency? The HP v. Autonomy civil trial begins in London. The BBC
  5. What is the difference in whistleblowing and extortion? Joe Mont explains in Compliance Week. (sub req’d)
  6. What are your supply chain risks? Russ Berland explores in Part 1 of a two-part blog post series on Corporate Compliance Insights.
  7. Looking at enforcement of financial market crimes in Canada and UK. Anita Anand reports in NYU’s Compliance and Enforcement Blog.
  8. What steps can you take to reduce whistleblower retaliation? Matt Kelly opines in Navex Global’s Ethics and Compliance Matters
  9. OECD slams Canadian government for interfering in SNC-Lavalin corruption investigation. Jonathan Rausch reports in Dipping Through Geometries.
  10. Join Tom and AMI’s Jesse Caplan for a 5-part exploration of emerging issues in healthcare compliance and monitoring. Check out the following: Part 1-Opioid Crisis-Legal issue; Part 2– Opioid Crisis-compliance solution; Part 3– the regulators; Part 4-the monitoring healthcare organizations; and Part 5-proactive monitoring. The podcast is available on multiple sites: the FCPA Compliance Report, iTunes, JDSupra, Panoplyand YouTube. The Compliance Podcast Network is now also on Spotifyand Corporate Compliance Insights.
  11. In Houston on April 11? Join the Greater Houston Business and Ethics Roundtable for a presentation for one year look back on GDPR. Registration and information are here.
  12. Check out the latest edition of Great Women in Compliance where Mary Shirley visits with Marianne Ibrahim.

Tom Fox is the Compliance Evangelist and can be reached at tfox@tfoxlaw.com. Jay Rosen is       Mr. Monitor and can be reached at jrosen@affiliatedmonitors.com.
For more information on how an independent monitor can help improve your company’s ethics and compliance program, visit our sponsor Affiliated Monitors at www.affiliatedmonitors.com.