违反和执行《反海外腐败法

Q1 Social Sciences
Adam W. Du Pon, Andrea M. Scheetz, Zhenyu “Mark” Zhang
{"title":"违反和执行《反海外腐败法","authors":"Adam W. Du Pon, Andrea M. Scheetz, Zhenyu “Mark” Zhang","doi":"10.1108/jfc-12-2023-0318","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThis study aims to examine the determinants of Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) violations and consequences of FCPA enforcements.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThis paper uses publicly available data from Compustat, I/B/E/S and Thomson Reuters databases, combined with Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Department of Justice (DOJ) cases, to extract insights on FCPA violations and enforcements using econometric approaches.\n\n\nFindings\nThe main determinants of FCPA violations appear to be firm size, multinational structure, country corruption and Sarbanes-Oxley Act control weaknesses. Traditional misreporting risks (F-score and M-score) do not predict FCPA violations. This study discovers significant differences between FCPA violations by motivation, as in, sale generation, rent extraction or cost evasion. Bribes motivated by sale generation or rent extraction are partially driven by the extent of the firm’s global operations, whereas bribes motivated by cost evasion relate to internal influences. This study also finds that enforcement is more salient for criminal violations (DOJ enforcement), compared to civil violations (SEC enforcement).\n\n\nResearch limitations/implications\nThis research provides new insights into the determinants of FCPA violations while underscoring the need for effective measures to combat bribery and promote ethical business practices. This research contributes to the ongoing efforts to curtail bribery, offering valuable insights into the characteristics of firms more likely to engage in bribery and contexts in which these activities occur. It provides critical implications for regulatory bodies, highlighting the differential responses of firms to varying types of enforcement, namely, criminal versus civil, as the authors observe greater decreases in internal control weaknesses following DOJ enforcement compared to SEC enforcement.\n\n\nPractical implications\nFor enforcement agencies, the findings underscore the importance of rigorous criminal enforcement against FCPA violations, highlighting the improved control environments prompted by DOJ actions. Managers will find this research relevant, as it demonstrates that a firm’s entry into international markets substantially elevates the risk of its representatives engaging in bribery with foreign officials. In addition, the results are of interest to regulators, revealing that the underlying motivations driving a firm’s activities can significantly alter the factors to consider that might lead to an FCPA violation.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThis paper is the original work of the authors and explores the determinants and consequences of FCPA violations and enforcement actions since 2002. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, it is the first to explore bribe determinants by their motive and documents industry-wide benefits arising from criminal enforcement.\n","PeriodicalId":38940,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Financial Crime","volume":"5 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Foreign corrupt practices act violations and enforcement\",\"authors\":\"Adam W. Du Pon, Andrea M. Scheetz, Zhenyu “Mark” Zhang\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/jfc-12-2023-0318\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nThis study aims to examine the determinants of Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) violations and consequences of FCPA enforcements.\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nThis paper uses publicly available data from Compustat, I/B/E/S and Thomson Reuters databases, combined with Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Department of Justice (DOJ) cases, to extract insights on FCPA violations and enforcements using econometric approaches.\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nThe main determinants of FCPA violations appear to be firm size, multinational structure, country corruption and Sarbanes-Oxley Act control weaknesses. Traditional misreporting risks (F-score and M-score) do not predict FCPA violations. This study discovers significant differences between FCPA violations by motivation, as in, sale generation, rent extraction or cost evasion. Bribes motivated by sale generation or rent extraction are partially driven by the extent of the firm’s global operations, whereas bribes motivated by cost evasion relate to internal influences. This study also finds that enforcement is more salient for criminal violations (DOJ enforcement), compared to civil violations (SEC enforcement).\\n\\n\\nResearch limitations/implications\\nThis research provides new insights into the determinants of FCPA violations while underscoring the need for effective measures to combat bribery and promote ethical business practices. This research contributes to the ongoing efforts to curtail bribery, offering valuable insights into the characteristics of firms more likely to engage in bribery and contexts in which these activities occur. It provides critical implications for regulatory bodies, highlighting the differential responses of firms to varying types of enforcement, namely, criminal versus civil, as the authors observe greater decreases in internal control weaknesses following DOJ enforcement compared to SEC enforcement.\\n\\n\\nPractical implications\\nFor enforcement agencies, the findings underscore the importance of rigorous criminal enforcement against FCPA violations, highlighting the improved control environments prompted by DOJ actions. Managers will find this research relevant, as it demonstrates that a firm’s entry into international markets substantially elevates the risk of its representatives engaging in bribery with foreign officials. In addition, the results are of interest to regulators, revealing that the underlying motivations driving a firm’s activities can significantly alter the factors to consider that might lead to an FCPA violation.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nThis paper is the original work of the authors and explores the determinants and consequences of FCPA violations and enforcement actions since 2002. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, it is the first to explore bribe determinants by their motive and documents industry-wide benefits arising from criminal enforcement.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":38940,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Financial Crime\",\"volume\":\"5 10\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Financial Crime\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/jfc-12-2023-0318\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Financial Crime","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jfc-12-2023-0318","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文利用 Compustat、I/B/E/S 和汤森路透数据库中的公开数据,结合美国证券交易委员会(SEC)和司法部(DOJ)的案例,采用计量经济学方法深入分析了违反《反海外腐败法》(FCPA)的行为和执法后果。研究结果违反 FCPA 的主要决定因素似乎是公司规模、跨国结构、国家腐败和《萨班斯-奥克斯利法案》的控制薄弱环节。传统的虚报风险(F-score 和 M-score)并不能预测 FCPA 违规行为。本研究发现,不同动机的 FCPA 违规行为之间存在显著差异,如销售收入、租金提取或成本规避。以销售收入或租金提取为动机的贿赂行为部分是由公司的全球业务范围驱动的,而以规避成本为动机的贿赂行为则与内部影响因素有关。本研究还发现,与民事违法行为(美国证券交易委员会执法)相比,刑事违法行为(司法部执法)的执法力度更大。本研究为遏制贿赂行为的持续努力做出了贡献,对更有可能参与贿赂行为的公司的特征以及这些活动发生的背景提供了宝贵的见解。对于执法机构来说,研究结果强调了对违反《反海外贿赂法》的行为进行严格刑事执法的重要性,突出了司法部行动所带来的控制环境的改善。管理者会发现这项研究很有意义,因为它表明公司进入国际市场会大大增加其代表与外国官员进行贿赂的风险。此外,研究结果对监管机构也很有意义,因为它揭示了驱动公司活动的潜在动机会极大地改变可能导致违反 FCPA 的考虑因素。据作者所知,这是第一篇按贿赂动机探讨贿赂决定因素的文章,并记录了刑事执法给整个行业带来的利益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Foreign corrupt practices act violations and enforcement
Purpose This study aims to examine the determinants of Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) violations and consequences of FCPA enforcements. Design/methodology/approach This paper uses publicly available data from Compustat, I/B/E/S and Thomson Reuters databases, combined with Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Department of Justice (DOJ) cases, to extract insights on FCPA violations and enforcements using econometric approaches. Findings The main determinants of FCPA violations appear to be firm size, multinational structure, country corruption and Sarbanes-Oxley Act control weaknesses. Traditional misreporting risks (F-score and M-score) do not predict FCPA violations. This study discovers significant differences between FCPA violations by motivation, as in, sale generation, rent extraction or cost evasion. Bribes motivated by sale generation or rent extraction are partially driven by the extent of the firm’s global operations, whereas bribes motivated by cost evasion relate to internal influences. This study also finds that enforcement is more salient for criminal violations (DOJ enforcement), compared to civil violations (SEC enforcement). Research limitations/implications This research provides new insights into the determinants of FCPA violations while underscoring the need for effective measures to combat bribery and promote ethical business practices. This research contributes to the ongoing efforts to curtail bribery, offering valuable insights into the characteristics of firms more likely to engage in bribery and contexts in which these activities occur. It provides critical implications for regulatory bodies, highlighting the differential responses of firms to varying types of enforcement, namely, criminal versus civil, as the authors observe greater decreases in internal control weaknesses following DOJ enforcement compared to SEC enforcement. Practical implications For enforcement agencies, the findings underscore the importance of rigorous criminal enforcement against FCPA violations, highlighting the improved control environments prompted by DOJ actions. Managers will find this research relevant, as it demonstrates that a firm’s entry into international markets substantially elevates the risk of its representatives engaging in bribery with foreign officials. In addition, the results are of interest to regulators, revealing that the underlying motivations driving a firm’s activities can significantly alter the factors to consider that might lead to an FCPA violation. Originality/value This paper is the original work of the authors and explores the determinants and consequences of FCPA violations and enforcement actions since 2002. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, it is the first to explore bribe determinants by their motive and documents industry-wide benefits arising from criminal enforcement.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Financial Crime
Journal of Financial Crime Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
71
期刊介绍: The Journal of Financial Crime, the leading journal in this field, publishes authoritative, practical and detailed insight in the most serious and topical issues relating to the control and prevention of financial crime and related abuse. The journal''s articles are authored by some of the leading international scholars and practitioners in the fields of law, criminology, economics, criminal justice and compliance. Consequently, articles are perceptive, evidence based and have policy impact. The journal covers a wide range of current topics including, but not limited to: • Tracing through the civil law of the proceeds of fraud • Cyber-crime: prevention and detection • Intelligence led investigations • Whistleblowing and the payment of rewards for information • Identity fraud • Insider dealing prosecutions • Specialised anti-corruption investigations • Underground banking systems • Asset tracing and forfeiture • Securities regulation and enforcement • Tax regimes and tax avoidance • Deferred prosecution agreements • Personal liability of compliance managers and professional advisers
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信