FCPAméricas Blog
Six Compliance Lessons from the 2012 Latin America Corruption Survey (Part 2: Compliance Program Benchmarking)
9.26.2012
The following article by FCPA attorneys James Tillen of Miller & Chevalier Chartered and Matteson Ellis of Matteson Ellis Law PLLC was originally published in the widely-read FCPA Report on September 5, 2012. It is republished below with the publication’s permission. Part 1 discusses subtle signs of improvement in the compliance environment. Part 2 (below) discusses compliance program benchmarking. And Part 3 discusses take-aways for the compliance officer.
The 2012 Latin America Corruption Survey results signal a notable increase in the prevalence of compliance programs at companies working in the region. Ninety-five percent (95%) of respondents from publicly listed companies say their company management has taken steps to protect the company from risk. Ninety-three percent (93%) of multinationals have done so. Eighty percent (80%) of private companies and 75% of local/regional companies are taking steps to address risk.
The survey went further to gauge the specific types of compliance efforts that companies are making, data that serves as a useful benchmark. For example, among publicly listed companies in the United States and operating in Latin America, the following percentages have implemented the following mechanisms:
– Anti-corruption policy: 92%
– Anti-corruption training: 90%
– Procedures for gifts, travel and entertainment of officials: 90%
– Procedures for charitable and community donations: 84%
– Procedures for political contributions: 72%
– Procedures for facilitations payments: 65%
– Anonymous reporting mechanisms: 79%
– Anti-corruption contract terms: 77%
– Anti-corruption audits and assessments: 72%
– Due diligence policies for third parties: 72%
– Pre-acquisition due diligence: 72%
– Full-time compliance personnel: 64%
For private companies operating in the region:
– Anti-corruption policy: 74%
– Anti-corruption training: 43%
– Procedures for gifts, travel and entertainment of officials: 54%
– Procedures for charitable and community donations: 48%
– Procedures for political contributions: 38%
– Procedures for facilitations payments: 40%
– Anonymous reporting mechanisms: 35%
– Anti-corruption contract terms: 48%
– Anti-corruption audits and assessments: 36%
– Due diligence policies for third parties: 39%
– Pre-acquisition due diligence: 37%
– Full-time compliance personnel: 30%
For multinational companies operating in the region:
– Anti-corruption policy: 88%
– Anti-corruption training: 76%
– Procedures for gifts, travel and entertainment of officials: 81%
– Procedures for charitable and community donations: 73%
– Procedures for political contributions: 62%
– Procedures for facilitations payments: 58%
– Anonymous reporting mechanisms: 65%
– Anti-corruption contract terms: 69%
– Anti-corruption audits and assessments: 60%
– Due diligence policies of third parties: 60%
– Pre-acquisition due diligence: 61%
– Full-time compliance personnel: 56%
For local or regional companies in the region:
– Anti-corruption policy: 69%
– Anti-corruption training: 35%
– Procedures for gifts, travel and entertainment of officials: 48%
– Procedures for charitable and community donations: 44%
– Procedures for political contributions: 34%
– Procedures for facilitations payments: 35%
– Anonymous reporting mechanisms: 28%
– Anti-corruption contract terms: 41%
– Anti-corruption audits and assessments: 32%
– Due diligence policies for third parties: 33%
– Pre-acquisition due diligence: 33%
– Full-time compliance personnel: 20%
Though these results do not necessarily suggest that each category of company is undertaking the levels of compliance precautions necessary to adequately manage risk, it can give companies an idea of where they stand with respect to their peers.
The FCPAméricas blog is not intended to provide legal advice to its readers. The blog entries and posts include only the thoughts, ideas, and impressions of its authors and contributors, and should be considered general information only about the Americas, anti-corruption laws including the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, issues related to anti-corruption compliance, and any other matters addressed. Nothing in this publication should be interpreted to constitute legal advice or services of any kind. Furthermore, information found on this blog should not be used as the basis for decisions or actions that may affect your business; instead, companies and businesspeople should seek legal counsel from qualified lawyers regarding anti-corruption laws or any other legal issue. The Editor and the contributors to this blog shall not be responsible for any losses incurred by a reader or a company as a result of information provided in this publication. For more information, please contact Info@MattesonEllisLaw.com.
The author gives his permission to link, post, distribute, or reference this article for any lawful purpose, provided attribution is made to the author.
© 2013 Matteson Ellis Law, PLLC
Post authored by Matteson Ellis, FCPAméricas Founder & Editor
Comments