Navigating Compliance Amid the White House’s 180-Day Pause in FCPA Investigations and Enforcement Actions

The February 10, 2025, Executive Order pausing new enforcement actions under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) for 180 days represents a significant shift in the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) priorities. This policy move, coupled with the Attorney General’s February 5 memorandum aimed at focusing resources on investigations of foreign bribery that facilitates drug cartels and transnational criminal organizations, has generated considerable debate and confusion regarding the implications for corporate compliance and international business ethics.

Understanding the Executive Order

The Executive Order directs the DOJ to suspend the initiation of new FCPA investigations and review all existing enforcement actions while it reassesses its approach to anti-corruption enforcement and considers updated guidelines and policies. According to the administration, this pause is intended to promote American economic competitiveness and reduce the regulatory burden on U.S. businesses operating internationally. The DOJ has also indicated that enforcement efforts will pivot towards national security concerns, particularly those related to illicit finance and foreign influence operations.

While this policy shift reflects an evolving enforcement landscape, it does not eliminate FCPA obligations for businesses. The FCPA remains the law of the land; Congress has not repealed it. Companies must remain vigilant in maintaining robust anti-corruption compliance programs to mitigate risks that persist despite this temporary pause in enforcement actions – and remain compliant with the laws of other countries in which they do business.

The FCPA: A Longstanding Framework for Business Integrity

The U.S. has been the global leader of efforts to combat corrupt business activities and it encouraged other countries to follow suit. Congress passed the FCPA in 1977 to maintain public confidence in the integrity of the markets by sanctioning companies and executives who paid bribes to foreign officials to obtain business.

After the law was enacted, investors had reason to believe that the U.S. and foreign companies that traded their securities on U.S. markets were compliant with U.S. law. For decades, the FCPA has played a key role in corporate compliance, setting expectations for anti-bribery enforcement and ethical business practices. It has served as a deterrent against corruption, provided companies with compliance guidelines and promoted a level playing field in the global marketplace.

Businesses operating within these standards rely on consistent enforcement to maintain fair competition. As some business executives have noted, U.S. companies can (and do) cite to the likelihood of criminal sanctions and civil liability due to the DOJ’s and SEC’s vigorous enforcement of the FCPA to help them avoid becoming targets of bribe solicitations by foreign officials.

There is room for clarification of some of the FCPA’s key provisions, especially given the dearth of judicial case law interpreting the statute, but the suspension of new FCPA enforcement actions could create new challenges for companies committed to compliance.

Potential Implications for Businesses

The administration’s policy shift has the potential to create uncertainty for U.S. businesses that have made significant investments in compliance programs. Many companies have spent years developing robust anti-corruption measures. These measures often involve significant costs in terms of systems and training, which compliance executives have to justify to their company’s leadership team. If the pause required by the Executive Order becomes policy and executives conclude that the FCPA will no longer be enforced, this shift may create questions about the value of investing in these expensive safeguards.

Additionally, foreign regulators—including the UK’s Serious Fraud Office (SFO) and France’s Parquet National Financier (PNF)—have historically worked closely with U.S. authorities on anti-bribery enforcement. The suspension of new FCPA investigations could raise questions about future cooperation and regulatory alignment in global anti-corruption efforts.

Maintaining Compliance in a Changing Enforcement Landscape

Despite the suspension of new DOJ FCPA investigations, the legal requirements of the FCPA remain unchanged. Companies should not interpret this as a signal to relax anti-corruption compliance efforts, as future enforcement actions could be more aggressive upon expiration of the 180-day review period.

Key Considerations for Businesses:

• Continue enforcing strong anti-bribery policies and conducting third-party due diligence.
• Ensure compliance training remains a priority for employees, agents, and business partners.
• Maintain robust internal accounting controls to prevent unauthorized or improper transactions.

The SEC’s Continued Enforcement Authority

The SEC has not announced a similar standstill of enforcement practices and retains full authority under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to hold companies responsible for books and records violations and internal controls deficiencies.

• Falsified Books & Records – Any misclassification of payments, such as labeling an improper transaction as a “consulting fee” or “marketing expense,” remains a compliance risk.
• Off-the-Books Accounts – Undisclosed financial records or unapproved transactions could still trigger enforcement actions.
• Weak Internal Controls – The SEC has historically pursued companies for both bribery and failing to detect and prevent improper payments.

Looking Ahead: Compliance Should Remain a Priority

Businesses that ignore or de-prioritize compliance efforts during this period may face:

• Delayed but Increased Enforcement – When the pause is lifted, companies that failed to maintain compliance may become a focus of future investigations.
• Foreign Regulatory Action – International enforcement agencies remain active, and companies could face scrutiny abroad, even if U.S. investigations slow down.
• Reputational Risks & Private Litigation – Investors, shareholders, and business partners expect continued adherence to compliance best practices.

Conclusion: Staying the Course on Compliance

Regardless of short-term enforcement shifts, the long-term expectation for corporate compliance remains unchanged. Companies should continue to follow FCPA best practices and maintain strong anti-corruption policies to protect against current and future regulatory risks.

Our team of experienced FCPA practitioners is available to help navigate these developments and ensure compliance strategies remain effective. Contact us for guidance about maintaining best practices amid shifting enforcement priorities.

Co-authored by Lionel André, Adriaen Morse, and John Rowley, Founding Partners at SECIL Law PLLC. They respectively can be reached at landre@secillaw.com; amorse@secillaw.com; and jrowley@secillaw.com.