Furthermore, the FCPA also criminalizes the act of "disguising" the
amount as a legitimate expense on any mandatory registration, issuance,
report, etc...

TZ

-----Original Message-----
From: Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Albert D. Spalding,
Jr.
Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 10:04 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Foreign Corrupt Practices Act question

And then there is the money.  More specifically, the tax deduction (or 
lack thereof).
Irrespective of prosecution under the securities laws. Internal Revenue 
Code section 162 disallows the deductibility of bribes on a U.S. income 
tax return, including, specifically, bribes in violation of the FCPA no 
matter where the bribes took place.

Albert Spalding

Peter W. Schroth wrote:

> There was Dooley v. United Technologies Corp., 803 F. Supp. 428, 440
> (D.D.C. 1992), but the 1998 amendments go even further.  In its
current
> form, the FCPA purports to reach foreigners who have virtually any
sort
> of contact with the United States in furtherance of a violation of the
> act and U.S. nationals who do anything in furtherance of such a
> violation anywhere in the world.  But don't you think this raises some
> due process problems, such as minimum contacts (International Shoe Co.
> v. State of Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 316 (1945), Burger King Corp. v.
> Rudzewick, 471 U.S. 462, 474 (1985)) and reasonable anticipation of
> being haled into court in the U.S. (World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v.
> Woodson, 444 U.S. 286, 297 (1980))?  Article 5 of the OECD Convention
> might help a little as to absent nationals, but not absent
non-nationals.
>
> As to the practicalities of physical control over the defendants,
> however, the government can just hire some Mexicans to kidnap them and
> bring them back as far as El Paso.  Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain, 124 S.Ct.
> 2739, 2761-62 (2004).
>
> Peter W. Schroth
>
>
>
> Robert Bird wrote:
>
>> A student asked me a question in class about the FCPA which I cannot
>> definitively answer.
>>
>> The FCPA applies to U.S. companies bribing abroad and an amendment
>> extends the FCPA to Non-U.S. citizens acting in the United States.
Is a
>> foreign agent (say, a Mexican national) who bribes a Mexican official
on
>> behalf of a U.S. firm in Mexico liabile under the FCPA?  Assume that
the
>> Mexican national never enters the United States.  Also, would there
be a
>> jurisdictional problem with prosecuting the Mexican agent?
>>
>> Thanks in advance for you help,
>>
>> Robert
>>
>> Robert C. Bird
>> Assistant Professor
>> University of Connecticut
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>