Global Sales and Ethics
According to The United States Department of Justice, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act “was enacted for the purpose of making it unlawful for certain classes of persons and entities to make payments to foreign government officials to assist in obtaining or retaining business”. Therefore, Mike O’Brian is facing both an ethical and legal dilemma. If O’Brian is to provide $100,000, plus a “ten percent commission on future parts-and-service revenues”, and agrees with this stipulation, he will be committing an illegal act to both obtain and retain the sales business in Africa. O’Brian has limited options as to making a decision and how he will do so. By keeping the contract offer in place, O’Brian will face ethical dilemmas and will need to determine who he will carry out the sale while obtaining his commission.
Ethics and Decisions
…show more content…
For example, if the construction material company will not be providing the minister a bribe directly he has the ability to claim ignorant about having knowledge about the payoff that goes to the minister. Therefore, he may be able protect himself if he goes forward with the contract. If the company is expected to pay the minister, O’Brian will not be able to do so. On the other hand, O’Brian will be aware of what is happening, and pretending to be ignorant is lying and provides an ethical dilemma within itself. The situation at hand will force unethical behavior upon O’Brian if he wanted to obtain the contract and the
This review will address several issues associated with the legal, business, and ethics related with the case. First, it will address the legality of the case by reviewing the difference between a written and oral contract, and the results of recovering fees. Next, this review will analyze the business effect of the case as it relates to the monetary bottom line and Chuckrow’s attempt to protect his profits. Subsequently, it will highlight the unethical behavior of Chuckrow and its potential effects on future subcontractors’ trust in
1. You recently retired from government contracting work and established a consulting company (fully consistent with government ethics laws and rules, of course) with the primary focus of advising potential government contractors and subcontractors. Mr. Johnny Jones, of The Johnny Jones Flooring and Construction Company has approached you with a question. Jones and his company are potential subcontractors (they, obviously, specialize in flooring) on a federal construction contract worth a little over two million dollars ($ 2,000,000.00) recently awarded to the Jimmy Smith Construction Company (Jimmy Smith, the prime contractor). Neither Johnny nor his company have ever been part of a government contract
OECD published Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions and Related Documents to prevent bribery and corruption. The aim of this convention was making the bribery of a foreign public official a crime under their laws (International Monetary Fund, OECD Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions, 2001). This document recommends to member countries that:
If takes the bribe and therefore falsifies the calculations to appear to meet regulations, then they would fail to adhere to Rule 4, which states that Professional Engineers must “comply with applicable statutes, regulations and bylaws”. In failing to comply with the regulations this could consequentially cause some health or safety issues for the public and environment, and therefore fail to abide by Rule 1, “hold paramount the health, safety and welfare of the public, and have regard for the environment”. Rules 3, and 5 concern the “integrity, honesty, fairness and objectivity” if the Engineer in their profession, and upholding and enhancing “the honour, dignity, and reputation of their profession”. Not only would compromise their own integrity, and reputation by taking the bribe and falsifying information, they jeopardize that of the entire
In the past few years, enterprise integrity has come up on a regular subject of conversation. In the past ten years only, we have seen numerous situations associated with collaborative scams which have shaken the people 's trust in businesses and also the general economic climate. A few of the many salient frauds are the WorldCom and Enron 's scams, the ponzi scheme perpetrated by Bernard Madoff 's, the latest accusations of Goldman Sachs tricking option traders to guarantee the company 's personal profit. Incidents such as these designed us all, as upcoming corporation professionals as well as market leaders, think about ethics and its particular function in the commercial world (Gross, 2010.)
Each of these jurisdictions works together to keep aspects of FCPA from being violated. This law is not always prohibiting all payments to the foreign officials. The FCPA has an exception for anti-bribery prohibitions and that is called “ routine government action.” This exception is also given the names “facilitating” or “ grease payment.” The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act defines this “routine government action” as for a foreign official to perform in obtaining permits, licenses, or other official documents that enable then to do business in that country, processing government papers such as visa and work orders, protection services and conducting inspections, and anything that has similar nature (6). The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) has two affirmative defenses and they consist of assertion that payment in question was lawful under the laws of the foreign country, and the assertion that the payment was valued a bona fide expenditure (6). This affirmative defense is aimed to be for the issuer, domestic concern, or other person. In this affirmative defense there must be some type of written law authorizing or supporting the payment. The penalties for violating the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act are different from the provision that they fall under. For an individual and it is from the anti bribery
Yes, I think that the payments outlined on pages 12 and 13 should be considered corrupt practices because of the way they were registered in the company’s books -it was in compliance with the FCPA because of the anti-bribery provision and the books and records provision.
While reading this case analysis, The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act came into discussion as an underlying factor in Weihardt’s decision. The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act was enacted for the purpose of making it unlawful for certain classes of persons and entities to make payments to foreign government officials to assist in obtaining or retaining business. This practice applies to Weinhardt in the fact that he was given the opportunity to give Lee a bribe to obtain Lees’ business.
The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977- is a U.S. Federal Law that prohibits any U.S. citizen from bribing a foreign official for the purpose of obtaining
The ethical dilemma Bob faces in this case is a transaction that makes Bob question his and the company’s ethics and legal obligations. It’s February, business was slow, the company was $5,000 below their breakeven point, and it appeared as if a
In 1977, Congress passed the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), which makes it unlawful for U.S. businesspersons or companies to pay, with money or anything else of value, to foreign officials to secure beneficial contracts. The anti-bribery requirements of the FCPA have applied to all U.S. persons since 1977. In 1998, certain amendments were revised and the anti-bribery requirements now apply to foreign firms and persons who cause an act in continuance of bribery within the United States. The government was attempting to restricted illegal behavior, which is why they implemented the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act after the SEC discovered that over 400 companies were sending corrupt payments to foreign government officials and
In today’s ever changing and competitive modern world of business, it is critical for the companies to have activities internationally. In order to prohibit frauds and illegal activities, several acts and documents have been elaborated. One of the documents is Foreign Corrupt Practices Act that has been enacted in the 1970’s, as a result of SEC investigation of several U.S. companies that made illegal payments to foreign governmental officials, politicians, and political parties (Barnes 73). The FCPA had a critical impact on the way U.S. firms do business. Companies that did not comply with FCPA have been subject of criminal and civil enforcement actions that later resulted in huge fines and sentences for
Mr. Chong knows about recent cases of corporate bribery in Malaysia and in the retail industry. There had been scandals regarding foreign investors who bribed public officials or financed government programs to obtain business privileges or competitive advantage (Inkpen, 2010). Moreover, there was a recent case of bribery involving a Jextra’s country manager in the Philippines. More likely, this manager also encountered similar ethical dilemmas like Mr. Chong. Some individual factors that may have driven him to act unethically in the Philippines could have been pressure from the company to expand and gain competitive advantage in the region. Alternatively, he might have simply wanted to advance his career as a country manager, lacked of ethics or did not know the local laws regarding bribery. Additionally, he might not have received or requested support from the top management regarding the social and ethical issues raised in the Philippines. Mr. Chong, as an experienced manager, should have anticipated that he would encounter legal and ethical risks in Malaysia.
This case portrays the widely propagated and accepted phenomena of bribes and corruption in developing countries. Specifically how it affects every sector of the Ukrainian society, therefore making it difficult for the American investors to establish companies there and to prosper solely on doing good business. The case describes the types of obstacles and ethical dilemmas being created for the investors as a result of bribery and extortion.
It is clear from the case study that Alistair knows the contract is unorthodox. The problem he faces is whether he should overlook the bribe or report it to the board. The board of directors expects Alistair to tell the truth and report the bribe because of: his position as Chief Legal Officer, the board has a very strong ethics policy and they are wary of unethical activities.