From The Archives

Key Takeaways

• 2010 roundtable featured top DOJ, SEC, and Chamber officials.
• Weissmann authored “Restoring Balance,” urging FCPA reform.
• 2025 Trump EO pauses FCPA enforcement, citing overreach.
• DOJ directed to restore proper bounds on anti‑corruption probes.
• Weissmann publicly criticized the EO, highlighting political tensions.

Pulse Analysis

The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, enacted in 1977, has become a cornerstone of U.S. anti‑corruption policy. By 2010, enforcement intensity sparked a backlash among business leaders, prompting a high‑profile C‑span roundtable that gathered senior government officials and legal experts. Andrew Weissmann, then a senior figure at the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform, leveraged the forum to champion "Restoring Balance," a set of amendments aimed at curbing what he viewed as overly aggressive prosecutions and restoring predictability for corporations operating abroad.

Fast forward to February 2025, when President Donald Trump signed an Executive Order temporarily halting FCPA enforcement. The order argued that recent investigations had stretched beyond “proper bounds,” directing the Department of Justice to recalibrate its approach. While supporters hailed the move as a relief for businesses facing costly investigations, critics warned it could erode the United States' credibility in the global fight against corruption. The directive also raised questions about the separation of powers, as it effectively instructed a law‑enforcement agency to alter its prosecutorial discretion.

For multinational enterprises, the oscillation between aggressive enforcement and sudden pauses creates a compliance paradox. Companies must balance robust internal controls with the uncertainty of policy swings that can affect litigation risk, insurance premiums, and capital allocation. Weissmann’s outspoken criticism of the 2025 order reflects broader industry concerns that politicized enforcement undermines the rule of law. As Congress and the courts weigh the executive’s authority, firms should monitor legislative proposals and judicial rulings that could cement a more stable FCPA framework, ensuring that anti‑corruption programs remain both effective and adaptable.