An government went to trial. One other alleged scheme participant cooperated. Corsa Coal itself went bankrupt. No matter executives thought the FCPA pause meant for his or her publicity, this case is a helpful corrective — and former US Legal professional Eric Olshan, who constructed the underlying prosecution, is in a uncommon place to clarify precisely what occurred and why compliance officers ought to be paying shut consideration.
With all gratitude to Mark Twain, studies of the dying of FCPA enforcement beneath the Trump Administration have been drastically exaggerated. In February, a federal jury in Pennsylvania discovered a former coal firm government responsible of bribing Egyptian officers in reference to greater than $140 million in contracts.
The conviction of Charles Hunter Hobson, previously a vice chairman at Corsa Coal, got here after a nine-day trial in Pittsburgh’s Western District of Pennsylvania — the identical district the place, years earlier, then-Assistant US Legal professional Eric Olshan had constructed the case and obtained the 2022 indictment towards Hobson.
Hobson was discovered responsible on seven counts: two FCPA violations, conspiracy to violate the FCPA, cash laundering, conspiracy to commit cash laundering and conspiracy to commit wire fraud. His sentencing has been scheduled for June 25; he faces a most sentence of 65 years, although his attorneys have stated he’ll enchantment the conviction.
A yr earlier, President Donald Trump had signed an government order pausing FCPA enforcement, and Hobson’s protection workforce instantly sought a continuance, arguing the evaluate would possibly result in dismissal. The DOJ accomplished that evaluate, determined to proceed and opposed a second delay try in December 2025. By the point opening statements started Feb. 9, the query of whether or not the case would survive the pause had already been answered. The jury deliberated for 5 hours earlier than delivering its verdict.
The human structure of the case is price understanding. Hobson didn’t act alone, in line with the federal government. Frederick Cushmore Jr., one other Corsa government, pleaded responsible to a conspiracy cost again in 2021 and cooperated with authorities, and his testimony at trial was among the many most damaging proof towards Hobson. Cushmore awaits sentencing, and as Olshan informed CCI, the distinction between the 2 males’s selections will probably be mirrored of their outcomes: “Cooperating and acknowledging wrongdoing is commonly much more advantageous than continuing to trial. Cushmore’s sentence will replicate that he owned as much as his conduct, did so early and supplied compelling and credible testimony towards Hobson.”
Corsa Coal itself, in the meantime, is now bankrupt. The corporate obtained what seemed to be favorable therapy from the DOJ in 2023, a declination with disgorgement, requiring it to pay again solely $1.2 million of an estimated $33 million in earnings as a result of, the DOJ concluded, paying extra would have threatened the corporate’s viability. However the favorable decision didn’t reserve it: The corporate filed for Chapter 11 reorganization in January 2025.
As Assistant Legal professional Common A. Tysen Duva put it within the DOJ’s assertion saying the conviction: “Businessmen and corporations that pay bribes to international authorities officers to win contracts undermine the rule of legislation and warp competitors, which hurts American enterprise pursuits worldwide.”
That final level — hurt to law-abiding rivals — is one Olshan identifies as central to understanding why this case survived the FCPA pause.
Olshan, now a litigation companion at McGuireWoods, is uniquely positioned to clarify what the decision means and what compliance professionals ought to take from it. His Q&A with CCI, performed through e-mail, is beneath.
CCI: You had been the assistant US legal professional (AUSA) who investigated Hobson and obtained the 2022 indictment — and also you went on to function US legal professional for the Western District of Pennsylvania, the place this nine-day trial in the end passed off. Now you’re watching the decision are available in from the personal sector. How do you’re feeling in regards to the end result, and what does it imply for a case that survived some of the dramatic enforcement pivots within the FCPA’s 50-year historical past?
Eric Olshan: I understand how a lot work went into investigating this case, so naturally I felt some private funding within the end result of the “pause” and was gratified to see that the division made the fitting name to proceed with the prosecution. The responsible verdicts on all counts definitely vindicate that call and reinforce that the conduct on this case issues to strange residents. And whereas I really feel some satisfaction within the end result, it’s actually a testomony to the dedication of the trial workforce from the US Legal professional’s Workplace in Pittsburgh and the FCPA Unit at Foremost Justice, who labored collectively for years to litigate the case after which placed on a compelling and easy case. The jury clearly had no drawback with the federal government’s narrative.
CCI: After President Donald Trump signed the February 2025 government order pausing FCPA enforcement, Hobson’s workforce instantly sought a 180-day continuance, arguing the administration’s personal evaluate would possibly result in dismissal. The DOJ in the end accomplished its evaluate and elected to proceed — after which “strenuously” opposed Hobson’s December 2025 try and delay additional. What indicators does the DOJ’s resolution to see this case by means of ship about what makes an FCPA prosecution “survivable” beneath the present administration’s enforcement priorities? Was the result a shock to you?
EO: Though the division hasn’t publicized its justification for shifting ahead with the case, there are some hints within the public document as to what made the case “survivable” regardless of the absence of a nexus to cartels or transnational felony organizations. Three stand out to me. First, each the middleman and the international authorities official had been prosecuted by Egyptian authorities, reflecting that the bribery conduct wasn’t thought-about “enterprise as traditional” in Egypt, a typical justification for not pursuing accountability beneath the FCPA. Second, Hobson didn’t simply funnel bribes to win coal contracts; he additionally skimmed off the highest, taking a minimize for himself and, in essence, dishonest Corsa. The kickback conduct was clearly an aggravating issue. Third, and maybe most significantly within the present enforcement atmosphere, the jury heard that Hobson’s conduct deprived different American firms searching for to do enterprise in Egypt, one thing US Legal professional Troy Rivetti highlighted within the press launch saying the conviction. The division has made clear that instances involving hurt to law-abiding home firms stay a precedence. Having made the choice to maneuver forward, the federal government’s dedication to seeing the case by means of to the top was hardly a shock. And neither was the result at trial. This was a case that had a number of of the hallmarks of a profitable white-collar prosecution: testimony from a cooperating insider, the usage of coded language, a transparent monetary motive and a mountain of corroborating statements from the defendant himself, to call just a few.
CCI: Hobson was convicted not solely on two FCPA counts and conspiracy to violate the FCPA but in addition on cash laundering and conspiracy to commit cash laundering, in addition to conspiracy to commit wire fraud. The present administration has directed the DOJ’s FCPA Unit to prioritize instances with a nexus to cartels and transnational felony organizations, however cash laundering can also be a core focus. How vital is the money-laundering thread in retaining a case like this alive beneath a modified enforcement regime? And is there a broader lesson right here for compliance professionals that conduct framed as a international bribery drawback could carry a for much longer authorized tail by means of parallel fees?
EO: It’s unclear how vital the money-laundering facet of the case could have been within the division’s evaluation, since FCPA instances typically contain each FCPA fees and money-laundering offenses. It’s not unusual for defendants to route illicit bribe funds by means of financial institution accounts abroad, forming the premise for worldwide promotional money-laundering fees. And since the FCPA itself can’t be used to cost the international authorities official, traditionally the division has employed the money-laundering statutes to carry instances towards these officers in US courts. (The Overseas Extortion Prevention Act, FEPA, was enacted to shut this hole, although it has but for use in a case.) Nonetheless, the division has been categorical in its continued deal with money-laundering conduct, and it’s notable that three instances which have moved ahead post-“pause” — Hobson, Berko and Zaglin — all contain money-laundering fees, whereas the dismissed Coburn/Schwartz case didn’t. Consequently, the presence of money-laundering conduct will probably enhance the possibilities {that a} case is charged and will function a lesson to compliance professionals that inner controls centered on clear tracing and documentation for international transactions — significantly these associated to commissions — are crucial.
CCI: Corsa Coal obtained a declination with disgorgement — paying simply $1.2 million towards $33 million in estimated earnings — in 2023. But Hobson faces potential jail time. The DOJ efficiently prevented Hobson from even presenting Corsa’s declination to the jury as a mitigating issue, with prosecutors arguing the company decision had “no bearing on the details of” Hobson’s conduct. What does this case illustrate in regards to the relationship between an organization’s decision and the person publicity of its executives? Ought to compliance officers be advising their management groups to consider these two tracks as distinct from one another?
EO: This case is one other reminder that the pursuits of an organization and its executives should not all the time aligned and infrequently diverge. This is the reason it’s essential in lots of investigations for executives to acquire their very own legal professionals; in-house counsel’s job is to signify the pursuits of the corporate alone. The Hobson declination letter spells this distinction out, specifying that it offers no safety for any people, together with Corsa workers. The differing paths on this case additionally underscore that it’s incumbent upon compliance officers to coach their management groups on the truth that outcomes for firms and their workers can fluctuate relying on the actual details of every case. The earlier they resolve what occurred — and the place there have been breakdowns in inner controls — the higher positioned the corporate will probably be to make knowledgeable selections about the right way to navigate the enforcement panorama.
CCI: That is believed to be solely the twenty sixth FCPA jury trial within the statute’s historical past. The overwhelming norm is plea agreements, deferred prosecution agreements and declinations. What does it inform us that the DOJ was keen — beneath the present administration, no much less — to take this all the best way to a nine-day jury trial? And what ought to company executives perceive in regards to the calculus of going to trial vs. cooperating in an FCPA matter?
EO: When prosecutors examine, construct and cost instances, they achieve this by means of the lens of creating certain they will show their case at trial, not assuming they may resolve it by means of a negotiated decision or plea. The Justice Guide requires as a lot. So, the truth that the division took the case all the best way to trial is solely a mirrored image that, however the “pause,” this was the best way issues ought to work. Hobson might have negotiated a responsible plea, however it seems he had no curiosity, and trial was the one remaining route. Executives ought to know that cooperating and acknowledging wrongdoing is commonly much more advantageous than continuing to trial, the place the conviction price in federal courtroom is kind of excessive, significantly in well-resourced prosecutions. Hobson exercised his proper to a trial, however now the decide has a big and damning document upon which to base a sentencing willpower. In the meantime, Cushmore’s sentence will replicate that he owned as much as his conduct, did so early, and supplied compelling and credible testimony towards Hobson, all of which can affect the really useful sentencing vary beneath the US sentencing pointers and certain result in a decrease sentence.
CCI: One of many extra placing points of this case is that whilst the present administration has pulled again on company FCPA enforcement, it pursued and convicted a person. Does that recommend the administration’s method could also be much less a retreat from accountability than a rebalancing towards particular person prosecutions and away from giant company settlements? And in that case, how ought to that shift the best way executives take into consideration their very own publicity vs. their employer’s?
EO: There may be typically an ebb and stream between administrations in relation to company accountability. Certainly, the Trump Administration has already introduced shifts in favor of leniency towards firms. The clearest instance is the deputy legal professional basic’s announcement March 10 of a first-of-its-kind department-wide company enforcement coverage that establishes a presumption of a declination for firms that voluntarily disclose found misconduct, cooperate and well timed and appropriately remediate the wrongdoing. Notably, this coverage supersedes all prior insurance policies from US attorneys’ places of work and DOJ parts (aside from the Antitrust Division’s coverage), even when these insurance policies took a tougher line on company culpability. The identical will not be true for particular person accountability. The Justice Guide, which applies to all prosecutors throughout the complete company, emphasizes that company enforcement will not be an alternative choice to particular person prosecutions. Prosecutors’ major focus is holding folks accountable — an organization can’t function with out the individuals who run it. Executives ought to pay attention to this evergreen precedence as a result of it’s unlikely to vary, no matter how the present administration shifts its view on company culpability.
CCI: The Corsa Coal matter concerned a third-party gross sales agent in Egypt, a state-owned enterprise counterparty and commissions that had been being funneled as bribes, all traditional pink flags within the FCPA context. But the scheme ran from roughly 2016 to 2020 and concerned greater than $143 million in contracts. Are there compliance program design or third-party due diligence classes that organizations ought to take from this truth sample, significantly for firms working in rising markets or state-enterprise-heavy industries?
EO: Firms working in these markets would do properly to take a position closely in rigorous compliance applications and keep in mind that the FCPA’s books-and-records necessities set the baseline, not the ceiling, for compliance. Amongst different issues, firms which might be newer entrants to markets with a identified historical past of company bribery ought to conduct extra frequent audits and tracing of all fee funds. Oversight of gross sales personnel can also be key: mandating common coaching, selling inner reporting, guaranteeing most transparency for communications between workers and abroad contacts, minimizing one-on-one relationships with brokers and eliminating siloed reporting constructions can likewise scale back the danger of illicit exercise or assist forestall it from going undetected for very lengthy. Evasion of compliance measures by rogue workers will all the time be a chance, however the tougher firms make it for these workers, the extra probably enforcement authorities will view the businesses favorably down the highway.
CCI: The FCPA pause, the Bondi memo’s cartel-and-TCO focus, the obvious drawdown of the SEC’s specialised FCPA unit — and now a notable particular person conviction. How ought to firms take into consideration the enforcement panorama for the remainder of 2026? And for firms with worldwide operations, how necessary is it to keep in mind that the UK Bribery Act, EU frameworks and different international regimes stay totally operative no matter what the DOJ does?
EO: A robust anti-corruption mindset ought to be on the core of any firm’s tradition. Full cease. The Hobson prosecution is only one current instance that the division, by means of partnerships between the FCPA Unit and US Legal professional’s Workplaces, will proceed to place sources into international bribery investigations and prosecutions, even ones introduced beneath the prior administration and that contain an business (coal) that the president has sought to bolster. Federal enforcement apart, no less than one state legal professional basic (California’s) has sounded the alarm and is exploring holding firms accountable for international bribery beneath the state’s unfair competitors legislation. Furthermore, firms working within the world economic system want to pay attention to their publicity beneath international jurisdictions’ anti-bribery regimes, which may attain the identical conduct because the FCPA. The UK and EU, particularly, have leaned in on anti-bribery measures. Lastly, executives within the C-suite and their boards have to keep in mind that prosecutors have an extended reminiscence, and extra importantly, the FCPA’s bribery provisions have a five-year statute of limitations (six years for books-and-records violations), guaranteeing that conduct occurring proper now in 2026 might be prosecuted properly into the following administration.
An government went to trial. One other alleged scheme participant cooperated. Corsa Coal itself went bankrupt. No matter executives thought the FCPA pause meant for his or her publicity, this case is a helpful corrective — and former US Legal professional Eric Olshan, who constructed the underlying prosecution, is in a uncommon place to clarify precisely what occurred and why compliance officers ought to be paying shut consideration.
With all gratitude to Mark Twain, studies of the dying of FCPA enforcement beneath the Trump Administration have been drastically exaggerated. In February, a federal jury in Pennsylvania discovered a former coal firm government responsible of bribing Egyptian officers in reference to greater than $140 million in contracts.
The conviction of Charles Hunter Hobson, previously a vice chairman at Corsa Coal, got here after a nine-day trial in Pittsburgh’s Western District of Pennsylvania — the identical district the place, years earlier, then-Assistant US Legal professional Eric Olshan had constructed the case and obtained the 2022 indictment towards Hobson.
Hobson was discovered responsible on seven counts: two FCPA violations, conspiracy to violate the FCPA, cash laundering, conspiracy to commit cash laundering and conspiracy to commit wire fraud. His sentencing has been scheduled for June 25; he faces a most sentence of 65 years, although his attorneys have stated he’ll enchantment the conviction.
A yr earlier, President Donald Trump had signed an government order pausing FCPA enforcement, and Hobson’s protection workforce instantly sought a continuance, arguing the evaluate would possibly result in dismissal. The DOJ accomplished that evaluate, determined to proceed and opposed a second delay try in December 2025. By the point opening statements started Feb. 9, the query of whether or not the case would survive the pause had already been answered. The jury deliberated for 5 hours earlier than delivering its verdict.
The human structure of the case is price understanding. Hobson didn’t act alone, in line with the federal government. Frederick Cushmore Jr., one other Corsa government, pleaded responsible to a conspiracy cost again in 2021 and cooperated with authorities, and his testimony at trial was among the many most damaging proof towards Hobson. Cushmore awaits sentencing, and as Olshan informed CCI, the distinction between the 2 males’s selections will probably be mirrored of their outcomes: “Cooperating and acknowledging wrongdoing is commonly much more advantageous than continuing to trial. Cushmore’s sentence will replicate that he owned as much as his conduct, did so early and supplied compelling and credible testimony towards Hobson.”
Corsa Coal itself, in the meantime, is now bankrupt. The corporate obtained what seemed to be favorable therapy from the DOJ in 2023, a declination with disgorgement, requiring it to pay again solely $1.2 million of an estimated $33 million in earnings as a result of, the DOJ concluded, paying extra would have threatened the corporate’s viability. However the favorable decision didn’t reserve it: The corporate filed for Chapter 11 reorganization in January 2025.
As Assistant Legal professional Common A. Tysen Duva put it within the DOJ’s assertion saying the conviction: “Businessmen and corporations that pay bribes to international authorities officers to win contracts undermine the rule of legislation and warp competitors, which hurts American enterprise pursuits worldwide.”
That final level — hurt to law-abiding rivals — is one Olshan identifies as central to understanding why this case survived the FCPA pause.
Olshan, now a litigation companion at McGuireWoods, is uniquely positioned to clarify what the decision means and what compliance professionals ought to take from it. His Q&A with CCI, performed through e-mail, is beneath.
CCI: You had been the assistant US legal professional (AUSA) who investigated Hobson and obtained the 2022 indictment — and also you went on to function US legal professional for the Western District of Pennsylvania, the place this nine-day trial in the end passed off. Now you’re watching the decision are available in from the personal sector. How do you’re feeling in regards to the end result, and what does it imply for a case that survived some of the dramatic enforcement pivots within the FCPA’s 50-year historical past?
Eric Olshan: I understand how a lot work went into investigating this case, so naturally I felt some private funding within the end result of the “pause” and was gratified to see that the division made the fitting name to proceed with the prosecution. The responsible verdicts on all counts definitely vindicate that call and reinforce that the conduct on this case issues to strange residents. And whereas I really feel some satisfaction within the end result, it’s actually a testomony to the dedication of the trial workforce from the US Legal professional’s Workplace in Pittsburgh and the FCPA Unit at Foremost Justice, who labored collectively for years to litigate the case after which placed on a compelling and easy case. The jury clearly had no drawback with the federal government’s narrative.
CCI: After President Donald Trump signed the February 2025 government order pausing FCPA enforcement, Hobson’s workforce instantly sought a 180-day continuance, arguing the administration’s personal evaluate would possibly result in dismissal. The DOJ in the end accomplished its evaluate and elected to proceed — after which “strenuously” opposed Hobson’s December 2025 try and delay additional. What indicators does the DOJ’s resolution to see this case by means of ship about what makes an FCPA prosecution “survivable” beneath the present administration’s enforcement priorities? Was the result a shock to you?
EO: Though the division hasn’t publicized its justification for shifting ahead with the case, there are some hints within the public document as to what made the case “survivable” regardless of the absence of a nexus to cartels or transnational felony organizations. Three stand out to me. First, each the middleman and the international authorities official had been prosecuted by Egyptian authorities, reflecting that the bribery conduct wasn’t thought-about “enterprise as traditional” in Egypt, a typical justification for not pursuing accountability beneath the FCPA. Second, Hobson didn’t simply funnel bribes to win coal contracts; he additionally skimmed off the highest, taking a minimize for himself and, in essence, dishonest Corsa. The kickback conduct was clearly an aggravating issue. Third, and maybe most significantly within the present enforcement atmosphere, the jury heard that Hobson’s conduct deprived different American firms searching for to do enterprise in Egypt, one thing US Legal professional Troy Rivetti highlighted within the press launch saying the conviction. The division has made clear that instances involving hurt to law-abiding home firms stay a precedence. Having made the choice to maneuver forward, the federal government’s dedication to seeing the case by means of to the top was hardly a shock. And neither was the result at trial. This was a case that had a number of of the hallmarks of a profitable white-collar prosecution: testimony from a cooperating insider, the usage of coded language, a transparent monetary motive and a mountain of corroborating statements from the defendant himself, to call just a few.
CCI: Hobson was convicted not solely on two FCPA counts and conspiracy to violate the FCPA but in addition on cash laundering and conspiracy to commit cash laundering, in addition to conspiracy to commit wire fraud. The present administration has directed the DOJ’s FCPA Unit to prioritize instances with a nexus to cartels and transnational felony organizations, however cash laundering can also be a core focus. How vital is the money-laundering thread in retaining a case like this alive beneath a modified enforcement regime? And is there a broader lesson right here for compliance professionals that conduct framed as a international bribery drawback could carry a for much longer authorized tail by means of parallel fees?
EO: It’s unclear how vital the money-laundering facet of the case could have been within the division’s evaluation, since FCPA instances typically contain each FCPA fees and money-laundering offenses. It’s not unusual for defendants to route illicit bribe funds by means of financial institution accounts abroad, forming the premise for worldwide promotional money-laundering fees. And since the FCPA itself can’t be used to cost the international authorities official, traditionally the division has employed the money-laundering statutes to carry instances towards these officers in US courts. (The Overseas Extortion Prevention Act, FEPA, was enacted to shut this hole, although it has but for use in a case.) Nonetheless, the division has been categorical in its continued deal with money-laundering conduct, and it’s notable that three instances which have moved ahead post-“pause” — Hobson, Berko and Zaglin — all contain money-laundering fees, whereas the dismissed Coburn/Schwartz case didn’t. Consequently, the presence of money-laundering conduct will probably enhance the possibilities {that a} case is charged and will function a lesson to compliance professionals that inner controls centered on clear tracing and documentation for international transactions — significantly these associated to commissions — are crucial.
CCI: Corsa Coal obtained a declination with disgorgement — paying simply $1.2 million towards $33 million in estimated earnings — in 2023. But Hobson faces potential jail time. The DOJ efficiently prevented Hobson from even presenting Corsa’s declination to the jury as a mitigating issue, with prosecutors arguing the company decision had “no bearing on the details of” Hobson’s conduct. What does this case illustrate in regards to the relationship between an organization’s decision and the person publicity of its executives? Ought to compliance officers be advising their management groups to consider these two tracks as distinct from one another?
EO: This case is one other reminder that the pursuits of an organization and its executives should not all the time aligned and infrequently diverge. This is the reason it’s essential in lots of investigations for executives to acquire their very own legal professionals; in-house counsel’s job is to signify the pursuits of the corporate alone. The Hobson declination letter spells this distinction out, specifying that it offers no safety for any people, together with Corsa workers. The differing paths on this case additionally underscore that it’s incumbent upon compliance officers to coach their management groups on the truth that outcomes for firms and their workers can fluctuate relying on the actual details of every case. The earlier they resolve what occurred — and the place there have been breakdowns in inner controls — the higher positioned the corporate will probably be to make knowledgeable selections about the right way to navigate the enforcement panorama.
CCI: That is believed to be solely the twenty sixth FCPA jury trial within the statute’s historical past. The overwhelming norm is plea agreements, deferred prosecution agreements and declinations. What does it inform us that the DOJ was keen — beneath the present administration, no much less — to take this all the best way to a nine-day jury trial? And what ought to company executives perceive in regards to the calculus of going to trial vs. cooperating in an FCPA matter?
EO: When prosecutors examine, construct and cost instances, they achieve this by means of the lens of creating certain they will show their case at trial, not assuming they may resolve it by means of a negotiated decision or plea. The Justice Guide requires as a lot. So, the truth that the division took the case all the best way to trial is solely a mirrored image that, however the “pause,” this was the best way issues ought to work. Hobson might have negotiated a responsible plea, however it seems he had no curiosity, and trial was the one remaining route. Executives ought to know that cooperating and acknowledging wrongdoing is commonly much more advantageous than continuing to trial, the place the conviction price in federal courtroom is kind of excessive, significantly in well-resourced prosecutions. Hobson exercised his proper to a trial, however now the decide has a big and damning document upon which to base a sentencing willpower. In the meantime, Cushmore’s sentence will replicate that he owned as much as his conduct, did so early, and supplied compelling and credible testimony towards Hobson, all of which can affect the really useful sentencing vary beneath the US sentencing pointers and certain result in a decrease sentence.
CCI: One of many extra placing points of this case is that whilst the present administration has pulled again on company FCPA enforcement, it pursued and convicted a person. Does that recommend the administration’s method could also be much less a retreat from accountability than a rebalancing towards particular person prosecutions and away from giant company settlements? And in that case, how ought to that shift the best way executives take into consideration their very own publicity vs. their employer’s?
EO: There may be typically an ebb and stream between administrations in relation to company accountability. Certainly, the Trump Administration has already introduced shifts in favor of leniency towards firms. The clearest instance is the deputy legal professional basic’s announcement March 10 of a first-of-its-kind department-wide company enforcement coverage that establishes a presumption of a declination for firms that voluntarily disclose found misconduct, cooperate and well timed and appropriately remediate the wrongdoing. Notably, this coverage supersedes all prior insurance policies from US attorneys’ places of work and DOJ parts (aside from the Antitrust Division’s coverage), even when these insurance policies took a tougher line on company culpability. The identical will not be true for particular person accountability. The Justice Guide, which applies to all prosecutors throughout the complete company, emphasizes that company enforcement will not be an alternative choice to particular person prosecutions. Prosecutors’ major focus is holding folks accountable — an organization can’t function with out the individuals who run it. Executives ought to pay attention to this evergreen precedence as a result of it’s unlikely to vary, no matter how the present administration shifts its view on company culpability.
CCI: The Corsa Coal matter concerned a third-party gross sales agent in Egypt, a state-owned enterprise counterparty and commissions that had been being funneled as bribes, all traditional pink flags within the FCPA context. But the scheme ran from roughly 2016 to 2020 and concerned greater than $143 million in contracts. Are there compliance program design or third-party due diligence classes that organizations ought to take from this truth sample, significantly for firms working in rising markets or state-enterprise-heavy industries?
EO: Firms working in these markets would do properly to take a position closely in rigorous compliance applications and keep in mind that the FCPA’s books-and-records necessities set the baseline, not the ceiling, for compliance. Amongst different issues, firms which might be newer entrants to markets with a identified historical past of company bribery ought to conduct extra frequent audits and tracing of all fee funds. Oversight of gross sales personnel can also be key: mandating common coaching, selling inner reporting, guaranteeing most transparency for communications between workers and abroad contacts, minimizing one-on-one relationships with brokers and eliminating siloed reporting constructions can likewise scale back the danger of illicit exercise or assist forestall it from going undetected for very lengthy. Evasion of compliance measures by rogue workers will all the time be a chance, however the tougher firms make it for these workers, the extra probably enforcement authorities will view the businesses favorably down the highway.
CCI: The FCPA pause, the Bondi memo’s cartel-and-TCO focus, the obvious drawdown of the SEC’s specialised FCPA unit — and now a notable particular person conviction. How ought to firms take into consideration the enforcement panorama for the remainder of 2026? And for firms with worldwide operations, how necessary is it to keep in mind that the UK Bribery Act, EU frameworks and different international regimes stay totally operative no matter what the DOJ does?
EO: A robust anti-corruption mindset ought to be on the core of any firm’s tradition. Full cease. The Hobson prosecution is only one current instance that the division, by means of partnerships between the FCPA Unit and US Legal professional’s Workplaces, will proceed to place sources into international bribery investigations and prosecutions, even ones introduced beneath the prior administration and that contain an business (coal) that the president has sought to bolster. Federal enforcement apart, no less than one state legal professional basic (California’s) has sounded the alarm and is exploring holding firms accountable for international bribery beneath the state’s unfair competitors legislation. Furthermore, firms working within the world economic system want to pay attention to their publicity beneath international jurisdictions’ anti-bribery regimes, which may attain the identical conduct because the FCPA. The UK and EU, particularly, have leaned in on anti-bribery measures. Lastly, executives within the C-suite and their boards have to keep in mind that prosecutors have an extended reminiscence, and extra importantly, the FCPA’s bribery provisions have a five-year statute of limitations (six years for books-and-records violations), guaranteeing that conduct occurring proper now in 2026 might be prosecuted properly into the following administration.
