Second Circuit Reinstates FIFA Bribery Convictions, Reviving Trustworthy Companies Fraud Prosecutions for International Industrial Bribery

by David A. Final, Rahul Mukhi, Victor L. Hou, Lisa Vicens, Matthew M. Yelovich, and Sarah Pyun

From left to proper:  David A. Final, Rahul Mukhi, Victor L. Hou, Lisa Vicens, Matthew M. Yelovich, and Sarah Pyun (photographs courtesy of Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP)

In a major determination with broad implications for firms and people working internationally, the U.S. Courtroom of Appeals for the Second Circuit has reversed the acquittal of a former media govt and a sports activities advertising and marketing firm within the long-running FIFA bribery investigation.[1]  The ruling reinstates jury convictions for trustworthy companies wire fraud and cash laundering conspiracy, holding that the federal trustworthy companies fraud statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1346, can apply to overseas industrial bribery schemes.[2]

The choice, issued on July 2, 2025, overturns a September 2023 judgment of acquittal from the U.S. District Courtroom for the Jap District of New York.[3]  As we mentioned in our September 14, 2023 alert memorandum, the district courtroom had concluded that current Supreme Courtroom choices in Percoco v. United States and Ciminelli v. United States narrowed the scope of the trustworthy companies fraud statute to exclude the overseas industrial bribery at problem within the FIFA case.[4]  The Second Circuit’s reversal revives a statutory device for the Division of Justice (“DOJ”) to police worldwide corruption, even when the International Corrupt Practices Act (“FCPA”) could not apply.

The case includes allegations {that a} former media govt and a sports activities advertising and marketing firm paid tens of millions of {dollars} in bribes to officers of the South American soccer confederation, CONMEBOL, to safe profitable broadcasting rights for soccer tournaments.[5]  In March 2023, a federal jury convicted the sports activities advertising and marketing firm and a former govt on the media firm on costs of trustworthy companies wire fraud conspiracy and cash laundering conspiracy.[6]

Nonetheless, U.S. District Decide Pamela Okay. Chen granted the defendants’ post-trial movement for acquittal.[7]  Decide Chen reasoned that the Supreme Courtroom’s 2023 rulings in Percoco and Ciminelli, which restricted the scope of trustworthy companies fraud within the context of public officers and property rights, successfully foreclosed the applying of the statute to overseas industrial bribery schemes.[8]  The district courtroom held that § 1346 doesn’t criminalize the conduct of a overseas, non-public actor who deprives a overseas, non-public entity of its trustworthy companies.[9]

The Second Circuit panel unanimously disagreed, vacating the judgment of acquittal and remanding the case to the district courtroom with directions to reinstate the responsible verdicts.[10]  In doing so, the courtroom made a number of key holdings:

1. Percoco and Ciminelli Did Not Warrant Acquittal: The Courtroom held that the district courtroom’s reliance on Percoco and Ciminelli was misplaced.[11] These circumstances, the Second Circuit defined, handled distinct theories of fraud—the “right-to-control” idea of property fraud in Ciminelli and the scope of fiduciary responsibility for personal residents coping with the federal government in Percoco.[12]  Neither case, the Courtroom reasoned, addressed the core of trustworthy companies fraud because it applies to private-sector industrial bribery.[13]
2. Trustworthy Companies Fraud Applies to International Industrial Bribery: The Second Circuit reaffirmed its precedent that § 1346 criminalizes schemes to deprive a personal employer of its worker’s trustworthy companies via bribery and kickbacks.[14] The Courtroom discovered no foundation within the statute’s textual content or historical past to create a carve-out for bribery schemes that occur to contain overseas actors or overseas entities.[15]  The main focus of the wire fraud statute, for functions of figuring out its home utility, stays the usage of U.S. wires to advance the fraudulent scheme.[16]  As a result of the defendants used the U.S. monetary system to transmit the bribes, the Courtroom discovered a ample home nexus to use the statute.[17]
3. Distinguishing from “Undisclosed Self-Dealing”: The Courtroom distinguished the bribery and kickback scheme at problem from circumstances of undisclosed self-dealing, which the Supreme Courtroom in Skilling v. United States held was outdoors the scope of the trustworthy companies statute.[18] The FIFA case, the Courtroom emphasised, concerned basic bribery geared toward corrupting a fiduciary relationship, which lies on the “core” of the conduct Congress supposed to ban in § 1346.[19]

The Courtroom remanded the case for the district courtroom to think about the defendants’ different arguments for acquittal or a brand new trial, however the core authorized holding strengthens the DOJ’s jurisdiction in future worldwide corruption circumstances.

• Revival of a Key Enforcement Software: The Second Circuit’s determination could breathe new life into the usage of the trustworthy companies wire fraud statute as a versatile device for the DOJ to prosecute overseas bribery, significantly in circumstances the place the FCPA anti-bribery provisions don’t apply (e.g., industrial bribery involving no authorities officers).
• Resolution Aligns with DOJ’s Aggressive Enforcement Posture: This ruling dovetails with the DOJ’s lately introduced priorities. The DOJ’s new white-collar enforcement plan, as mentioned in our Could 15, 2025 alert memorandum, and its revised FCPA steerage, coated in our June 11, 2025 alert memorandum, each sign an intent to make use of all accessible statutory instruments to pursue high-impact worldwide corruption that harms U.S. pursuits.[20]  The Second Circuit’s determination to revive a non-FCPA idea of legal responsibility for overseas industrial bribery gives prosecutors with the form of flexibility the DOJ’s new insurance policies envision.  In assessing enforcement dangers, firms ought to think about whether or not conduct beforehand believed to fall outdoors FCPA protection could now set off scrutiny underneath § 1346.
• Use of U.S. Wires Stays a Important Jurisdictional Hook: The choice reaffirms the precept that any use of the U.S. monetary system—together with correspondent financial institution accounts—to facilitate illicit funds will be ample to set off U.S. jurisdiction.[21] This serves as a reminder that even seemingly “foreign-to-foreign” transactions can fall throughout the purview of U.S. prosecutors in the event that they contact the U.S. monetary system in any significant means.[22] Right here, the Second Circuit reiterated that what’s key’s the “use of the telecommunications techniques of the USA in furtherance of a scheme,” and that the identification and site of the sufferer are “irrelevant.”
• Compliance Packages Ought to Handle Industrial Bribery: This determination underscores the significance for multinational firms to keep up sturdy compliance packages that tackle not solely bribery of public officers underneath the FCPA but additionally industrial bribery. For instance, firms ought to study whether or not their third-party insurance policies tackle industrial bribery dangers and think about coaching staff and brokers on the topic.
• Significance of Sustaining Correct Books and Information, and Ample Inner Controls: Corporations publicly-traded on a U.S. inventory trade additionally ought to stay aware of the FCPA’s accounting provisions, which require that public firms account for all belongings and liabilities precisely and in affordable element of their books and information, in addition to devise and keep a system of inner accounting controls ample to guarantee administration’s management, authority, and accountability over the agency’s belongings. DOJ and SEC have beforehand introduced FCPA circumstances primarily based, partially, on violations of the books and information provision associated to industrial bribery, the place improper funds have been falsely recorded.  
• Potential for Additional Supreme Courtroom Evaluation: Given the conflicting interpretations of the trustworthy companies statute and the numerous implications of this ruling, the defendants acknowledged they’ll search Supreme Courtroom evaluation.[23] The Supreme Courtroom has proven a current curiosity in clarifying the scope of federal fraud statutes, and this case presents a chance to deal with the extraterritorial utility of trustworthy companies fraud.[24]

The Second Circuit’s determination is a major growth within the panorama of white-collar prison enforcement.  It serves as a reminder that U.S. regulation enforcement authorities will proceed to make use of a wide range of statutes to pursue worldwide corruption and assert broad jurisdiction over conduct that has alleged ties to the USA.

[1] United States v. Lopez, No. 23-7183-CR, 2025 WL 1818945 (2nd Cir. July 2, 2025).

[2] Id. at *1.

[3] Id.

[4] U.S. District Courtroom Tosses FIFA Bribery Convictions, Discovering Trustworthy Companies Statute Does Not Attain International Industrial Bribery, Cleary Gottlieb (Sept. 14, 2023), https://www.clearygottlieb.com/news-and-insights/publication-listing/us-district-court-tosses-fifa-bribery-convictions-finding-honest-services-statute-does-not-reach-foreign-commercial-bribery.

[5] Lopez, 2025 WL 1818945 at *2–3.

[6] Id. at *4.

[7] United States v. Full Play Grp., S.A., 690 F. Supp. 3d 5 (E.D.N.Y. 2023), vacated and remanded sub nom. United States v. Lopez, No. 23-7183-CR, 2025 WL 1818945 (2nd Cir. July 2, 2025).

[8] Id. at 11–12.

[9] Id. at 12.

[10] Lopez, 2025 WL 1818945 at *1.

[11] Id. at *9.

[12] Id. at *8.

[13] Id. at *11.

[14] Id. at *10.

[15] Id. at *11.

[16] Id. at *11–12.

[17] Id. at *12.

[18] Id. at *7.

[19] Id. at *8–10.

[20] See DOJ Legal Division Broadcasts White Collar Enforcement Plan and Revisions to Three Key Insurance policies, Cleary Gottlieb (Could 15, 2025), https://www.clearygottlieb.com/news-and-insights/publication-listing/doj-criminal-division-announces-white-collar-enforcement-plan-and-revisions-to-three-key-policies; DOJ Points Revised FCPA Pointers: A Strategic Give attention to U.S. Nationwide Pursuits and Excessive-Impression Enforcement, Cleary Gottlieb (June 11, 2025), https://www.clearygottlieb.com/news-and-insights/publication-listing/doj-issues-revised-fcpa-guidelines.

[21] See Lopez, 2025 WL 1818945 at *2–3, 11.

[22] See id. at *11.

[23] See Santul Nerkar & Ken Bensinger, Courtroom Reinstates Convictions in Worldwide Soccer Corruption Case, N.Y. Occasions (July 2, 2025), https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/02/nyregion/court-reinstates-fifa-corruption-convictions.html.

[24] See e.g., Kousisis v. United States, 145 S. Ct. 1382 (2025) (clarifying the scope the federal wire-fraud statute, 18 U.S. § 1343).

David A. Final, Rahul Mukhi, Victor L. Hou, Lisa Vicens, Matthew M. Yelovich are Companions, and Sarah Pyun is an Affiliate at Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP. This submit first appeared as a shopper alert for the agency.

The views, opinions and positions expressed inside all posts are these of the creator(s) alone and don’t symbolize these of the Program on Company Compliance and Enforcement (PCCE) or of the New York College Faculty of Legislation. PCCE makes no representations as to the accuracy, completeness and validity or any statements made on this web site and won’t be liable any errors, omissions or representations. The copyright of this content material belongs to the creator(s) and any legal responsibility as regards to infringement of mental property rights stays with the creator(s).

by David A. Final, Rahul Mukhi, Victor L. Hou, Lisa Vicens, Matthew M. Yelovich, and Sarah Pyun

From left to proper:  David A. Final, Rahul Mukhi, Victor L. Hou, Lisa Vicens, Matthew M. Yelovich, and Sarah Pyun (photographs courtesy of Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP)

In a major determination with broad implications for firms and people working internationally, the U.S. Courtroom of Appeals for the Second Circuit has reversed the acquittal of a former media govt and a sports activities advertising and marketing firm within the long-running FIFA bribery investigation.[1]  The ruling reinstates jury convictions for trustworthy companies wire fraud and cash laundering conspiracy, holding that the federal trustworthy companies fraud statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1346, can apply to overseas industrial bribery schemes.[2]

The choice, issued on July 2, 2025, overturns a September 2023 judgment of acquittal from the U.S. District Courtroom for the Jap District of New York.[3]  As we mentioned in our September 14, 2023 alert memorandum, the district courtroom had concluded that current Supreme Courtroom choices in Percoco v. United States and Ciminelli v. United States narrowed the scope of the trustworthy companies fraud statute to exclude the overseas industrial bribery at problem within the FIFA case.[4]  The Second Circuit’s reversal revives a statutory device for the Division of Justice (“DOJ”) to police worldwide corruption, even when the International Corrupt Practices Act (“FCPA”) could not apply.

The case includes allegations {that a} former media govt and a sports activities advertising and marketing firm paid tens of millions of {dollars} in bribes to officers of the South American soccer confederation, CONMEBOL, to safe profitable broadcasting rights for soccer tournaments.[5]  In March 2023, a federal jury convicted the sports activities advertising and marketing firm and a former govt on the media firm on costs of trustworthy companies wire fraud conspiracy and cash laundering conspiracy.[6]

Nonetheless, U.S. District Decide Pamela Okay. Chen granted the defendants’ post-trial movement for acquittal.[7]  Decide Chen reasoned that the Supreme Courtroom’s 2023 rulings in Percoco and Ciminelli, which restricted the scope of trustworthy companies fraud within the context of public officers and property rights, successfully foreclosed the applying of the statute to overseas industrial bribery schemes.[8]  The district courtroom held that § 1346 doesn’t criminalize the conduct of a overseas, non-public actor who deprives a overseas, non-public entity of its trustworthy companies.[9]

The Second Circuit panel unanimously disagreed, vacating the judgment of acquittal and remanding the case to the district courtroom with directions to reinstate the responsible verdicts.[10]  In doing so, the courtroom made a number of key holdings:

1. Percoco and Ciminelli Did Not Warrant Acquittal: The Courtroom held that the district courtroom’s reliance on Percoco and Ciminelli was misplaced.[11] These circumstances, the Second Circuit defined, handled distinct theories of fraud—the “right-to-control” idea of property fraud in Ciminelli and the scope of fiduciary responsibility for personal residents coping with the federal government in Percoco.[12]  Neither case, the Courtroom reasoned, addressed the core of trustworthy companies fraud because it applies to private-sector industrial bribery.[13]
2. Trustworthy Companies Fraud Applies to International Industrial Bribery: The Second Circuit reaffirmed its precedent that § 1346 criminalizes schemes to deprive a personal employer of its worker’s trustworthy companies via bribery and kickbacks.[14] The Courtroom discovered no foundation within the statute’s textual content or historical past to create a carve-out for bribery schemes that occur to contain overseas actors or overseas entities.[15]  The main focus of the wire fraud statute, for functions of figuring out its home utility, stays the usage of U.S. wires to advance the fraudulent scheme.[16]  As a result of the defendants used the U.S. monetary system to transmit the bribes, the Courtroom discovered a ample home nexus to use the statute.[17]
3. Distinguishing from “Undisclosed Self-Dealing”: The Courtroom distinguished the bribery and kickback scheme at problem from circumstances of undisclosed self-dealing, which the Supreme Courtroom in Skilling v. United States held was outdoors the scope of the trustworthy companies statute.[18] The FIFA case, the Courtroom emphasised, concerned basic bribery geared toward corrupting a fiduciary relationship, which lies on the “core” of the conduct Congress supposed to ban in § 1346.[19]

The Courtroom remanded the case for the district courtroom to think about the defendants’ different arguments for acquittal or a brand new trial, however the core authorized holding strengthens the DOJ’s jurisdiction in future worldwide corruption circumstances.

• Revival of a Key Enforcement Software: The Second Circuit’s determination could breathe new life into the usage of the trustworthy companies wire fraud statute as a versatile device for the DOJ to prosecute overseas bribery, significantly in circumstances the place the FCPA anti-bribery provisions don’t apply (e.g., industrial bribery involving no authorities officers).
• Resolution Aligns with DOJ’s Aggressive Enforcement Posture: This ruling dovetails with the DOJ’s lately introduced priorities. The DOJ’s new white-collar enforcement plan, as mentioned in our Could 15, 2025 alert memorandum, and its revised FCPA steerage, coated in our June 11, 2025 alert memorandum, each sign an intent to make use of all accessible statutory instruments to pursue high-impact worldwide corruption that harms U.S. pursuits.[20]  The Second Circuit’s determination to revive a non-FCPA idea of legal responsibility for overseas industrial bribery gives prosecutors with the form of flexibility the DOJ’s new insurance policies envision.  In assessing enforcement dangers, firms ought to think about whether or not conduct beforehand believed to fall outdoors FCPA protection could now set off scrutiny underneath § 1346.
• Use of U.S. Wires Stays a Important Jurisdictional Hook: The choice reaffirms the precept that any use of the U.S. monetary system—together with correspondent financial institution accounts—to facilitate illicit funds will be ample to set off U.S. jurisdiction.[21] This serves as a reminder that even seemingly “foreign-to-foreign” transactions can fall throughout the purview of U.S. prosecutors in the event that they contact the U.S. monetary system in any significant means.[22] Right here, the Second Circuit reiterated that what’s key’s the “use of the telecommunications techniques of the USA in furtherance of a scheme,” and that the identification and site of the sufferer are “irrelevant.”
• Compliance Packages Ought to Handle Industrial Bribery: This determination underscores the significance for multinational firms to keep up sturdy compliance packages that tackle not solely bribery of public officers underneath the FCPA but additionally industrial bribery. For instance, firms ought to study whether or not their third-party insurance policies tackle industrial bribery dangers and think about coaching staff and brokers on the topic.
• Significance of Sustaining Correct Books and Information, and Ample Inner Controls: Corporations publicly-traded on a U.S. inventory trade additionally ought to stay aware of the FCPA’s accounting provisions, which require that public firms account for all belongings and liabilities precisely and in affordable element of their books and information, in addition to devise and keep a system of inner accounting controls ample to guarantee administration’s management, authority, and accountability over the agency’s belongings. DOJ and SEC have beforehand introduced FCPA circumstances primarily based, partially, on violations of the books and information provision associated to industrial bribery, the place improper funds have been falsely recorded.  
• Potential for Additional Supreme Courtroom Evaluation: Given the conflicting interpretations of the trustworthy companies statute and the numerous implications of this ruling, the defendants acknowledged they’ll search Supreme Courtroom evaluation.[23] The Supreme Courtroom has proven a current curiosity in clarifying the scope of federal fraud statutes, and this case presents a chance to deal with the extraterritorial utility of trustworthy companies fraud.[24]

The Second Circuit’s determination is a major growth within the panorama of white-collar prison enforcement.  It serves as a reminder that U.S. regulation enforcement authorities will proceed to make use of a wide range of statutes to pursue worldwide corruption and assert broad jurisdiction over conduct that has alleged ties to the USA.

[1] United States v. Lopez, No. 23-7183-CR, 2025 WL 1818945 (2nd Cir. July 2, 2025).

[2] Id. at *1.

[3] Id.

[4] U.S. District Courtroom Tosses FIFA Bribery Convictions, Discovering Trustworthy Companies Statute Does Not Attain International Industrial Bribery, Cleary Gottlieb (Sept. 14, 2023), https://www.clearygottlieb.com/news-and-insights/publication-listing/us-district-court-tosses-fifa-bribery-convictions-finding-honest-services-statute-does-not-reach-foreign-commercial-bribery.

[5] Lopez, 2025 WL 1818945 at *2–3.

[6] Id. at *4.

[7] United States v. Full Play Grp., S.A., 690 F. Supp. 3d 5 (E.D.N.Y. 2023), vacated and remanded sub nom. United States v. Lopez, No. 23-7183-CR, 2025 WL 1818945 (2nd Cir. July 2, 2025).

[8] Id. at 11–12.

[9] Id. at 12.

[10] Lopez, 2025 WL 1818945 at *1.

[11] Id. at *9.

[12] Id. at *8.

[13] Id. at *11.

[14] Id. at *10.

[15] Id. at *11.

[16] Id. at *11–12.

[17] Id. at *12.

[18] Id. at *7.

[19] Id. at *8–10.

[20] See DOJ Legal Division Broadcasts White Collar Enforcement Plan and Revisions to Three Key Insurance policies, Cleary Gottlieb (Could 15, 2025), https://www.clearygottlieb.com/news-and-insights/publication-listing/doj-criminal-division-announces-white-collar-enforcement-plan-and-revisions-to-three-key-policies; DOJ Points Revised FCPA Pointers: A Strategic Give attention to U.S. Nationwide Pursuits and Excessive-Impression Enforcement, Cleary Gottlieb (June 11, 2025), https://www.clearygottlieb.com/news-and-insights/publication-listing/doj-issues-revised-fcpa-guidelines.

[21] See Lopez, 2025 WL 1818945 at *2–3, 11.

[22] See id. at *11.

[23] See Santul Nerkar & Ken Bensinger, Courtroom Reinstates Convictions in Worldwide Soccer Corruption Case, N.Y. Occasions (July 2, 2025), https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/02/nyregion/court-reinstates-fifa-corruption-convictions.html.

[24] See e.g., Kousisis v. United States, 145 S. Ct. 1382 (2025) (clarifying the scope the federal wire-fraud statute, 18 U.S. § 1343).

David A. Final, Rahul Mukhi, Victor L. Hou, Lisa Vicens, Matthew M. Yelovich are Companions, and Sarah Pyun is an Affiliate at Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP. This submit first appeared as a shopper alert for the agency.

The views, opinions and positions expressed inside all posts are these of the creator(s) alone and don’t symbolize these of the Program on Company Compliance and Enforcement (PCCE) or of the New York College Faculty of Legislation. PCCE makes no representations as to the accuracy, completeness and validity or any statements made on this web site and won’t be liable any errors, omissions or representations. The copyright of this content material belongs to the creator(s) and any legal responsibility as regards to infringement of mental property rights stays with the creator(s).