Categories
AI Today in 5

AI Today in 5: December 18, 2025, The Will Apple Get AI Mojo in 2026 Edition

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

  1. Will Apple get back into the AI game in 2026. (CNBC)
  2. Oracle $10bn Michigan data centre in limbo. (FT)
  3. Client enablement with AI. (FinTechGlobal)
  4. Hospital call center drives ROI with AI. (HealthcareITNews)
  5. Coursera to buy Udemy, creating a $2.5 bn firm to target AI training. (Reuters)

For more information on the use of AI in Compliance programs, my new book, Upping Your Game. You can purchase a copy of the book on Amazon.com

Categories
AI Today in 5

AI Today in 5: December 17, 2025, The Bombshell Rent Edition

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

  1. Oracle is committed to $248bn in data center rent payments. (Bloomberg)
  2. Compliance can be a competitive advantage. (FinanceMagnates)
  3. Hybrid AI reshaping compliance and risk management. (FinTechGlobal)
  4. Governing AI in the wake of the new CA AI law. (Forbes)
  5. Agentic AI transforming compliance. (FinTechGlobal)

For more information on the use of AI in Compliance programs, my new book, Upping Your Game. You can purchase a copy of the book on Amazon.com

Categories
Compliance and AI

Compliance and AI: Automate the Noise Away – The Future of Financial Crime Detection with Oracle’s Jason Somrak

What is the role of Artificial Intelligence in compliance? What about Machine Learning? Are you using ChatGPT? These questions are just three of the many we will explore in this cutting-edge podcast series, Compliance and AI, hosted by Tom Fox, the award-winning Voice of Compliance. In this insightful episode, Tom Fox interviews Jason Somrak, Chief of Product & Strategy – Financial Crime & Compliance at Oracle Financial Services Software Limited.

They delve into the evolving role of AI in combating financial crimes and the proactive potential of AI in compliance investigations. Highlighting the transformative power of AI, Jason explains its applications, ranging from detection to investigation, and its impact on regulatory practices. They also discuss future emerging challenges in risk management and the collaboration between humans and AI in enhancing financial crime detection and compliance.

Key highlights:

  • AI’s Role in Financial Crime Prevention
  • Proactive and Preventive Measures
  • AI in Investigations and Triage
  • Automating the Noise Away
  • Regulatory Interactions and Challenges
  • Emerging Challenges in Risk Management
  • Future of AI in Compliance
  • Corporate Culture and AI Adoption

Resources:

Jason Somrak on LinkedIn

Oracle Financial Services

Tom Fox

Instagram

Facebook

YouTube

Twitter

LinkedIn

Categories
Innovation in Compliance

Innovation in Compliance – AI in Financial Crime and Compliance: A Deep Dive with Oracle’s Jason Somrak

Innovation comes in many areas, and compliance professionals need to be ready for it and embrace it. Join Tom Fox, the Voice of Compliance, as he visits with top innovative minds, thinkers, and creators in the award-winning Innovation in Compliance podcast. In this episode,  host Tom Fox welcomes Jason Somrak, the Chief of Product and Strategy for Financial Crime and Compliance at Oracle.

Jason elaborates on his professional background and his decade-long journey at Oracle. He delves into the transformative role of AI in combating financial crimes, exploring how AI has evolved from predicting false positives to using behavioral models and generative AI to enhance investigation processes. Their discussion touches on AI’s potential to shift from detection to prevention, the impact of real-time AML, and the significance of automating noise in compliance investigations. They also discuss the importance of regulatory relationships and the emerging challenges in risk management. The episode concludes with insights into the future skills needed in compliance roles and the critical role of corporate culture in implementing AI solutions.

Key highlights:

  • AI’s Role in Financial Crime Prevention
  • Proactive vs. Reactive Approaches
  • AI in Investigations and Triage
  • Emerging Challenges in Risk Management
  • Future of AI in Compliance
  • Skills for Next-Gen Compliance Officers

Resources:

Jason Somrak on LinkedIn

Oracle Financial Services

Tom Fox

Instagram

Facebook

YouTube

Twitter

LinkedIn

Categories
Blog

Reprioritizing Your Third-Party Risk Management Program – Key 2022 FCPA Enforcement Actions

From the Foreign Corruption Practices Act (FCPA) enforcement actions in 2022, one clear theme emerges; that is, organizations must reprioritize their third-party risk management programs. Many companies are becoming complacent in this arena, not realizing the potential consequences of not properly assessing their third-party risk management practices. I recently had the opportunity to visit with Alexander Cotoia of the Volkov Law Group to discuss importance of reprioritizing third-party risk management and how organizations can assess the effectiveness of their current practices. We review three 2022 FCPA enforcement actions to explore the importance of proper third-party risk management and how to avoid the potential consequences of not properly assessing these risks. Join us as we explore the details and implications of these enforcement actions and how organizations can reprioritize their compliance programs for the ever-changing dynamics of third-party risk management.

Here are the steps you need to follow to reprioritize your third-party risk management program.:

  1. Understand that third-party risk, especially as it pertains to anti bribery and corruption concerns, is a universal constant and still the highest risk.
  2. Reassess the framework by which third parties are evaluated and objectively evaluate the totality of risks posed by a potential business partner to the organization.
  3. Implement a risk-based approach to third party risk management.
  1. Understanding third-party risk

Understanding that third party risk, especially as it pertains to anti-bribery and corruption, is a universal constant is an important step in the risk management process. As evidenced by three key enforcement actions, ABB Limited, Oracle and GOL Airlines, organizations must evaluate the risks posed by potential business partners and ensure that the information collected is adequate to objectively assess the totality of the risks. Organizations should be aware that the DOJ requires companies to adopt a risk-based approach to third party risk management. To ensure that the organization is compliant with these regulations, they should review their existing practices and be prepared to supplement them if necessary. Additionally, organizations should be aware that they may be given credit for voluntary disclosure and cooperation efforts when faced with potential violations. This may be beneficial when determining penalties and is an important factor to consider when dealing with third party risk.

  1. Reassess your third-party framework

Reassessing the framework by which third parties are evaluated and objectively evaluating the totality of risks posed by a potential business partner to the organization is a critical step in reprioritizing your third-party risk management strategy. This should be approached holistically, focusing on the information being collected and its adequacy in objectively evaluating risks. Organizations should adopt a risk-based approach, as recommended by the DOJ, and not simply have a one size fits all approach. This approach should include due diligence, assessing the potential partner’s reputation and business practices, verifying their legitimacy and background, and understanding their country of origin and its laws. Additionally, organizations should consider the potential partner’s relationship with government officials and whether it could violate any anti-bribery or corruption laws. If any of these issues are identified, organizations should look into it further to ensure that their partner is compliant. By doing this, organizations can ensure that they are not engaging in any activities that could be deemed illegal or unethical. 

  1. Implement a risk-based approach

Implementing a risk-based approach to third party risk management is essential to any organization’s compliance program. This involves assessing the external parties on which an organization relies operationally, and identifying any risks associated with those external parties. This assessment should include evaluating their qualifications and experience to ensure they are able to meet the organization’s expectations. Additionally, organizations should consider conducting background checks on potential external parties, and assessing any potential conflicts of interest that may arise. Once potential external parties have been identified, organizations should consider conducting due diligence to ensure that the external party has not been involved in any fraud, bribery, or other criminal activities. Organizations should also consider developing contracts and compliance policies for external parties and monitoring their activities to ensure compliance. Finally, organizations should consider developing a training program for their external parties to ensure they understand the organization’s expectations and policies. By implementing a risk-based approach to third party risk management, organizations can reduce the risk of an FCPA violation and ensure their organization remains compliant.

Third-party risk management one of the most critical components of any organization’s compliance program. Organizations should take the initiative to reprioritize third-party risk management and assess the effectiveness of their current practices. Through the exploration of three enforcement actions and the introduction of the joint compliance note, this article has highlighted the importance of properly assessing third-party risk and how to best prepare for the ever-changing dynamics of third-party risk management. By implementing a risk-based approach to third party risk management, organizations can protect themselves from potential violations of the FCPA and ensure their organization remains compliant. With the right tools, processes, and dedication you can achieve the same results and protect your organization from costly fines and penalties.

For more information, on Diligent’s Third-party Risk Management solution, click here.

Listen to Alexander Cotoia on the podcast series, sponsored by Diligent here.

Check out the Volkov Law Group here.

Categories
Compliance Into the Weeds

Compliance Issues & Events We Are Looking at for 2023

The award-winning, Compliance into the Weeds is the only weekly podcast that takes a deep dive into a compliance-related topic, literally going into the weeds to explore a subject. In this episode, Matt and I consider a list of compliance issues and events worth watching in the next 12 months, likely to happen in the coming year, that will be most consequential for corporate compliance and audit professionals.

For 2023 (at least at this point), it is the following:

·      SEC rules on greenhouse gases.

·      PCAOB enforcement.

·      The FTC and privacy enforcement.

·      Fallout from the Oracle FCPA enforcement action.

·      New DOJ corporate crime enforcement policies.

·      An ESG controller.

·      Crash and burn of Elon Musk-style corporate governance.

 Resources

Matt Kelly in Radical Compliance

Categories
Corruption, Crime and Compliance

A Deep Dive into the Oracle FCPA SEC Settlement

Oracle Corporation settled its second FCPA case in ten years. It agreed to pay the SEC $23 million to resolve allegations that its subsidiaries in Turkey, India and the United Arab Emirates maintained slush funds to bribe foreign officials. Ten years ago in 2012, Oracle paid the SEC $2 million for creating millions of dollars in off-the-books accounts at its India subsidiary. Join Michael Volkov as he takes a deep dive in the Oracle case and provides valuable lessons for managing third-party corruption risks.

  • In the SEC’s mind, Oracle is a recidivist, having its second enforcement action case in 10 years.
  • The settlement for $23 million underscored the power of the FCPA provisions, which mandate effective internal controls and accurate books and records, and can be applied to a wide range of conduct beyond foreign bribery, Michael remarks. 
  • The controls that Oracle put in place to prevent improper use of discounts and marketing reimbursements were not effective because there was a lack of compliance culture within the business.
  • The Oracle case is one that should be studied by compliance professionals, Michael believes. It reminds you to look at your own controls that surround discounting and ensure that the necessary documentation is carried out. “No matter what controls you have in place, they still have to be adhered to with a true culture of compliance underneath it as a foundation,” he adds.

 

Resources

SEC Oracle Case

Email Michael: mvolkov@volkovlaw.com

Categories
GalloCast

Gallocast – Episode 4 – October 2022

Welcome to the GalloCast. You have heard of the Manningcast in football. Now we have the GalloCast in compliance. The two top brothers in compliance, Nick and Gio Gallo, come together for a free-form exploration of compliance topics. It is a great insight on compliance brought to you by the co-CEOs of ComplianceLine. Fun, witty, and insightful with a dash of the two brothers throughout. It’s like listening to the Brothers Gallo talk compliance at the dinner table. Hosted by Tom Fox, the Voice of Compliance. Topics in this episode include:

  • ComplianceLine rebranded to Ethico. How does this reflect the overall products and services of the organization in 2022 and beyond.
  • The Oracle FCPA Enforcement Action. What are some key lessons for compliance?
  • The Monaco Memo. Focus on employee incentives and clawbacks.
  • Employees having two jobs post pandemic. When is it a conflict of interest?
  • Quiet quitting and the opportunity for employee engagement.

Resources

Nick Gallo on LinkedIn

Gio Gallo on LinkedIn

Ethico

Categories
Blog

Use Your Eyes in Compliance

One thing compliance professionals are rarely trained to do is trust your eyes. This may be because it seems too obvious. After all the well-known Howard Sklar maxim of “Water is Wet” is largely based on the fact that if something is so obvious you may not need to train on it. Yet two recent events make clear we all need to ‘trust our eyes’ in a variety of settings. The first is in the National Football League (NFL) and it involves Miami Dolphin quarterback, Tua Tagovailoa. Three weeks ago, he was tackled, thrown to the ground and his head snapped against the tuft. This is clearly a sign a concussion may be coming. After Tua got up, he stumbled and fell and then had to be helped up by a teammate and off the field.

I say all of this with absolute certainty as I was watching the game Dolphins v. Bills and saw it along with some 70,000 in the stadium and millions on television. Unfortunately, those who did not see these actions of Tua after the hit was the Dolphins medical staff who, rather amazingly (or perhaps not), cleared him under the NFL Concussion Protocol and sent him back to play in the second half of the game. Again, finding he was fine under the concussion protocol, he was allowed to play. The Dolphins claimed that he had sustained a “back injury” and that was why he stumbled and fell, not motor impairment. The next week, Tua took another shot to his head and this time he did not get up, stumble and fall. He did not get up at all. According to New York Times (NYT), he left the field on a stretcher and was taken immediately to a local hospital.

It was clear to anyone who saw the first concussion, that it was just that a concussion. However, “because of the incident, the league and union said they were considering changing the protocols, which currently allow a player with “gross motor instability” to return to the game if doctors decide there is an orthopedic reason for his unsteadiness.” Some doctor said the instability was due to Tua’s bad back and that was good enough. The NYT went on to further note, “The expected change will be to instead establish ataxia, a term describing impaired balance or coordination caused by damage to the brain or nerves, as a sign that automatically disqualifies a player from returning to the game.”

All of this informs compliance programs and compliance professionals as sometimes actions do not simply pass the eye test. I thought of this in the context of the recent Oracle Corporation Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) enforcement action. In this Oracle matter, the bribery schemes involved distributors, which were used as not only conduits to pay bribes, but as the mechanism to create a pot of money to pay bribes. The Oracle compliance program allowed sales employees at the subsidiaries to request monies meant to reimburse distributors for certain marketing expenses associated with selling Oracle products. There was a multi-pronged approval process in place. For marketing reimbursements “under $5,000, first-level supervisors at the Subsidiaries could approve the purchase order requests without any corroborating documentation indicating that the marketing activity actually took place.” Above this $5,000 threshold, additional approvals were required with additional requirements for business justification and documentation.

You can no doubt see where this is going as this internal control gap allowed for abuse. Indeed the Orderstated, “Oracle Turkey sales employees opened purchase orders totaling approximately $115,200 to [distributors] in 2018 that were ostensibly for marketing purposes and were individually under this $5,000 threshold.” That is at least 23 different expense requests to reimburse for marketing made under the threshold. Of course, there were no marketing efforts by the distributors and no follows up audits, inspections or even questions to confirm that the marketing expenses had actually occurred. The entire business unit was in on the fraud, and it stole money from the corporate office to fund it slush fund to pay bribes.

Clearly compliance was not using its eyes for if it had, it would have seen that there was a large number of marketing reimbursement requests at or below the threshold which required additional oversight and approval. Using your eyes does not mean that it is simply your eyes which catch nefarious conduct, it means that you use your eyes and if it something unusual occurs then additional investigation is warranted.

All of this brings to the second lesson from the NFL’s sordid tale involving Tua Tagovailoa; which is if the protocol does not work, change the protocol. Renee Miller, writing The Athletic, said, “The purpose of the onsite concussion “exam is to determine if any symptoms are apparent in a neurological exam (looking at reflexes, cranial nerve function and limited cognitive skills), and if so, whether they arise from a neurological origin.” It does not take into account what we all saw with our eyes, the stumbling, Tua grabbing his helmet and inability to focus. The NFL will now make a change to consider the other factors Tua exhibited. In other words, they changed the protocol to require and allow for additional information about the injured player in making a determination of that player’s returning to the game.

In the case of Oracle, there was a high risk of business unit employees using the marketing reimbursement requests to create a pot of money to pay bribes. We know this because this same bribery scheme was used by Oracle India to pay bribes and do business corruption, all of which was the subject of a prior FCPA enforcement action. Pretty clearly allowing business unit employees to obtain marketing reimbursements was something that would lead to disaster; which it did just as the Dolphins allowing Tua to come back into the second half of the Bills game where he sustained his first concussion was disastrous for Tua as he was much more seriously injured just the next week.

In compliance never forget to ‘use your eyes’ in testing your compliance program. If something does not look right, do additional investigation. If you do not do so, you may end up like Oracle, now one of 15 FCPA recidivists, a list no company wants to be on.

Categories
FCPA Compliance Report

Oracle FCPA Enforcement Action

In this episode, I take on a solo pod to discuss and consider the Oracle FCPA enforcement action brought by the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Key areas we discuss on this podcast are:

  • Background facts.
  • Same facts in same country?
  • Failure of a paper program.
  • The need for data analytics.
  • Where is the DOJ?
  • What are the lesson learned going forward?

 Resources

For a White Paper on the Oracle FCPE enforcement action, email tfox@tfoxlaw.com