Amending the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act: Should the Bribery Act 2010 Be a Guideline?

On December 19th, 1977, President Jimmy Carter signed into law the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). This Act prohibited the “furtherance of an offer, payment, promise to pay, authorization of the payment of any money, or offer, gift, promise to give, or authorization of the giving of anything of value” to a foreign official. As early as 1981, members of Congress introduced bills to amend the Act due to numerous complaints from the business and legal communities. Both proponents and opponents of amending the FCPA set forth arguments in May, June, and July of 1981. Similarly, in 2011, both sides debated the merits of the Act, along with what each side viewed as “improvements” to the Act. While the United States debated its own anti-bribery act, the United Kingdom passed the Bribery Act 2010. Until 2009, British prosecutors had never convicted a company of bribery due to outdated legislation and the perception of bribery as “a necessary cost of doing business in certain countries.” As one world power debates the merits of amending its long standing anti-bribery law and another world power passes a similar yet distinct law, it is appropriate to look at one in the context of the other. This paper compares American and British