Tag Archives: Kara Brockmeyer

Congress Passes Foreign Extortion Prevention Act, Targeting “Demand Side” of Foreign Bribery

by Kara Brockmeyer, Andrew M. Levine, David A. O’Neil, Winston M. Paes, Jane Shvets, Bruce E. Yannett, Douglas S. Zolkind, and Erich O. Grosz

Top left to right: Kara Brockmeyer, Andrew M. Levine, David A. O’Neil, and Winston M. Paes
Bottom left to right: Jane Shvets, Bruce E. Yannett, Douglas S. Zolkind, and Erich O. Grosz (Photos courtesy of Debevoise & Plimpton LLP)

On December 14, 2023, the U.S. Congress approved the Foreign Extortion Prevention Act (“FEPA”), which will make it a federal crime for any foreign government official to demand or receive a bribe from a U.S. citizen, resident or company in exchange for taking or omitting to take official action or conferring any improper business-related advantage.[1] This legislation, which is part of the National Defense Authorization Act and expected to be signed into law by President Biden, substantially expands U.S. enforcement authority with respect to foreign bribery and aligns with the Biden Administration’s elevation of anti-corruption enforcement to a national security priority.

Continue reading →

FinCEN Issues Advisory on Kleptocracy and Foreign Public Corruption

by Kara Brockmeyer, Andrew M. Levine, Satish Kini, Robert Dura, and Lily D. Vo

On April 14, 2022, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”) released its “Advisory on Kleptocracy and Foreign Public Corruption” (the “Advisory”), directing covered financial institutions to focus their efforts on identifying the proceeds of foreign public corruption, which is a priority for the Biden administration.[1] The Advisory focuses on so-called “kleptocrats,” defined as individuals who use “their position and influence to enrich themselves and their networks of corrupt actors,” as well as other corrupt public officials who may launder the proceeds of their corruption through financial institutions.

Continue reading →

SEC Brings its First Corporate Anti-Corruption Action of 2022

by Kara Brockmeyer, Andrew M. Levine, Karolos Seeger, and Konstantin Bureiko

On February 17, 2022, the SEC brought a settled FCPA administrative proceeding against KT Corporation (“KT” or the “Company”), a South Korean telecom operator with American depository shares trading on the New York Stock Exchange.[1]  In its Cease-and-Desist Order (the “Order”), the SEC found that KT engaged in multiple schemes to make improper payments in Korea and Vietnam, including through purported charitable donations and third-party payments.  The SEC also found that KT paid executives inflated bonuses in order to generate slush funds to pay for gifts and illegal political contributions.  As a result of the settlement, the Company agreed to pay $6.3 million in disgorgement and civil penalties, and to a two-year reporting obligation.[2]  The settlement with the SEC came several months after the Company and fourteen executives were indicted in South Korea for the political contribution scheme.

Of particular note, the KT settlement is the SEC’s most recent action involving charitable contributions, and it goes somewhat beyond earlier cases in that the Order does not find that the donations were made as part of any quid pro quo.  It is also a cautionary tale demonstrating various ways that slush funds can be created.

Continue reading →

Recommendations for Combating Bribery of Foreign Officials

by Kara Brockmeyer, Andrew M. Levine, Bruce E. Yannett, Ada Fernandez Johnson, and Katelyn McNelis

On November 26, 2021, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (the “OECD”) published revised anti-corruption guidelines, the Recommendation for Further Combating Bribery of Foreign Officials (the “2021 Recommendation”). These guidelines update the original recommendation from 2009 and significantly expand the expectations of member countries regarding anti-corruption enforcement.

Continue reading →

Likely Policy Priorities of the Gensler SEC

by Kara Brockmeyer, Andrew Ceresney, Arian June, Robert Kaplan, Julie Riewe, Jeff Robins, Jonathan Tuttle, Charu Chandrasekar, and Amy Aixi Zhang

Gary Gensler was confirmed on April 14 in a 53-45 vote as Chair of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”).

Before his confirmation, Chair Gensler testified before the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs (“Banking Committee”) on Tuesday, March 2, 2021. Several key themes emerged in Chair Gensler’s testimony that signaled some of his likely policy priorities and directions for future initiatives at the agency.

Chair Gensler’s opening statement[1] and responses to questions provided perspective on three major policy themes: (1) the SEC’s potential role in using its disclosure, examination and enforcement authority to advance environmental, social and governance (“ESG”) and political spending priorities of the Democratic Party and Biden Administration; (2) market structure reforms, particularly in the equity markets in the wake of the WallStreetBets-related market volatility (though market structure reform more broadly will be a priority); and (3) digital asset and financial technology, and in particular, the regulation of cryptocurrency and new technologies.

Continue reading →

Despite Unprecedented Challenges, SEC’s Division of Enforcement’s 2020 Annual Report Presents Healthy Enforcement Results

by Kara Brockmeyer, Andrew Ceresney, Arian June, Robert B. Kaplan, Julie M. Riewe, Jonathan R. Tuttle, Mary Jo White, Ada Fernandez Johnson, and Mark D. Flinn

On November 2, 2020, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s (the “SEC” or “Commission”) Division of Enforcement (the “Division”) released its 2020 Annual Report (the “Report”), which details the Division’s activities and results for the period October 1, 2019 to September 30, 2020. The Report highlights the substantial impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the Division’s activities, including the challenges of moving investigations forward while working remotely and the need to divert significant resources to protecting retail investors by investigating potential pandemic-related misconduct. Continue reading →

Brazil Announces New Anti-Corruption Cooperation Framework; MPF’s 5th Chamber Opposes It

by Kara Brockmeyer, Andrew Levine, Karolos Seeger, Bruce Yannett, Daniel Aun, and Fabricio Archanjo 

On August 6, 2020, Brazilian enforcement authorities announced a technical cooperation agreement focused on leniency agreements under the country’s
Anti-Corruption Law (the “TCA”).[1] The Comptroller-General’s Office (the “CGU”), Attorney-General’s Office (the “AGU”), Ministry of Justice and Public Security (the “MJSP”), and Federal Court of Accounts (the “TCU”) already have executed the TCA, which the Supreme Court (the “STF”) mediated. The Federal Prosecution Service (the “MPF”) is listed also as a signatory and discussed in various provisions, but has not yet executed the TCA. Four days later, the Permanent Advisory Commission on Leniency and Collaboration Agreements of the MPF’s 5th Chamber of Coordination and Revision (the “5th Chamber”)—which focuses on anti-corruption efforts—issued a detailed Technical Note advising the head of the MPF against doing so.[2]

Continue reading →

Safeguarding Corporate Compliance Programs During the COVID-19 Crisis

by Kara Brockmeyer, Andrew M. Levine and Philip Rohlik

COVID-19 has altered life for billions, including how companies interact with their employees, business partners, and regulators. Some changes will reverse as the pandemic ebbs or the virus becomes treatable. Others likely will remain for an extended period of time or even become permanent.

No matter the exact course of the coming months, disruptions from COVID-19 already have had a significant impact on corporate compliance functions, internal investigations, and government enforcement. These disruptions will continue to evolve, affecting companies in differing ways and leaving an unmistakable imprint on the compliance landscape. Continue reading →

Anti-Corruption Enforcement in Mexico:  A Possible Turning Point?

by Andrew M. Levine, Kara Brockmeyer, and Marisa R. Taney

In recent years, anti-corruption enforcement has become increasingly globalized.  New anti-corruption laws have proliferated, along with deepening commitments to enforcing such laws.  Sometimes, like in Brazil, active enforcement has followed promptly after the adoption of new laws.  Other times, as in the case of Mexico, the journey from enactment to enforcement has proven more challenging. 

Amidst much fanfare, Mexico adopted its new National Anti-Corruption System in mid-2016.  Many hoped Mexico would seize the opportunity and shortly thereafter pursue significant anti-corruption enforcement.  But key posts within the anti-corruption system remained unfilled, and no significant enforcement ensued. Continue reading →

Anti-Corruption Enforcement in Mexico:  A Possible Turning Point?

by Andrew M. Levine, Kara Brockmeyer, and Marisa R. Taney

In recent years, anti-corruption enforcement has become increasingly globalized.  New anti-corruption laws have proliferated, along with deepening commitments to enforcing such laws.  Sometimes, like in Brazil, active enforcement has followed promptly after the adoption of new laws.  Other times, as in the case of Mexico, the journey from enactment to enforcement has proven more challenging. 

Amidst much fanfare, Mexico adopted its new National Anti-Corruption System in mid-2016.  Many hoped Mexico would seize the opportunity and shortly thereafter pursue significant anti-corruption enforcement.  But key posts within the anti-corruption system remained unfilled, and no significant enforcement ensued. Continue reading →