Introduction

Since the landscape-altering February 10, 2025 executive order (E.O.) from President Trump "pausing" enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practice Act (FCPA) and altering other key elements of the U.S. Department of Justice's (DOJ) structure for investigating and prosecuting foreign corruption, corporate enforcement remains largely at a standstill. There has, however, been action in several ongoing cases involving individuals, including DOJ decisions to proceed to trial in several actions. We also discuss below various updates at the DOJ and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), an announcement by California's Attorney General (AG) suggesting that the state is preparing to step up enforcement against foreign bribery under state law, and various international developments. While many questions remain as to how the enforcement environment related to international anti-corruption will play out in the next few years, there remain many reasons for companies to remain vigilant of and to respond appropriately to FCPA risks. 

It is worth noting several direct responses to the February 10 E.O., as well as other statements by the U.S. government that cite corruption as an ongoing concern even for the current administration.  

Members of Congress Request Information on Impact of February 10 E.O. from DOJ

On February 21, 2025, ranking Members of Congress on several House oversight committees sent a letter to AG Pam Bondi that, among other issues, questioned the rationale behind the E.O. Stating that "the Order asserts that suspension of FCPA investigative and enforcement activity is necessary to promote "strategic business advantages" for U.S. businesses abroad," the letter argues that "DOJ's own longstanding guidance squarely contradicts this rationale, making explicit that '[c]orporate bribery is bad for business,' in that it 'raises the risks of doing business, putting a company's bottom line and reputation in jeopardy[,]' and thus undermines companies' 'long-term interests and the best interests of their investors.'" 

The letter requests that the DOJ provide information on "the number of investigations involving potential bribery of foreign officials and/or associated money laundering that have been paused or terminated following the President's February 10, 2025, Executive Order," along with other requests. Any information provided to the ranking members has not been made public to date. 

Former OECD Leaders Urge DOJ to Enforce Anti-Bribery Compliance

On February 13, 2025, in response to the announced pause on FCPA enforcement, a coalition of former Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) General Counsels and Chairs of the OECD Working Group on Bribery addressed a letter to AG Bondi, asking her to renew U.S. efforts to enforce anti-bribery laws. The letter acknowledges the U.S. desire to ensure "an even playing field" but opines that such concerns "would be best addressed by the United States resuming vigorous enforcement and bringing its influence to bear on other countries to more effectively enforce compliance with similar laws by their own companies and nationals." The letter emphasizes that unlike in the days of the FCPA's initial adoption, the prohibition of bribery has now become "a universal norm" by which the U.S. and hundreds of other countries have committed to abide. 

The letter further notes that most FCPA enforcement in recent years has targeted foreign corporate defendants and individuals rather than disadvantaging U.S. companies, generating billions of dollars in revenue for the U.S. treasury. The letter stresses the risks posed to U.S. companies by weakening FCPA enforcement due to the likely increase in bribe demands by foreign public officials and heightened scrutiny on U.S. companies by other countries' anti-bribery authorities. However, at the same time, the letter expresses concerns that other countries "engaged in significant international business are not adequately enforcing anti-bribery laws" and opines that the U.S. should encourage all G20 countries to become parties to the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention to promote compliance. In conclusion, the letter urges the U.S. to "preserve its standing as a responsible anti-bribery law enforcer and the influence this affords it within the [OECD Working Group on Bribery] in order to induce all Parties to investigate and prosecute their own companies operating abroad."

AG Bondi has not publicly responded to this letter to date, and the DOJ, as noted below, did not attend the March 2025 meeting of the OECD's Working Group on Bribery. 

USTR 2025 National Trade Estimate Cites Risk from Corruption to International Trading System

On March 31, 2025, the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) issued the annual 2025 National Trade Estimate (NTE) Report to the president. The NTE Report addresses various types of "foreign trade barriers" to and issues regarding the international trading system and its impact on U.S. economic interests, including the interest of U.S. companies. The report often provides a basis for U.S. government actions to protect such interests by acting against identified "foreign trade barriers." 

On page 3 of the 2025 Report, the USTR made the following general statements regarding the effects of bribery and corruption on U.S. companies:

The prevalence of corruption is a consistent complaint from U.S. firms that trade with or invest in other economies. Corruption takes many forms and affects trade and development in different ways. In many countries and economies, it affects customs practices, licensing decisions, and the award of government procurement contracts. If left unchecked, bribery and corruption can negate market access gained through trade negotiations, frustrate broader reforms and economic stabilization programs, and undermine the foundations of the international trading system. The United States continues to play a leading role in addressing bribery and corruption in international business transactions and has made real progress over the past quarter century building international coalitions to fight bribery and corruption.

The report also discusses country-specific issues related to bribery and corruption among "other barriers" to trade and investment by U.S. companies, including calling out "inadequate" enforcement of local anti-corruption laws. The report also notes issues related to corruption in government procurement as a barrier to effective U.S. competition in that sector for many countries. 

The 2025 NTE Report's treatment of bribery and corruption as a barrier to trade that injures U.S. companies' interests is consistent with prior reports issued by previous administrations of both political parties and reflects language that has represented a general consensus among U.S. policymakers for many years. It is unclear how this NTE Report language can be read consistently with assertions made in President Trump's February 10 E.O. We recommend that companies continue to assess how various elements of the U.S. government address corruption and its effects in calibrating their compliance programs over the next few years. 

DOJ Developments

DOJ Ends Glencore Monitorship Early 

In March 2025, the DOJ moved to terminate the independent compliance monitorship imposed on Glencore plc as part of the company's 2022 resolution of foreign bribery and market manipulation charges discussed in our FCPA Summer Review 2022. That resolution included a guilty plea and over $1.1 billion in penalties, as well as the appointment of an independent monitor for a term of three years. In a filing to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (SDNY), DOJ prosecutors used their "sole discretion" under the plea agreement to end the monitorship approximately 15 months earlier than originally scheduled, stating that the decision followed an assessment of "the facts and circumstances." The DOJ did not elaborate further on what specific factors supported the early conclusion in this case, though the first Trump administration DOJ somewhat disfavored monitorships. Indeed, the DOJ's monitorship policy, which was modified under the Biden administration, no longer appears on the DOJ's website, suggesting that the DOJ might be working on new revisions. 

DOJ Closes Investigations of PetroNor and Digicel

On April 2, 2025, Oslo-based oil and gas company PetroNor E&P ASA (PetroNor) announced that the DOJ had closed its investigation into the company's operations in Africa. The DOJ inquiry, first disclosed by PetroNor in 2022, focused on potential corruption-related conduct. In its public statement, PetroNor attributed the closure to the February 10 E.O. PetroNor noted that the company continues to cooperate with a parallel investigation by Økokrim, Norway's anti-corruption authority, and expects further clarity on that matter later this year.

In mid-April 2025, media reports noted that Jamaica-based telecoms provider Digicel had announced that the DOJ had informed the company on April 1, 2025 that an FCPA probe of company operations had been closed. Digicel had informed creditors of the FCPA investigation in November 2024.

Key DOJ Personnel Shifts

In March 2025, DOJ announced a series of senior leadership changes within its Criminal Division. On March 5, the Senate confirmed Todd Blanche as Deputy Attorney General (DAG). Blanche, a former federal prosecutor and defense attorney for President Trump, now oversees all 93 U.S. Attorneys and major federal law enforcement components, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA). During his confirmation hearing, according to reports in Global Investigations Review, Blanche defended the FCPA enforcement "pause" pursuant to the February 10 E.O. According to various media reports, DAG Blanche issued a draft internal memorandum on March 25, 2025, to DOJ components proposing sweeping changes to the DOJ's structure and enforcement priorities. Among the cited changes would be cuts to the number of attorneys in the Fraud Section focused on FCPA cases, as well as in DOJ components focused on national security, export controls enforcement, and Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) cases. The memorandum also reportedly proposed a substantial reduction in staffing for the DOJ's Public Integrity Section. The memorandum requested comments from the leaders of the relevant DOJ components by April 2, 2025; as of the date of publication, there is not further information regarding these proposed changes.  

Following Blanche's confirmation, according to media reports, the DOJ reassigned Glenn Leon, who had served as Chief of the DOJ's Fraud Section since September 2022, to a role within the DAG's office. As of this publication, the DOJ has not named a successor to Leon and the Fraud Section continues to operate under acting Chief Lorinda Laryea. The DOJ also appointed Matthew Galeotti, a former Assistant U.S. Attorney in the Eastern District of New York, as Head of the DOJ's Criminal Division. Galeotti replaces Antoinette "Toni" Bacon, who had been leading the Criminal Division in an acting capacity since January 2025. As of the date of publication, the administration has not nominated a candidate to become the Assistant AG for the division. 

OECD Working Group Absence

In a notable departure from past practice, the DOJ did not participate in the March 2025 quarterly meeting of the OECD Working Group on Bribery in Paris. The Working Group serves as the principal forum for monitoring compliance with the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention and includes peer reviews and discussions on enforcement trends among its 46 member countries. The U.S. played a central role in the Convention's development and has historically been one of its most active enforcers. 

The DOJ did not provide a public explanation for its absence, and the U.S. Department of State reportedly did not send a representative in the DOJ's place. Ahead of the meeting, as noted above, a group of former OECD officials publicly expressed concern that the new administration's pause of FCPA enforcement could undermine the U.S.'s longstanding leadership within the Working Group and weaken global momentum behind the Convention's enforcement framework. It remains to be seen whether the U.S. will attend the next OECD Working Group meeting in June 2025. 

Actions Against Individuals

The February 10 E.O. requires the AG to review existing FCPA prosecutions within a 180-day period. This review has prompted the DOJ to abandon a case against two individuals after six years of ongoing litigation and others may follow. On the other hand, after several other defendants with impending trial dates filed motions to dismiss charges against them in light of the E.O., the DOJ nonetheless determined that those cases should move forward. 

Case Against Former Cognizant Executives Dismissed 

On April 2, 2025, federal prosecutors moved to dismiss the long-running FCPA case against former Cognizant President Gordon Coburn and former Chief Legal Officer Steven Schwartz, marking the first time the DOJ has dropped charges in an FCPA case since the issuance of the February 10 E.O. In a concise motion, the DOJ stated that "after consultation with the Office of the Attorney General, the Government hereby moves to dismiss… based on the recent assessment of the Executive Order's application to this matter." The U.S. District Court of the New Jersey granted the motion to dismiss with prejudice the next day. 

The case against the two ex-Cognizant executives has been ongoing since February 2019, when a federal grand jury indicted them for their alleged roles in paying $2 million in bribes to Indian government officials in exchange for construction permits (in the same month, the company entered into a declination agreement with the DOJ and, in parallel, settled with the SEC; as a result Cognizant agreed to pay the SEC and DOJ approximately $28 million in total disgorgement, prejudgment interest, and penalties). As previously reported, several pretrial disputes and delays preceded this dismissal. Notably, on March 11, 2025, the court denied the government's motion to delay the case by 180 days, citing defendants' right to a speedy trial. 

The two former Cognizant executives had separately been the subject of an SEC action, which was stayed pending the resolution of the DOJ case. On April 10, 2025, the SEC sent a letter to the judge overseeing the case stating that the agency and defendants wished the judge to "restore this case to the active docket and stay the action to allow the Parties to explore a potential resolution." The parties also agreed to submit a joint status report on the matter within 60 days. 

Prosecution of Former Smartmatic Executives to Proceed 

On April 9, 2025, federal prosecutors moved forward with their case against former Smartmatic executives Roger Alejandro Pinate Martinez and Jorge Miguel Vasquez, after having "conducted a detailed review of the instant case as contemplated by [the February 10] Executive Order." In August 2024, a federal grand jury in the Southern District of Florida indicted Martinez and Vasquez, along with two others, for their alleged participation in a bribery and money laundering scheme to pay at least $1 million in bribes to a Philippines official in exchange for obtaining approximately $182 million in contracts related to the administration of the 2016 Philippines elections.

On March 12, co-defendants Martinez and Vasquez filed a motion to continue several pretrial deadlines. Citing the February 10 E.O., they reasoned that, "in recent days and weeks, judges in other pending FCPA matters have stayed or continued deadlines in those matters, to allow that review to proceed without wasting the resources of courts or litigants." The government consented to the 30-day continuance and thus the court granted the defendants' unopposed motion. Both parties have proceeded with filing pretrial motions regarding discovery and evidence in anticipation of trial. 

DOJ to Move Forward with Prosecution of Corsa Coal Executive After "Priority Review"

The DOJ's FCPA case against former Corsa Coal Corporation Vice President Charles Hunter Hobson will also move forward after a priority review by the DOJ. On April 11, 2025, the DOJ filed a "notice of authorization" stating that "the Government has completed its detailed review of the instant case as contemplated by [the February 10] Executive Order…and intends to proceed to trial." The DOJ requested a status conference to "set the date for trial of this matter."

Three years ago, in March 2022, the DOJ brought FCPA, money laundering, and wire fraud charges against Hobson in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania for his alleged role in a scheme to bribe Egyptian government officials, including the Chairman of Al Nasr Company for Coke and Chemicals (Al Nasr), an Egyptian state-owned and state-controlled company, via $4.8 million of payments to a third-party intermediary. Hobson was the executive in charge of the relationship and allegedly secured $143 million in coal contracts for Corsa Coal in exchange for the bribes. As reported in our FCPA Spring Review 2023, the DOJ declined to prosecute Corsa Coal itself for this conduct but required the company to disgorge $1.2 million of profit from the contracts.

On February 20, 2025, 10 days after President Trump issued the February 10 E.O., Hobson requested a 180-day continuance of his trial, arguing that "it is reasonable for Mr. Hobson to believe that the state of his case might change after the stringent review required by the Executive Order." In response, on March 4, the DOJ filed a motion stating that Hobson's case was under prioritized review and that the government would provide an update by March 18. On March 6, the court stayed the matter and then vacated the previously scheduled April 21 start date for the trial. 

Prosecution of American Businessman and Others for Alleged Honduran Bribery to Continue

Similarly, on April 11, 2025, the DOJ filed a motion with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, stating that the DOJ "has completed its detailed review of the instant case as contemplated by [the February 10] Executive Order… and intends to proceed to trial" in its prosecution of Carl Zaglin, Aldo Nestor Marchena, and Francisco Roberto Cosenza Centeno for conspiracy, violating the FCPA, and money laundering. 

In December 2023, the DOJ unsealed an indictment charging Zaglin and Marchena for their alleged payment of bribes to Centeno, a former Honduran official, in order to secure procurement contracts from the Honduran National Police. In a pretrial conference on February 18, 2025, the DOJ informed the court that they would be complying with the February 10 E.O. and the parties agreed to postpone the trial date to April 28. On March 28, the defendants moved to delay the trial to June 2025 at the earliest to allow for the availability of key witnesses. The court has yet to rule on the recent motions as of the date of publication.

Corruption Charges Against New York City Mayor Dismissed

On April 2, 2025, Judge Dale Ho granted the DOJ's motion to dismiss charges against New York City Mayor Eric Adams with prejudice. Judge Ho dismissed the case because "a court, if it were so inclined, would have no way to compel the government to prosecute a case," but criticized the DOJ's rationale for dismissal. In his decision, Judge Ho noted that the DOJ's motion to dismiss was based not on the merits of the case but on the DOJ's assertion that "continuing these proceedings would interfere with the Mayor's ability to govern, thereby threatening federal immigration initiatives and policies." 

The case began in September 2024, when federal prosecutors in the  SDNY charged Adams with conspiracy to commit wire fraud, wire fraud, bribery, and two counts of soliciting donations from foreign nationals for seeking and accepting illegal campaign contributions from Turkish officials and nationals, as well as luxury travel to and accommodations in Turkey. In February 2025, the acting SDNY U.S. Attorney, Danielle Sassoon, resigned after senior DOJ personnel in Washington, DC, directed SDNY to dismiss the charges against Adams. Soon after, Washington-based DOJ officials took over the prosecution and filed a motion to dismiss.

Glenn Oztemel Argues for Acquittal or Retrial After Conviction 

On January 23, 2025, Glenn Oztemel — whom a Connecticut jury found guilty of violating the FCPA and related offenses in September 2024 for his role in a Petrobras-related bribery and money laundering scheme— filed a motion arguing for his acquittal. Oztemel's primary argument was that the prosecution failed to meet its high burden of proving that Oztemel "committed any criminal offense within the statutory limitations period or was a knowing and willful participant in any conspiracy that existed within that period." In a response in opposition to the defense's motion filed on February 24, the DOJ stated that a jury viewed Oztemel's emails from 2018, within the statute of limitations, along with the remaining evidence presented during trial, as sufficient to find him guilty of conspiracy to violate the FCPA, three counts of violating the FCPA, money laundering conspiracy, and two counts of money laundering.

Failing the granting of an acquittal, Oztemel also moved for a retrial for three reasons. First, Oztemel claimed material errors in the jury instructions, including an error "conflating the elements of distinct theories of substantive FCPA liability," which Oztemel claimed allowed the jury to convict Oztemel for lawful conduct. Specifically, Oztemel argued that violating the FCPA under section 78dd-2 (a)(1) involves "two main actors: (1) the domestic concern/agent and (2) the foreign official" whereas as an "(a)(3) violation involves three main actors: (1) the domestic concern/agent, (2) the intermediary, and (3) the foreign official." Per Oztemel, the government's case was based on Oztemel's co-defendant, Eduardo Innecco, acting as the agent of domestic concern and an "any person" intermediary, contradictorily placing Innecco in two roles on opposite sides of a transaction. The prosecution countered that an "agent" of a domestic concern can also be the "any person" intermediary, "so long as the payment is made with the requisite knowledge that it will be passed along to an official." The prosecution further argued that "Section 78dd-2 may be violated in more than one way."

Oztemel's second argument for retrial was that the court placed unfair limits on the defense counsel's opening statements. The DOJ responded that the defense consented to the limits on the opening statement, while Oztemel maintains that his counsel repeatedly objected during pre-trial conferences. Third, Oztemel claimed the government's failure to disclose information that could be used to impeach the credibility of a witness, which Oztemel alleged violated Supreme Court requirements under Giglio v. United States, was not properly resolved. Regarding both the opening statement and the alleged Giglio violation, the prosecution argued that the court "gave Glenn Oztemel the opportunity to mitigate any perceived prejudice" during trial. The court has not yet rendered its decision on the dueling motions. 

New 1MDB Cases Signaled

Finally, on April 14, 2025, the DOJ filed a motion in an ongoing civil forfeiture case in California federal court involving roughly $300 million in assets related to the massive 1MDB scandal requesting a six-month stay in discovery (or a protective order) in the case because "[t]he Government is… still pursuing other criminal investigations arising out of 1MDB fraud" that will likely result in criminal charges. The 1MDB cases are directed by attorneys in the DOJ's Money Laundering and Asset Recovery Section (MLARS), and this recent filing indicates that President Trump's February 10 E.O. has not completely diverted MLARS resources away from ongoing investigations tied to public corruption and related money laundering issues.

SEC Developments

The change in administration that resulted in the February 10 E.O.  and a reorientation on key issues, such as cryptocurrency regulation, has had significant effects on the SEC in the first quarter of 2025. 

New Chair Confirmed

On April 9, 2025, the Senate confirmed former SEC Commissioner Paul Atkins as Chair of the SEC. Atkins will likely continue former Acting Chair Mark Uyeda's focus on cryptocurrency regulation and stepping back from some of the assertive positions taken by the agency under the Biden administration. 

SEC Personnel Reduction in Force 

On February 11, 2025, President Trump issued an E.O. implementing a Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) workforce initiative. The administration has stated that this initiative is designed to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of the federal workforce by reducing its size and limiting hiring to essential roles.

In line with the president's directive, the SEC has launched its own effort to reduce staff. On March 4, 2025, the SEC communicated an offer via email to eligible employees, proposing a $50,000 incentive to encourage them to resign or retire by April 4, 2025. This $50,000 offer, classified as a voluntary separation incentive or early retirement program, was made available to all SEC employees who were on the agency's payroll as of January 2024. The cutoff date for accepting or declining the offer was March 21, 2025, and employees who choose to return to the SEC within five years after accepting the offer must repay the $50,000 incentive in full. 

Reports indicate that approximately 600 employees — over 12 percent of the SEC's workforce — have agreed to accept the offer. A significant portion of those who opted to leave come from the SEC's Division of Enforcement and its Office of General Counsel, including several senior staff members. 

In a significant development related to the SEC's role in FCPA enforcement, on April 1, 2025, sources cited by Global Investigations Review indicated that senior SEC officials Charles Cain and Tracy Price, the current chief and deputy chief of the SEC's FCPA Unit, have resigned. Cain was appointed as the chief of the SEC's specialized national FCPA Unit in 2017, after serving as the unit's deputy chief since 2010. Price has held the role of deputy chief within the same unit since 2017. Under their tenure, Cain and Price led numerous high-profile and complex FCPA investigations, which resulted in historic corporate penalties, including fines, disgorgement, and prejudgment interest. 

These departures create a significant loss of institutional knowledge within the affected departments, including the Enforcement Division, and are likely to result in fewer, but lengthier, investigations.  

Freeze of FCPA Investigation of Calavo Growers, Inc. 

On March 12, 2025, Calavo Growers, Inc., a company that markets and distributes fresh and prepared avocados and other food products to food distributors, wholesalers, and retailers around the world, revealed in its annual 10-Q filing that the SEC had temporarily halted its investigation into the company's alleged violations of the FCPA. 

In its 10-Q filing on January 31, 2024, Calavo announced that its internal audit had uncovered FCPA-related issues in Mexico, which the Board had determined required further internal investigation. The company noted that it had proactively disclosed the findings of its internal investigation into its operations in Mexico with the SEC and the DOJ and was collaborating with both agencies in relation to the investigation. 

However, in its March 12 10-Q, Calavo updated its disclosure stating that the SEC had notified the company on February 18, 2025, that activity in the investigation had been postponed. According to the 10-Q, the SEC's decision to pause the investigation was in response to President Trump's February 10 E.O. halting enforcement of the FCPA for 180 days to allow the AG to issue new guidance on its enforcement. According to the company's 10-Q filing, in light of the E.O. and AG's February 5, 2025 Memorandum, the company does not "currently anticipate any near-term action from the government's FCPA inquiry." 

Final Rule on Enforcement Director's Subpoena Authority

On March 10, 2025, the SEC adopted a final rule that amends the agency's delegation of authority to the Director of Enforcement (Director). This change, which became effective March 14, 2025, removes the Director's ability to independently issue formal orders of investigation.

In the aftermath of the 2009 financial crisis, the SEC granted the Director the authority to issue orders of investigation for a one-year period without needing specific Commission approval. In 2020, the SEC extended this authority beyond the initial one-year timeframe. This delegation also permitted lower-level enforcement attorneys to issue subpoenas for documents and testimony from individuals and companies, without requiring approval from the SEC's commissioners. 

As a result of the March 2025 amendment, the process for opening a formal investigation at the agency will now require the agreement of a majority of commissioners. According to the SEC, this amendment is based on the Commission's experience with non-public investigations and is "intended to increase effectiveness by more closely aligning the Commission's use of its investigative resources with Commission priorities." 

Despite the reduction in the Director of Enforcement's delegated authority, the SEC has indicated that it will not be retreating from enforcement in certain areas. For example, former Acting Chair Uyeda stated at the Florida State Bar Association's Federal Securities Institute and M&A Conference on February 24, 2025, that "the Commission's enforcement work has not stopped' and that "the agency continues to bring charges for insider trading, inflating financial performance, and breaches of fiduciary duty by investment advisers, among other topics." Similarly, Antonia M. Apps, Regional Director of the SEC's New York Office and Acting Deputy Director of Enforcement, commented at the American Bar Association (ABA) White Collar Crime Institute on March 5, 2025, that the SEC is not "walking away" from enforcement but will focus on its "core areas," such as fraud and deceptive market practices. 

Agency Enforcement Priorities in Light of FCPA "Pause"

While the SEC has, for now, followed the DOJ's lead in pausing FCPA actions, former Acting Chair Uyeda has issued public statements on the SEC's enforcement approach, aligning with the Trump administration's efforts to redefine and limit the agency's regulatory reach. 

During his remarks at the 2025 Annual Washington Conference of the Institute of International Bankers on March 10, 2025, Uyeda expressed that the Commission had made a misstep by tying the regulation of Treasury markets to a "heavy-handed attempt to tamp down the crypto market." He further elaborated that he had instructed staff to reconsider part of a proposal that would have broadened the definition of an "exchange" in relation to crypto assets. 

Similarly, in a separate statement released on February 11, 2025, Uyeda revealed his opposition to the Enhancement and Standardization of Climate-Related Disclosures for Investors rule, which the Commission had adopted on March 6, 2024. He criticized the rule as "deeply flawed" and cautioned that it could potentially harm the capital markets and the U.S. economy. He argued that the rule would mandate the disclosure of a significant amount of irrelevant financial information, even though climate-related risks deemed financially material were already covered under existing disclosure requirements, and contended that the rule exceeded the SEC's authority. 
 
Subsequently, in a press release on March 27, 2025, the SEC announced that it had since voted to end its defense of the rules which were being challenged in court by state and private parties. Uyeda's comments, and the SEC's ensuing actions, are a strong indication of the current administration's efforts to restrain the scope of authority and the investigative and enforcement mechanisms of the SEC. 

California AG Issues Legal Alert that FCPA Violations Remain Actionable under State Unfair Competition Law

In an unusual announcement responding to the "pause" in DOJ enforcement of the FCPA, California AG Robert Bonta issued a legal alert on April 2, 2025, noting that violations of the FCPA remain "actionable" under California's Unfair Competition Law (UCL). AG Bonta's alert and accompanying press release underscore a growing divergence between federal and state enforcement priorities in the realm of international anti-corruption. The press release specifically states, "[i]llegal activity is still illegal. Paying bribes to foreign officials is not only unethical, it's also bad for business. Bribery erodes consumer confidence in the market and rewards corruption instead of competition… Despite the Trump administration's actions, I remind businesses in California that bribing foreign officials is illegal under California law and will not be tolerated." 

The California legal alert asserts that "[v]iolations of the FCPA are actionable under California's UCL," a broadly worded statute designed to protect fair business practices and consumers from unlawful, unfair, or fraudulent conduct.

Under the UCL, California can pursue violations of virtually any law — including federal statutes like the FCPA — as "unlawful" business practices. The legal alert notes that the law's reach has been recognized by courts in cases such as Korea Supply Co. v. Lockheed Martin Corp. In that case, an alleged FCPA violation was deemed a potentially valid predicate for a UCL action, although the claim ultimately failed on other grounds. The UCL covers businesses operating in California, as well as (per some court cases) out-of-state conduct that has substantial effects on or injuries to in-state individuals or entities.

Notably, UCL enforcement is not limited to California's AG. Private parties who can show that they suffered actual injury and a loss of money or property due to the unlawful conduct also have standing to bring UCL claims. The legal alert states that remedies under the UCL include civil penalties, disgorgement, and mechanisms such as restitution or injunctive relief. 

As we have noted, there are many good reasons for companies to maintain robust and appropriate anti-corruption compliance programs. The California legal alert provides a further reminder for companies operating in the state that "businesses should continue to maintain rigorous internal accounting controls and to ensure that they and their agents do not offer or pay anything of value to foreign officials to obtain or retain business." 

While California is currently leading this charge, it is possible that other states that have enacted broad consumer protection or related statutes could follow. 

International Developments

The first and early second quarters of 2025 saw several new developments in international attention to anti-corruption concerns, some of which indicate continued active enforcement in light of the U.S. FCPA "pause." 

U.K., French, and Swiss Officials Launch International Anti-Corruption Prosecutorial Taskforce

On March 20, 2025, the Director of the U.K. Serious Fraud Office (SFO), the Attorney General of the Swiss Confederation, and the Head of the National Financial Prosecution Office (PNF) in France issued a Founding Statement for a newly formed International Anti-Corruption Prosecutorial Taskforce (Taskforce) among the three countries. The Founding Statement establishes a joint commitment to tackle the threats of bribery and corruption within both national and international legal frameworks. The Founding Statement also states that the Taskforce will pursue various initiatives to strengthen collaboration and best practice sharing, including forming a "Leaders' Group" to facilitate strategic exchange and a "Working Group" for "devising proposals for co-operation on cases." The signatories state their intention to invite "other like-minded agencies" to join. Although the three agencies represented in this Taskforce have long been committed to cooperating in their anticorruption efforts, the announcement of this new initiative so soon after the pause on FCPA enforcement could signify that European authorities are taking action to fill the enforcement gap — as we predicted in our FCPA Winter Review 2025.

Other SFO Priorities Announced

On April 3, 2025, the SFO published its annual business plan, in which the agency announced several relevant initiatives for the coming year. Among other initiatives, the SFO plan "includes delivery of refreshed corporate guidance for engaging with the SFO and advancing plans for a whistleblower incentivisation scheme." The plan also notes that the "deployment of the failure to prevent fraud offence in September [established by the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act] will be a landmark moment which will widen the reach and breadth of prosecutions." The plan also highlights the SFO's new "asset confiscation enforcement (ACE) team" and the need to "[f]urther strengthen covert surveillance capabilities" to fight various types of corruption and fraud cases. 

Brazilian Authorities Resolve Trafigura Investigation

On March 31, 2025, Brazil's Office of the Comptroller General (CGU) announced that it had signed a leniency agreement with Trafigura Beheer, Trafigura Group Pte. Ltd.'s (Trafigura) parent company, earlier that week, resolving a years-long investigation into Trafigura's bribery of Petrobras officials in order to obtain privileged information. Trafigura will pay 435.4 million reais (approximately $76 million) in fines, of which $26.8 million will be credited toward its U.S. penalty for FCPA anti-bribery violations (covered in our FCPA Spring Review 2024). Trafigura agreed to pay an additional 282 million reais (approximately $49 million) to resolve civil cases with Brazilian authorities, which concluded all Brazilian investigations into the company.

Brazilian CGU Fines Japanese Petrochemical Company for "Car Wash"-Related Corruption

The Brazilian CGU also announced a civil penalty on April 7, 2025 against Japanese petrochemical company Toyo Engineering Corporation in relation to alleged bribery involving Petrobras. The CGU fined the company R$566,602,793 (approximately $95.9 million) "for bribery and fraud committed against Petrobras in a contract signed for the construction of the Utility Plant Development Center (CDPU) at the Rio de Janeiro Petrochemical Complex." Specifically, according to the CGU release, a Brazilian affiliate of Toyo, as a member of "the TUC Construções Consortium," contributed to a "criminal scheme" that included the payment of "bribes totaling approximately 1% of the contract…to the directors of the service and supply departments of" Petrobras. The CGU release also notes that Toyo and its Brazilian subsidiary "were declared unfit to bid and contract with the Public Administration" in Brazil. 

Toyo released a statement on April 8, 2025, in which the company asserted that Toyo had "explained that PPI (and the Company) were not involved in such wrongdoing" and that "[t]he position of the Company remains unchanged." Thus, the company stated that it would "take the appropriate action to challenge the [CGU] Decision."

Belgian Authorities Charge Multiple Persons Related to Alleged Bribery at EU Parliament

According to an official release, on March 13, 2025, Belgian authorities executed searches at various locations "as part of a federal case relating to organised crime, money laundering and corruption" that led to the charging of five persons before a magistrate on March 18. The release also noted that a second set of searches was conducted on March 17 "at the offices of the European Parliament in Brussels, some of whose premises had already been placed under judicial seal on 13 March 2025." A follow-up official release on April 4 stated that the investigating judge had charged a total of eight people with various alleged crimes related to corruption, money laundering, and other offenses. 

A separate release dated March 13 stated that "[t]he alleged bribery is said to have benefited HUAWEI." Another statement noted that the alleged "corruption is said to have been practised regularly and very discreetly from 2021 to the present day, under the guise of commercial lobbying and taking various forms, such as remuneration for taking political positions or excessive gifts such as food and travel expenses or regular invitations to football matches." The statement also asserted that "[t]he financial advantages linked to the alleged corruption may have been mixed up in financial flows linked to the defrayal of conference expenses, and paid to various intermediaries, with a view to concealing their illicit nature or enabling the perpetrators to escape the consequences of their actions." Related media reports have suggested that Huawei may have known about the searches and could be cooperating with the Belgian authorities.  

World Bank Restructuring and Recent Debarments Related to Corruption

In February 2025, the World Bank announced that it will be restructuring its global operations by establishing hub offices around the world to house its regional management teams, which currently operate out of Washington, DC. While the Latin America and Caribbean team will remain in DC, the World Bank will decentralize its other units to better equip the organization to deftly respond to local needs. 

The World Bank Group also announced two noteworthy debarments in the first quarter of 2025 that involved bribery, both of which qualify for cross-debarment by other multilateral development banks. First, on January 16, 2025, the World Bank announced the 30-month debarment of two Nigerian companies and their Managing Director/CEO in connection with corrupt practices stemming from the National Social Safety Nets Project in Nigeria. In addition to an undisclosed conflict of interest and collusive information sharing, the World Bank alleged that Viva Atlantic Limited, Technology House Limited, and Norman Bwuruk Didam offered and provided things of value to public officials involved in the project, which aimed to provide financial assistance to poor and vulnerable households in Nigeria.

On March 19, 2025, the World Bank announced a two-year debarment with conditional release for Italian company Panaque, S.R.L. (Panaque) and its sole director, Oscar Di Santo, for "collusive, fraudulent, and corrupt practices" in relation to the Second Institutional Development and Agricultural Strengthening Project in Montenegro. The charges included findings of anti-competitive behavior, conflict of interest, and improper payments to a public official during the execution of a contract for the project, which was designed to foster the competitiveness of agriculture and fisheries. The settlements included reduced debarment periods due to Panaque's and Di Santo's "minor role in the misconduct, compliance efforts, cooperation, acceptance of responsibility, and voluntary restraint from seeking additional Bank Group-financed contracts."

Miller & Chevalier Recent Publications and Podcasts

Podcasts

EMBARGOED! is intelligent talk about sanctions, export controls, and all things international trade for trade nerds and normal human beings alike, hosted by Miller & Chevalier. Each episode will feature deep thoughts and hot takes about the latest headline-grabbing developments in this area of the law, as well as some below-the-radar items to keep an eye on. Subscribe for new bi-monthly episodes so you don't miss out: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Amazon Music | YouTube

Upcoming Speaking Engagements

04.28.2025	PLI Webinar: EU and U.S. Approaches to Artificial Intelligence Risk (Leah Moushey, James Tillen)
05.06.2025	PLI Webinar: FCPA Enforcement Pause: Proceed With Caution (Ann Sultan, James Tillen)
05.07.2025	Webinar and Q&A: The Trump Administration and New Corporate Criminal Risks - Enforcement Trends across the U.S., U.K., and Europe (Ann Sultan, James Tillen)
05.20.2025	Thought Leaders 4 FIRE International: Vilamoura (Timothy O'Toole)

Recent Publications

04.21.2025	Trade Compliance Flash: Key Takeaways from New BIS Restrictions on AI Chips to China (Timothy O'Toole, Leah Moushey, Melissa Burgess, Collmann Griffin, Caroline Watson, Annie Cho)
04.17.2025	Trade Compliance Flash: Key Takeaways from OFAC's Advisory for Shipping and Maritime Stakeholders on Detecting and Mitigating Iranian Oil Sanctions Evasion (Timothy O'Toole, Leah Moushey, Melissa Burgess, Collmann Griffin, Caroline Watson, Annie Cho)
04.10.2025	Using the First Sale Rule to Reduce Tariffs (Brian Gleicher, Richard Mojica)
04.09.2025	2024 Anti-Corruption Trends in Latin America: A Dynamic Environment for Enforcement and Compliance (Alejandra Montenegro Almonte, Matteson Ellis, Katie Cantone-Hardy)
04.04.2025	What You Need to Know About Reciprocal Tariffs [UPDATED] (Richard Mojica, Julia Herring, Brittany Huamani, Franco Jofré, Peter Kentz, Aditi Patil)
04.03.2025	Key Takeaways Regarding FinCEN's Interim Final Beneficial Ownership Information Reporting Rule (Ian Herbert, Leah Moushey, Ann Sultan, Peter Kentz)
04.03.2025	Tariff Increases Create Transfer Pricing Challenges for U.S. Importers (Rocco Femia, Brian Gleicher, Richard Mojica)
03.31.2025	What Cartel FTO Designation May Mean for Mexico (Matteson Ellis)
03.25.2025	Trade Compliance Flash: DOJ Announces Latest Settlement in False Claims Act Case Arising From Alleged Customs Fraud (Joshua Drew, Richard Mojica, Bradley Markano)
03.19.2025	FCPA Changes & Terrorist Designations for Cartels Create Dangerous New Math in Latin America (Matteson Ellis, Maria Elena Lapetina, James Tillen, Katie Cantone-Hardy)
03.13.2025	Higher Education Facing Increasing Enforcement and Legal Risks (Ann Sultan, Joshua Drew, Katherine Pappas, William Barry, Marc Gerson, Maria Elena Lapetina, Alex Sarria, Sandeep Prasanna)
03.06.2025	Where FTO-Designated Cartels Operate (Matteson Ellis, Maria Elena Lapetina, James Tillen, Facundo Galeano)

---

Editors: John E. Davis, James G. Tillen, Ann Sultan

Contributors: Maame Esi Austin, Katie Cantone-Hardy, Franco Jofré, Aditi Patil, Ricardo Rincón

---

The information contained in this communication is not intended as legal advice or as an opinion on specific facts. This information is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, a lawyer-client relationship. For more information, please contact one of the senders or your existing Miller & Chevalier lawyer contact. The invitation to contact the firm and its lawyers is not to be construed as a solicitation for legal work. Any new lawyer-client relationship will be confirmed in writing.

This, and related communications, are protected by copyright laws and treaties. You may make a single copy for personal use. You may make copies for others, but not for commercial purposes. If you give a copy to anyone else, it must be in its original, unmodified form, and must include all attributions of authorship, copyright notices, and republication notices. Except as described above, it is unlawful to copy, republish, redistribute, and/or alter this presentation without prior written consent of the copyright holder.