Search for:
Category

Internal Investigation

Category

Russia’s Supreme Court confirmed that a company can be liable under Article 19.28 of the Administrative Procedure Code (“Illegal remuneration on behalf of a legal entity”) for the actions of third parties with whom that company has no formal contractual, employment, or other legal relationship.1

The court clarified that a company may be held liable if its officers either knew about such actions, or approved or instructed the respective third parties with regard to such actions. Another requirement for prosecution is that the company must have an “economic or other material interest (for example, a reputational one)” in the performance of such actions.

In light of this clarification, companies now face increased risk under Article 19.28 for the illegal actions of persons such as employees of their dealers, distributors and other counterparties.

The DOJ and the SEC recently published a Second Edition of their joint Resource Guide to the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. While the Second Edition does not promulgate any new law or policy, it is a useful refresher for practitioners on the significant FCPA cases and developments in the past eight years since the first edition was published. The Resource Guide once again provides a current and comprehensive overview of the core US enforcement agencies’ views on the statute for companies and practitioners. This article highlights key changes in the Second Edition of the Resource Guide.

Please join us for a new weekly video series, hosted by Baker McKenzie’s North America Government Enforcement partners Tom Firestone and Jerome Tomas.

This weekly briefing is available on demand and will cover hot topics and current enforcement actions related to white collar crime and criminal investigations in the US and abroad to arm you with the information you need to start your business week.

As one of the largest global law firms, we will call upon our exceptionally deep and broad bench of white collar experts throughout the world and particularly in the commercial hubs of Europe, Asia, Africa and Latin America to join our weekly discussion series.

These briefings will cover:

High-profile DOJ case updates and implications
SEC enforcement developments
CFTC enforcement developments
Other white collar defense industry developments

Both employers and recruiters who place candidates with employers should note that, in the face of difficult labour market conditions arising from COVID-19 and the Circuit Breaker movement restrictions affecting the conduct of business, MOM continues policies to strengthen job opportunities for Singaporeans to ensure the foreign workforce complements, and not substitute, the local workforce. Recognising the significant role played by labour market intermediaries in fair hiring practices, MOM will impose new anti-discrimination obligations for licensed Employment Agencies (EAs) from 1 October 2020. MOM will penalise EAs which fail to uphold fair hiring, and reward those EAs which show their strong commitment to fair recruitment practices and assist employers in strengthening their Singaporean core.

The Idaho Supreme Court recently affirmed a District Court’s judgment that the gain from the sale of a 78.54% membership interest in a limited liability company did not constitute ‘business income’ under Idaho Code section 63-3027.  In Noell Indus. Inc. v. Idaho State Tax Comm’n, Docket No. 46941 (Idaho 2020), the court determined that “this type of gain does not meet the definition of ‘business income’ under either the transactional test or functional test (including the unitary business test),” and was therefore not apportionable income.