Perhaps it was inevitable that the stepped-up enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) would spawn a backlash. Lots of companies have been targeted for prosecution, and lobbyists for big companies have taken up the cause, seeking some changes and clarifications to the controversial law.

The Washington Post highlights an interesting debate: Should companies be able to bribe employees of foreign companies? The law as currently interpreted bans bribes to such employees, considering them "foreign officials." Several companies have been prosecuted for bribing employees of state-owned utilities and other companies. Some of you might be shocked that this is even an issue, that we would even be discussing legitimizing bribes to such employees. But the debate--in the eyes of companies--is really about clarifying the law.

So perhaps it would be wise to make clear through some legislative tweaks that bribes to employees of state-owned companies are indeed against the law. The law perhaps should be amended to clear up other grey areas. Lots of companies say they are targeted for the wrong reasons, that simple payments for entertainment or transportation have been interpreted as bribes. They would like a change to give companies the benefit of doubt when it comes to gifted items or services worth less than $250.

Companies also want the FCPA to apply only to companies that are 50 percent or more owned by the government. I'm not sure that will fly. But in any case, it does look like there are changes coming to the FCPA, as lobbyists for big business take aim.

For more:
- here's the article

Related articles:
FCPA compliance sustainability--can financial controls help?  
Companies still struggle with FCPA