On Tuesday, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Department of Justice (DOJ) announced that both had reached agreements with medical diagnostics and life sciences manufacturing company Bio-Rad Laboratories to resolve allegations that Bio-Rad violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) in connection with its engagement of third party intermediaries in Russia, Thailand and Vietnam. The respective releases reveal information about the settlement that places it squarely in line with some emerging trends in the FCPA enforcement arena. The SEC alleged that Bio-Rad “lacked sufficient internal controls to prevent or detect” $7.5 million in bribes that were paid to Vietnamese and Thai foreign officials during a five-year period and recorded as legitimate expenses, including commissions. The SEC also alleged that Bio-Rad engaged foreign agents primarily to influence Russia’s Ministry of Health and assist the company in winning bids. Bio-Rad agreed to pay $40.7 million in disgorgement and interest under the SEC’s order and to report to the SEC for two years. Bio-Rad also agreed to enter into a non-prosecution agreement (NPA) with the DOJ pursuant to which it agreed to pay a penalty of $14.35 million, to periodically report to the DOJ for two years, and to engage in remedial actions, including improving its internal controls and compliance functions. First, the Bio-Rad settlement with the DOJ appears to be predicated entirely on violations of the internal controls and accounting provisions of the FCPA. Even then, it is difficult to see where the company’s actions fell short in terms of internal controls. The DOJ and SEC releases contains no allegations that Bio-Rad had any actual knowledge of any violations of the anti-bribery provisions of the FCPA. Rather, the releases allege that Bio-Rad simply didn’t do enough to prevent a corrupt scheme and employees seem to have ignored “red flags.” For example, the DOJ release asserts that Bio-Rad SNC, a French entity, retained third party intermediaries and paid them commissions of 15-30 percent in exchange for services connected with government sales in Russia. According to both releases, employees at Bio-Rad reviewed the commission payments, saw red flags, but ignored them. The release further alleges that Bio-Rad generally failed to implement adequate internal controls to prevent violations. What is unclear is how Bio-Rad’s internal controls were inadequate or what was missing in terms of a compliance program. The release seems only to reflect that there were bad actors that approved payments in spite of red flags, not that there were no systems in place to identify red flags, or that the company did little to prevent the bad acts. Second, with this announcement, Bio-Rad becomes only the latest example of a company that voluntarily disclosed potential violations of the FCPA and fully cooperated with the subsequent investigation, only to be hit with significant disgorgement requirements and penalties. The releases note repeatedly that Bio-Rad self-disclosed and cooperated in full with the DOJ and SEC investigations. However, there is little indication as to whether and to what extent disclosure and cooperation benefitted Bio-Rad. (Indeed, the FCPA Blog estimated that the disgorgement amount in this case is the tenth-largest disgorgement amount in an FCPA case in SEC history.) It is possible that the SEC agreed to back away from its traditional “1-to-1” disgorgement-to-penalty ratio as a result of the cooperation, meaning the penalty paid by Bio-Rad was discounted by around $26 million. However, because the releases mention only that credit was given, it is difficult to know how much credit was given. Put another way, the fact that the settlement was public, and that a penalty was imposed in the first place indicates that full credit was not given to Bio-Rad, but there is no indication of what “full credit” versus “partial credit” means in the context of cooperation with an FCPA investigation. Finally, the SEC resolved Bio-Rad’s case as an administrative proceeding, in keeping with its prior promises that it would pursue more cases through the administrative route. We have previously addressed this strategy on this blog on several occasions. This case demonstrates not only that the SEC will pursue cases through administrative proceedings, but also that it will not hesitate to seek massive disgorgement amounts in doing so. The magnitude of the disgorgement amount in this case shows that there is no case too small to go the administrative route.
RELATED ARTICLES
Don’t Overthink It! Advocate for Easy to Understand Jury Instructions to Effectively Communicate Your Case
May 17, 2018 | government-investigations, jury-instructions, The GEE Blog
Don't Let DOJ Defections Fool You: Corporate Conduct Still in the Crosshairs
September 6, 2017 | department-of-justice, The GEE Blog
The Yates Memo – DOJ Issues Questions and Answers: Question 7
May 1, 2017 | department-of-justice, The GEE Blog
The Yates Memo – DOJ Issues Questions and Answers: Question 6
April 27, 2017 | department-of-justice, The GEE Blog
The Yates Memo – DOJ Issues Questions and Answers: Question 5
April 25, 2017 | department-of-justice, The GEE Blog
Don’t Overthink It! Advocate for Easy to Understand Jury Instructions to Effectively Communicate Your Case
May 17, 2018 | government-investigations, jury-instructions, The GEE Blog
Don't Let DOJ Defections Fool You: Corporate Conduct Still in the Crosshairs
September 6, 2017 | department-of-justice, The GEE Blog
The Yates Memo – DOJ Issues Questions and Answers: Question 7
May 1, 2017 | department-of-justice, The GEE Blog
The Yates Memo – DOJ Issues Questions and Answers: Question 6
April 27, 2017 | department-of-justice, The GEE Blog
The Yates Memo – DOJ Issues Questions and Answers: Question 5
April 25, 2017 | department-of-justice, The GEE Blog
The Yates Memo – DOJ Issues Questions and Answers: Question 4 (Part 2)
April 7, 2017 | department-of-justice, The GEE Blog
The Yates Memo – DOJ Issues Questions and Answers: Question 4 (Part 1)
April 4, 2017 | department-of-justice, The GEE Blog
DOJ’s Corporate Compliance Program Guidance Provides Succinct Resource for Companies
March 31, 2017 | department-of-justice, The GEE Blog
The Yates Memo – DOJ Issues Questions and Answers: Question 3
March 31, 2017 | department-of-justice, The GEE Blog
Recently Announced: DOJ Will Extend the FCPA Pilot Program
March 28, 2017 | department-of-justice, The GEE Blog
The Yates Memo – DOJ Issues Questions and Answers: Question 2
March 21, 2017 | department-of-justice, The GEE Blog
The Yates Memo – DOJ Issues Questions and Answers: Question No. 1
March 17, 2017 | department-of-justice, The GEE Blog
The Yates Memo – DOJ Issues Questions and Answers
March 15, 2017 | department-of-justice, The GEE Blog
Department of Justice Rolls Out FCPA Enforcement Pilot Program
April 8, 2016 | department-of-justice, FCPA, The GEE Blog
DOJ Launches Targeted Elder Justice Task Forces
April 1, 2016 | government-investigations, The GEE Blog
A New Approach: DOJ Antitrust Division in Wake of Yates Memo
March 23, 2016 | department-of-justice, The GEE Blog
DOJ Leaves Much Unsaid After Announcing Need for Corporate Certifications to Finalize Settlements
March 8, 2016 | department-of-justice, The GEE Blog
The “Other Yates Memo:” DOJ to Enhance Workplace Safety Violation Prosecutions by Tacking On More Severe Charges Where Possible
February 8, 2016 | department-of-justice, The GEE Blog
“Hide No Harm Act Of 2015” Targets Employers, Directors and Officers
November 5, 2015 | department-of-justice, The GEE Blog
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT POLICY CHANGE TARGETS CORPORATE EXECUTIVES
September 11, 2015 | department-of-justice, The GEE Blog
What the DOJ Expects of 'Effective' Compliance Programs
August 12, 2015 | department-of-justice, The GEE Blog
U.S. v. Sigelman: Another FCPA Enforcement Setback for the DOJ
June 25, 2015 | FCPA, The GEE Blog
Justice Department Guidelines Seek to Focus Enforcement of Structuring Law on Most Serious Cases
June 8, 2015 | department-of-justice, The GEE Blog
THE BENEFITS OF COOPERATION – HYPERDYNAMICS AVOIDS INDICTMENT
May 29, 2015 | FCPA, The GEE Blog
RENEWED GOVERNMENT INTERFERENCE IN ATTORNEY FEE ARRANGEMENTS?
May 28, 2015 | government-investigations, The GEE Blog
Extradition from Japan: The Gamble
May 5, 2015 | government-investigations, The GEE Blog
Self-Reporting: A Wise Strategy or Chasing Unicorns?
April 28, 2015 | SEC, The GEE Blog
Top 10 Takeaways from ABA White Collar Crime Conference 2015 (Part 2)
March 18, 2015 | The GEE Blog
Top 10 Takeaways from ABA White Collar Crime Conference 2015 (Part 1)
March 17, 2015 | The GEE Blog
ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL URGES COMPANIES TO COOPERATE AND CONDUCT THOROUGH INTERNAL INVESTIGATIONS OF FCPA VIOLATIONS
November 21, 2014 | FCPA, The GEE Blog
A Cozy Relationship: The DOJ and JFTC, and the Potential Risks of Taking Advantage of JFTC’s Leniency Program
October 31, 2014 | government-investigations, The GEE Blog
Supreme Court Passes on Esquenazi, Makes Instrumentality Test Settled Law
October 6, 2014 | FCPA, The GEE Blog
REDUCING THE COST OF FCPA MONITORING
June 11, 2014 | bank-securities-fraud, The GEE Blog
Honest Services Fraud, Ray Nagin & "Big Easy" Money
March 28, 2014 | government-investigations, The GEE Blog
My Partner Left Me for the Government! DOJ’s First Opinion Procedure Release of 2014 Approves Buyout of Minority Shareholder-Turned-Government Official
March 25, 2014 | FCPA, The GEE Blog
D.C. District Court Order Provides a Warning About Attorney-Client Privilege Protection for Internal Investigations
March 20, 2014 | internal-investigations, The GEE Blog
Heightened SEC/DOJ FCPA Standards Offer Risks and Opportunities to Companies and Their Lawyers
March 18, 2014 | financial-regulation, The GEE Blog
Top 10 Takeaways from ABA White Collar Crime Conference 2014 (Part 2 of 2)
March 13, 2014 | government-investigations, The GEE Blog
Top 10 Takeaways from ABA White Collar Crime Conference 2014 (Part 1 of 2)
March 12, 2014 | government-investigations, The GEE Blog
The Department of Justice Continues to Bring the "HEAT" in Pursuing Health Care Fraud
March 5, 2014 | government-investigations, The GEE Blog
The Position Of Assistant Attorney General For The Criminal Division May Be Filled In The Near Future
February 19, 2014 | The GEE Blog
DOJ Wins Big Insider Trading Case: Martoma Conviction; Bad News for Cohen and SAC
February 8, 2014 | Insider Trading, The GEE Blog
Going South: What U.S. Companies Need to Know About the FCPA and Doing Business in Latin America
January 30, 2014 | criminal-procedure, government-investigations, The GEE Blog
RELATED PRACTICE AREAS
Subscribe
Do you want to receive more valuable insights directly in your inbox? Visit our subscription center and let us know what you're interested in learning more about.
View Subscription Center
LEAVE YOUR COMMENT