The U.S. is the world's bribery cop. Is that about to change?

Summary

Planet Money: The U.S. is the World's Bribery Cop. Is That About to Change?

Released on June 20, 2025

Introduction: The Glencore Scandal and U.S. Bribery Enforcement

The episode opens with the dramatic story of Glencore, one of the world's largest commodity trading companies, and its involvement in bribery to secure oil contracts in the newly independent South Sudan. Host Erica Barris sets the stage by highlighting how Glencore's actions drew the attention of U.S. authorities, leading to significant legal repercussions.

Key Quote:

"So anything that has been extracted, drilled, grown on planet Earth, probably they have their hands into it." — Javier Blass [02:09]

Origins of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA)

The discussion shifts to the historical context of the FCPA, a pivotal U.S. law enacted in 1977 to combat corporate bribery of foreign officials. The origins of the FCPA are traced back to the Watergate scandal, emphasizing the role of Stanley Sporkin, a federal employee whose observations during the hearings highlighted the rampant corruption in corporate America.

Key Quote:

"That whole law started on the basis of my going home in the evening in the early 70s and watching the Watergate hearings." — Stanley Sporkin [07:30]

FCPA Development and International Cooperation

Initially, the FCPA saw minimal enforcement, with only eight cases in its first decade. However, as American companies faced increasing competition from foreign firms that did not adhere to similar anti-corruption standards, the U.S. realized the necessity of stronger enforcement. This led to international cooperation, particularly through the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), culminating in the 1997 anti-bribery treaty signed by 29 nations.

Impact on Companies and the Global Economy

Experts like Rachel Brewster, a Duke Law School professor, explain how bribery was once seen as a mere "grease in the wheels" to expedite business deals, especially in developing countries. However, economic studies revealed that bribery distorted competition, enriched corrupt officials, and ultimately hindered global economic efficiency.

Key Quote:

"Bribery might help an individual company secure a deal, sure. But it did not help a country's economy." — Rachel Brewster [11:27]

Glencore's Bribery Case: A Deep Dive

The narrative returns to Glencore, detailing how the company engaged in widespread bribery across multiple countries, including South Sudan, Venezuela, Brazil, and Nigeria. The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) meticulously documented these illicit activities, demonstrating the substantial profits Glencore reaped from their corrupt practices.

Key Quote:

"So it's a rather good investment. I mean, they more than doubled their money." — Javier Blass [23:06]

Despite Glencore's eventual compliance measures and the imposition of over $1.1 billion in fines, the episode underscores the persistent challenges in curbing corporate corruption.

Changes in FCPA Enforcement Under the Trump Administration

A significant turn in the episode addresses the Trump administration's approach to the FCPA. President Trump criticized the FCPA as "crippling American businesses," advocating for a rollback of its stringent enforcement to enhance U.S. competitiveness, especially in critical sectors like mining and the acquisition of essential minerals.

Key Quote:

"The President's foreign policy is inextricably linked with how competitive American companies are abroad." — Executive Order Excerpt [26:03]

Legal expert James Kukios elaborates on this shift, suggesting that the administration's stance is motivated by the need to compete with countries like China, where bribery is not as heavily sanctioned.

Key Quote:

"We need access to those ports, we need access to those critical minerals. If we do not pay bribes like China does, we will lose those things to China." — James Kukios [27:07]

The DOJ's reduction in FCPA investigations, including the early termination of Glencore's compliance monitoring, signals a departure from previous rigorous enforcement practices.

Conclusion: The Future of U.S. Anti-Corruption Leadership

The episode concludes by pondering the implications of the Trump administration's policies on the U.S.'s role as the global enforcer against corporate bribery. With reduced enforcement and a more lenient approach towards FCPA violations, there are concerns that the U.S. may be retreating from its leadership in combating international corruption.

Key Quote:

"We need to be able to fight fire with fire or bribes with bribes." — James Kukios [27:46]

The episode leaves listeners contemplating whether this shift will undermine global anti-corruption efforts and alter the balance of economic power on the international stage.

Notable Contributions:

• Hosts: Amanda Aronczyk and Erica Barris
• Expert Insights: Javier Blass (Bloomberg), Stanley Sporkin (SEC), Rachel Brewster (Duke Law School), James Kukios (Morrison Forrester)

Final Thoughts

"Planet Money" effectively weaves together historical context, expert analysis, and contemporary policy changes to provide a comprehensive look at the U.S.'s role in combating international bribery and how recent administrative shifts may alter this landscape. The episode serves as an essential resource for understanding the intricate interplay between economic policies, corporate behavior, and international relations.

Transcript

[Advertiser]

This message comes from Discover, accepted at 99% of places that take credit cards nationwide. If you don't think so, maybe it's time to face facts. You're stuck in the past. Based on the February 2024 Nielsen report. [e-mail] credit card.

[Erica Barris]

This is Planet Money from NPR.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

Now, this doesn't happen very often, but back in 2011, the world welcomed a new country, the Republic of South Sudan. A nation is born. The scene in South Sudan is nothing less than electric.

[Erica Barris]

After a brutal civil war that went on for decades, the people of South Sudan voted for independence from Sudan.

[Javier Blass]

I feel good, man.

[Erica Barris]

I feel good.

[Stanley Sporkin]

This is the new flag that will be recognized by different world states.

[Javier Blass]

South Sudan declares independence, Raised the flag of the 9th of July of 2011.

[Erica Barris]

This is Javier Blass. He covers energy and commodities for Bloomberg.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

Javier was watching this vote because South Sudan has a lot of oil.

[Javier Blass]

And well, everyone, every diplomat, everyone in Africa is celebrating this success. There are some commodity traders who are thinking, aha, New independent country, loss of oil. They need money. We want to buy. How we get our hands on the South Sudanese oil.

[Erica Barris]

Javier co authored a book called the World for Money, Power and the Traders who Barter the Earth's Resources. He describes commodity traders as being willing to go where no one else wants to go and take risks that no one else is willing to take.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

So it wasn't surprising that some of the people going aha. And trying to figure out how to get their hands on the oil work for one of the largest commodity trading companies in, in the world, Glencore. The company is based in Switzerland, but they have about 60 offices in over 35 countries. And Glencore over the years has bought and sold some hundred different commodities.

[Javier Blass]

So anything that has been extracted, drilled, grown on planet Earth, probably they have their hands into it. Oil, natural gas, aluminium, copper, wheat, corn, sugar, you name it.

[Erica Barris]

You have almost definitely purchased something that was once bought and sold by Glencore. Like the wheat in a slice of bread or the aluminum in a can of soda or the cobalt in an electric vehicle.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

Anyway, the details of what happened next are a little fuzzy, but it seems that within a few weeks of South Sudan's declaration of independence, a small group of people from Glencore flew by private plane from London to, to Juba, which is the capital.

[Javier Blass]

And they carry a special suitcase full with $800,000 in cash.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

Cash Is this American cash? Is this euros?

[Javier Blass]

What is this American? American dollars?

[Erica Barris]

Because American dollars are welcome pretty much anywhere they want to travel to.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

Where would that money have come from?

[Javier Blass]

Surprisingly, it came from Glencore itself because at Glencore office in Switzerland in this year, they have a cashier, they have a cash desk where oil traders will go and say, I'm going on a business trip and I need some money.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

The traders would go to the cash desk and say, yeah, I'm going to need a million dollars. Oh, you know what, actually, can you make that like $10 million in cash? Because I am going on a trip and I will have some expenses.

[Erica Barris]

Javier says he can just imagine the conversation between the trader and the cash desk clerk as the trader explains what the money is for.

[Javier Blass]

Office expenses, isn't it? Yes, office expenses. Okay, office expenses it is. Enjoy the trip. And everyone will pretend that that was the real use of the money. And everyone, of course, knew that that was not what the money was used for.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

Okay, and what was the money used for?

[Javier Blass]

Well, the money was used to pay bribes.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

Bribes. $800,000 in bribes to convince some officials in the new government to give Glencore a couple of good oil contracts.

[Javier Blass]

They may have had some office expenses, but the bulk of those $800,000 that they took on their plane was to pay bribes immediately.

[Erica Barris]

And that was just one of many, many bribes in many countries paid out by Glencore Bribe that eventually drew the attention of the US Government because it ran afoul of an American law known as the Foreign Corrupt Practices act. And ultimately the U.S. department of justice accused Glencore of years worth of bribery and corruption.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

Hello and welcome to Planet Money. I'm Amanda Aronczyk.

[Erica Barris]

And I'm Erica Barris. The US has been policing bribery all over the world for nearly half, half a century. But President Trump has said that this anti corruption law is crippling American businesses. So the administration has reduced the number of investigators, held some cases, and they're changing the rules. So does this mean that the US Government is bringing bribery back? And if that's the plan, is that a good idea?

[Amanda Aronczyk]

Today on the show, the story of how the US Became the world's famous anti corruption cop and how the Trump administration is rolling that back.

[Wealthfront]

This message comes from Wealthfront. Get 4% APY on your cash from partner banks with Wealthfront's cash account. Go to wealthfront.com money for a $50 bonus with a $500 deposit when you open your first cash account. This has been a paid message from Wealthfront Cash account offered by Wealthfront Brokerage, LLC. Member FINRA SIPC, not a bank. APY on deposits as of December 27, 2024 is representative subject to change and requires no minimum funds are swept to partner banks where they earn the variable apy. This message comes from Schwab. Everyone has moments when they could have done better. Same goes for where you invest. Level up and invest smarter with Schwab. Get market insights, education and human help when you need it. This message comes from Square. Your favorite neighborhood spots are using Square to do everything from covering cash flow gaps to expanding to new locations. Wherever your business is growing, Square meets you there. Go to square.com go NPR to learn more.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

So when a couple of Glencore employees flew with $800,000 in cash from London to South Sudan, why did US law enforcement even find out? The reason was in part because of a law that was passed in 1977, the Foreign Corrupt Practices act, or FCPA.

[Erica Barris]

And there's a story about how that law came into being. It all started in the 1970s when Congress began to investigate the scandal that would lead to President renowned Richard Nixon's resignation. And there was one guy who was key to the law, a federal employee named Stanley Sporkin.

[Stanley Sporkin]

That whole law started on the basis of my going home in the evening in the early 70s and watching the Watergate hearings.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

Stanley investigated financial fraud for the securities and Exchange Commission, the sec. We are using an old interview because he passed away a few years ago.

[Erica Barris]

And Stanley, like practically everyone, was riveted by the Watergate hearings. It was this major television event, and there's the familiar part. Burglars breaking into the Watergate Hotel and stealing information from the Democrats for President Richard Nixon, who was trying to get reelected.

[Stanley Sporkin]

The committee will come to order and counsel will call the first witness.

[Erica Barris]

But there was this whole other part that Stanley was obsessed with.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

The moment happened late in the hearings. It was a series of CEOs and corporate execs being questioned about their political contributions to the Committee for the Re Election of the President. An acronym that, yes, spells creep and council.

[Stanley Sporkin]

Call the first witness, Mr. Oren E. Atkins. You stand up, Mr. Atkins. Hold up your right hand.

[Erica Barris]

Over the course of the hearings, executives from a bunch of companies testified to giving illegal campaign contributions. There were execs from Goodyear Tires and American Airlines and Ashland Oil. The moment that really stood out for Stanley was the questioning of an executive from Gulf oil about a $100,000 campaign contribution.

[Stanley Sporkin]

Did you make a contribution to the President's reelection effort? Didn't give him 100. I gave him 50,000.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

So Stanley's background was in accounting. So as he's watching, he's wondering, where did that 50,000 come from? Then the exec says that he got it from a colleague in the Bahamas.

[Stanley Sporkin]

Told him I needed $50,000, and he brought it to me. In what form was the $50,000? It was in cash.

[Erica Barris]

Stanley Sporkin goes into work the next day and apparently says, how the bleep. Could a publicly held company have a slush fund? There should be records of this. You know, is Gulf Oil declaring this to the irs? Do their investors know about this?

[Stanley Sporkin]

What bothered me by watching that was I didn't understand how these companies were making these payments even though they knew they were illegal.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

Stanley was worried about the bookkeeping of it all. And he was wondering how widespread was this? Like, do all companies have a slush fund for making illegal payments? And as Stanley is drawing attention to the issue, there's a senator who gets interested, too.

[Erica Barris]

Senator Frank Church over at the Foreign Relations Committee. He was worried about something else. If all of these American companies are paying contributions to reelect the President, who else in the world are they paying? And for what?

[Amanda Aronczyk]

So the Senator holds hearings and they find that not only are all of these companies making illegal political campaign contributions in the U.S. they are also paying bribes to foreign officials.

[Erica Barris]

One of the most dramatic admissions from the hearings was about Lockheed, the aircraft manufacturer.

[Stanley Sporkin]

We were engaged in trying to compete in a foreign market, and we competed according to the customs and the ground rules that were in effect out in those foreign markets.

[Erica Barris]

Okay, you've answered the question by not answering the question, and I want the record to be clear that Lockheed had been paying millions of dollars in bribes to the prime Minister of Japan, to a Dutch prince, to the President of Italy, all in exchange for lucrative contracts to buy their jets.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

What the Senator learned in his hearings was that many companies saw bribing, particularly in developing countries, as grease in the wheels, you know, a way to get important and lucrative business deals done.

[Rachel Brewster]

I think that there was fewer qualms about it then. There was this idea that bribery made things go better, you know, that it was kind of. That governments were bad. And to the extent you could get government out of it with a bribe, then actually that could help market efficiency.

[Erica Barris]

But when these Lockheed bribes came to light, it was a huge scandal.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

Rachel Brewster has written about these bribery hearings. She's a professor at Duke Law School, and she actually has a PhD in Political Science and a law degree and she did a fellowship. Rachel, how long were you in school for?

[Rachel Brewster]

Oh, yeah. You and my mother.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

Sorry. She phoned right before and she asked me to ask you that.

[Rachel Brewster]

I know she's like as they said, more degrees than a thermometer.

[Erica Barris]

Rachel says that when all of these bribing scandals came to light, there were huge repercussions. The Prime Minister of Japan was forced to resign. Italy's Democratic president was ousted by the Communist Party. What the Senator was worried about was true bribing wasn't just unethical. It had foreign policy implications, could even be a threat to national security.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

It was around this time that economists also started paying more attention to bribery. Before the 1970s, they weren't all that critical of bribing. Yeah, sure, maybe it's unethical, but it was efficient, grease in the wheels. But then they started looking more closely at the data, crunching numbers about who benefited and who lost. And they were like, wait a minute. Bribery might help an individual company secure a deal, sure. But it did not help a country's economy. The global economy would work better if no companies were bribing.

[Erica Barris]

In 1977, Congress decided they wanted to do something about all of this corruption and bribery. They pass the Foreign Corrupt Practices act, and President Jimmy Carter signs it into law. The US Becomes the first country to prohibit its companies from bribing foreign officials.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

But pretty quickly, American companies find this annoying.

[Rachel Brewster]

The US Chamber of Commerce was just like, this is gonna hurt our ability to export. It's gonna undermine our ability to kind of engage in the global economy. This is gonna really hurt us.

[Erica Barris]

So at first, the US Government didn't really enforce the law all that often. There were only eight cases in the first decade after the law was enacted. But over time, it became clear that there was a big problem if the government was going to enforce the fcpa. American companies couldn't really compete with companies around the world. Not if only Americans were being held to a higher standard. It was as if the US Was the only kid following the rules of the game while everyone else was cheating and high fiving and kind of making fun of the Americans.

[Rachel Brewster]

Like, if you're just stopping the Americans from bribing, are you really helping the global economy?

[Erica Barris]

The problem was the US Couldn't just go out in the world and stop by, say, the headquarters of Sony in Japan or Volkswagen in Germany and be like, hey, no more bribing. They needed a way to get buy in.

[Rachel Brewster]

So then there's this big push to say other nations should be doing this too and, you know, kind of establish more of an international baseline.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

So American officials brought their idea to an international organization made up of countries with the largest, most developed economies. The oecd, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and development. It's this group, it's based in Paris, and at the time it included 29 countries, including Canada and Greece and Australia.

[Erica Barris]

And the US was like, could we all agree that bribery is bad for business? And at that time, pretty much all the major companies were based in this group of countries.

[Rachel Brewster]

Who cares if you don't have the rest of the world on your side? You've got the states where all the major multinationals are headquartered so they could control the behavior they wanted to control with only the agreement of a smaller number of states.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

In 1997, all 29 OECD countries signed an anti bribery treaty known by its friends as the convention on combating bribery of foreign public officials in international business transactions.

[Erica Barris]

The US Remains the main enforcer, but other countries also set up their own anti corruption offices. And the countries work closely together.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

Nowadays, people like Rachel, political scientists and economists and researchers, they have done stacks and stacks of studies about bribery. And they've come to pretty much the same conclusion that bribery is bad for competition because it's not like the best company wins. Also, bribes enrich corrupt officials because the money often stays with a small group of elites. And bribes actually raise the cost of doing business. That old idea that a bribe will cut through the red tape isn't actually true. Bribes can create even more red tape.

[Rachel Brewster]

Now, I think there's a much greater appreciation of the fact that when you pay a bribe, government officials do not go away. In fact, more government officials say, wait, they'll. They'll pay bribes.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

Oh, I see. And they're all like, we all like to be bribes.

[Rachel Brewster]

We all would like to be bribes. Yes. So once corporations are known for paying bribes, they attract more government officials from the country. So it isn't like you pay it once and you've made your deal and they go away. But actually you pay it once and then actually the government wants to interact with you more because, you know, they know that there's a source of foreign capital there.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

So, like, a bribe isn't like a one time thing.

[Rachel Brewster]

I mean, I think corporations would like that. But no, government officials see it as a revenue stream.

[Erica Barris]

Over the past three decades, that sense that bribery is bad for governments and bad for businesses became a kind of orthodoxy.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

And with more international cooperation, there were more and more cases against Goldman Sachs and Siemens, Halliburton, 3M, Herbalife, and of course, Glencore.

[Erica Barris]

After the break, we go back to Glencore and that $800,000 bribe. To understand how an anti bribery case gets prosecuted, we consider the Trump administration's defanging of the FCPA.

[Advertiser]

This message comes from Apple Card each Apple product, like the iPhone, is thoughtfully developed by skilled designers. The Titanium Apple Card is no different. It's laser etched, has no numbers and rewards you with daily cash on everything you buy, including 3%. Back at Apple Apply for Apple Card in minutes, subject to credit approval. Applecard is issued by Goldman Sachs Bank USA Salt Lake City Branch terms and.

[Wealthfront]

[e-mail] this message comes from Discover Are you still quoting 30 year old movies? Have you said cool beans in the last 90 days? Do you think Discover isn't widely accepted? If this sounds like you, you're stuck in the past. Discover is accepted at 99% of places that take credit cards nationwide and every time you make a purchase with your card, you automatically earn cash back. Welcome to the now it pays to Discover. Learn [e-mail] credit card Based on the February 2024 Nielsen report, this message is.

[Advertiser]

From Spectrum Business from independently owned storefronts just open for business to established professional services run from large offices, Spectrum is committed to delivering connectivity solutions for any size business. Create a plan made for your business with fast, reliable Internet, TV packages, phone mobile services and more, all backed by the Spectrum Commitment. From one employee to thousands, Spectrum keeps your business connected. Learn [e-mail] business this message comes from.

[Wealthfront]

Insperity, providing HR services and technology from payroll benefits and HR compliance to talent development. Learn [e-mail] hrmatters so Glencore, the company.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

That paid 800,000 in bribes to officials in the new government of South Sudan, we reached out to them for an interview, but they didn't get back to us in time. Fortunately though, there is a lot of documentation about their case. So we wanted to go back to it because it's closely related to the changes the Trump administration is now making to the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. To the fcpa.

[Erica Barris]

One of the priorities of this administration is to make sure companies have all the tools they need to obtain and produce critical minerals, and Trump seems to be worried that the FCPA might be getting in the way now.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

Mining and the buying and selling of critical minerals are industries that are considered at high risk for bad behavior. That's because there's a lot of money to be made, plus there's a lot of regulation. So these are companies that have to interact with government officials all the time for permits and contracts and environmental approvals.

[Erica Barris]

And when you dive into Glencore's history a little, you can see how many times the company took the low road. Like the Founder Mark rich. Back in 1983, he was indicted on 65 criminal charges. Racketeering, wire fraud. The largest case of tax evasion in U.S. history at the time. Oh, and he'd also been trading oil with Iran while the American hostages were still there. A bad look, to say the least. By the way, he was later pardoned by President Bill Clinton. Also a bad look for Bill.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

To escape the charges, Mark Rich moved to Switzerland, where his company was headquartered. Writer Xavier Blass says Glencore was not the first commodity trading company to set up their headquarters there.

[Javier Blass]

So you fly into Zurich, take the train, cross the mountains, and 30 minutes later you are in a very nice, tiny town, which is a tax haven in Switzerland full of companies like Glencore who make a business trading commodities.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

Sure, Switzerland is known for its Alps and its chocolate and its political neutrality and also its low, low taxes.

[Erica Barris]

Plus, there used to be this other Swiss delight. Until recently when you would file your corporate taxes, you could write off any bribes.

[Javier Blass]

The Swiss authorities saw this as a business expense. So according to Swiss law, you could claim a tax credit.

[Erica Barris]

So, you know, a company would be getting everything together for, you know, the Swiss irs, gathering their receipts from office equipment, the four day retreat. Oh, and their bribes. They'd ask the government for a tax refund, and they'd get it.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

These kinds of perks might help to explain why there are more commodity trading companies in Switzerland than anywhere else in the world.

[Erica Barris]

And one of the ways Glencore became a target of scrutiny was by growing a lot. They got into the mining business, went public. That forced them to be less secretive.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

So when they went to the cash desk and got a wad of dollars to take to some foreign official in exchange for favors, those transactions came across the radar of U.S. authorities.

[Erica Barris]

The DOJ spent years working on the Glencore bribery case. They got help from the Brazilian authorities and from the Serious Fraud Office in the uk, which I know the name, makes it kind of hard to take them seriously.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

We reached out to the DOJ to ask for an interview, and they declined. But in 2022, they did hold a press conference about their case against Glencore.

[Stanley Sporkin]

Good afternoon. I'm joined today by Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division, Kenneth Polite.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

That suitcase that went to South Sudan was just one of many, many suitcases.

[Wealthfront]

The scope of this criminal bribery scheme is staggering.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

There were suitcases of cash flying to Venezuela, suitcases to Brazil, suitcases to Nigeria.

[Wealthfront]

Glencore paid bribes to secure oil contracts. Glencore paid bribes to avoid government audits. Glencore paid bribes to judges to make lawsuits disappear. Why did Glencore do it? They did it to make money. Hundreds of millions of dollars.

[Erica Barris]

Ultimately, the DOJ accused Glencore of paying more than $100 million to middlemen who they knew were using the money for bribes.

[Javier Blass]

It was very interesting reading the case because the American prosecutors were really forensic in their calculation of the bribery payment and the profit.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

The investigators laid out how much Glencore invested in bribes compared to how much profit they made in a particular country.

[Erica Barris]

The DOJ said that, for example, over 10 years, Glencore paid $52 million in bribes to officials in Nigeria. And thanks to the contracts they secured, they made $124 million in profit.

[Javier Blass]

So it's a rather good investment. I mean, they more than doubled their money.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

An even better example cited by the DOJ was the Ivory Coast. $4 million in bribes, $30 million in profit. They made more than seven times their initial bribe investment.

[Javier Blass]

I mean, you understand why they were doing it. This was fantastic business.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

But, Javier, I feel like the point that you are making, which maybe you are making by accident, is it seems absolutely worth it to bribe.

[Javier Blass]

It is until you get caught.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

The outcome of all of this. The DOJ required Glencore to have two compliance monitors closely watch their work for the next three years. Basically, it's like asking a police officer to move in, make sure there's no criming. And also, partly based on the size of the bribes, the company had to pay more than $1.1 billion in criminal fines and forfeiture.

[Erica Barris]

Now Glencore says they've been doing the stuff they're supposed to do. There have been two independent compliance monitors making sure they follow the rules like keeping good records, publishing ethics and compliance reports. And they put out videos like this one with a trader talking about how committed she is to the company's integrity. You need to treat everyone with respect, need to be fair, open, and build trust. And this is where, for me, the integrity plays a major role. That was where things were left with Glencore.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

That is, until Trump took office earlier this year and started changing the rules. He has made no secret of his feelings towards the Foreign Corrupt Practices act, the fcpa. Years ago, before he was president, he actually called into the CNBC show squawk box to complain about it. Every other country goes into these places and they do what they have to do. It's a horrible law and it should be changed. I mean, we're like the policeman for the world. It's ridiculous.

[Erica Barris]

And now his anti FCPA stance is aligning with another priority for this Administration making sure that the US can acquire the critical minerals it needs.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

The evidence for this is tucked into an executive order that President Trump issued back in February about the fcpa. The order says that the President's foreign policy is inextricably linked with how competitive American companies are abroad.

[Erica Barris]

Here's the next part, and this is the part that matters. Quote, american national security depends in substantial part on the United States and its companies gaining strategic business advantages, whether in critical minerals, deep water ports or other key infrastructure or assets.

[James Kukios]

I think he's very much thinking of China.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

We called up James Kukios to help us understand this new guidance because he's been interpreting FCPA laws for most of his career. He was a prosecutor for the Department of Justice and now he is a lawyer at Morrison Forrester, a law firm known delightfully as mofo.

[Erica Barris]

And you were delighted.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

I was.

[Erica Barris]

And James says that Trump is probably thinking about how to compete with China.

[James Kukios]

And so I think his theory is that, you know, we need access to those ports, we need access to those critical minerals. If we do not pay bribes like China does, we will lose those things to China.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

China is not a member of the oecd, the international group that oversees anti corruption rules around the world. And the Chinese government does not seem to be all that worried about Chinese companies paying bribes to foreign officials. That seems to have happened in the Congo to get Cobalt and in Namibia to get to get lithium.

[James Kukios]

Trump has long been of the view that when it comes to global economic competition, all gloves should be off and we should be able to fight fire with fire or bribes with bribes.

[Erica Barris]

So since his executive order, there are a lot fewer people working specifically on FCPA cases. The Trump administration closed about half of its investigations.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

Last week, the DOJ issued a new memo that is supposed to provide further guidance as to when to enforce the.

[James Kukios]

FCPA at a very high level. There's not that many changes.

[Erica Barris]

Like, prosecutors have always had a lot of discretion. If James was prosecuting a case, he would think about scale. Was it a serious crime? Was it a big bribe? Was a person who was bribed a low level official or a high level official?

[Amanda Aronczyk]

James says that part hasn't changed. But what has changed is that now prosecutors are supposed to ask themselves, what was the reason for the bribery and what was the impact?

[James Kukios]

Did US Businesses suffer any harm as a result of the bribery? Did US national security suffer any harm as a result of the bribery? And if the answer to those is yes, then these are cases that we are more likely to bring in. FCPA enforcement action than if the answer.

[Erica Barris]

Is no, which is a big change. The rules that the U.S. and our partners in fighting bribery have agreed to follow explicitly say that those are not good reasons for deciding which companies to go after. Like, the point is that bribery is bad. It's a crime, so law enforcement should go after the companies that are being bad, even when there might be economic or political reasons to ignore the crime.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

Of course, this memo just came out, so it is to be seen exactly how the changes play out.

[Erica Barris]

As for Glencore, a couple of months ago the Trump administration canceled Glencore's compliance monitoring more than a year early.

[James Kukios]

This was very unusual. DOJ always reserves the right to end monitor ships early if the purpose of the monitorship has been accomplished, but it rarely if ever happened before.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

For whatever reason, the government decided that Glencore's compliance seemed good enough that they no longer needed to have a police officer living inside of their house. Maybe the Trump administration decided that if a company is buying and selling critical minerals to the US that there's no need to look too closely at what the business is up to.

[Erica Barris]

Today's episode was produced by Willa Rubin and fact checked by Emily Crawford with help from Willa. It was edited by Marianne McCune. It was engineered by James Willits. Alex Goldmark is our Executive producer.

[Amanda Aronczyk]

Some of our additional footage today comes from Al Jazeera. Special thanks to the securities and Exchange Commission Historical Society and also to Maria Arbatskaya, Elizabeth Cassens, William Garrett, Michael Kavanagh, and Mike Kahler. I'm Amanda Aronczyk.

[Erica Barris]

And I'm Erica Barris. This is npr. Thanks for listening.

[Advertiser]

Support for this NPR podcast comes from Zscaler. Reduce infrastructure costs by eliminating expensive legacy technology like firewalls and VPNs that increase management overhead with a complex set of disjointed point products and increase risk leverage. Zscaler Zero Trust plus AI that eliminates the attack surface protecting data and users against fast evolving cyber threats, including AI based attacks. Learn [e-mail] Security this message comes from.

[Wealthfront]

Jerry Car Insurance shopping used to be a nightmare. Endless forms hold music and mysteriously rising rates. Thankfully, there's Jerry. Jerry handles the entire insurance shopping process, from comparing quotes side by side to purchasing your policy and even helping you cancel your old coverage all in one app. In just minutes, Jerry can check for quotes from over 50 top insurers. So before you renew your policy, download the Jerry app or head to Jerry AI NPR.