The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) issued new Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) enforcement guidelines on June 9, following President Trump's February 10, 2025 Executive Order. These guidelines don't pause FCPA enforcement; they refocus it. Companies now face a narrower but sharper enforcement lens, prioritizing cases tied to U.S. national security, economic competition, cartel activity, and serious misconduct with clear corrupt intent.
For compliance officers, this isn't permission to scale back anti-corruption programs. It's a signal to recalibrate risk assessment and disclosure strategies around DOJ's stated priorities.
Key Changes in Enforcement
The guidelines establish four non-exhaustive factors that prosecutors must weigh when opening FCPA investigations. Each factor directs enforcement toward cases that vindicate U.S. interests rather than pursuing corruption as a universal principle.
DOJ also introduced a procedural gate: new FCPA investigations require authorization from the Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division or a more senior official. This centralizes oversight and ensures alignment with the guidelines' framework.
Prosecutors are instructed to consider collateral consequences, business disruption, employee impact, throughout investigations, not just at resolution. They are also directed to focus on individual misconduct rather than attributing "nonspecific malfeasance to corporate structures."
Priority Areas for Enforcement
1. Cartel and TCO Connections
Cases involving cartels and transnational criminal organizations (TCOs) receive priority. DOJ defines this broadly: prosecutors should consider whether alleged misconduct "utilizes money launderers or shell companies that engage in money laundering for Cartels or TCOs" or "is linked to employees of state-owned entities or other foreign officials who have received bribes from Cartels or TCOs."
This means your third-party intermediary's client list matters. If your logistics provider also handles shipments for a cartel-linked entity, or if the state-owned enterprise official you're dealing with has accepted bribes from TCOs, your transaction gains enforcement visibility.
2. Harm to U.S. Companies
The second factor asks whether alleged misconduct "deprived specific and identifiable U.S. entities of fair access to compete and/or resulted in economic injury to specific and identifiable American companies or individuals." This isn't abstract market distortion, DOJ wants to identify which U.S. companies lost a contract or suffered economic harm because of the bribery.
The guidelines explicitly state that enforcement won't target companies based on nationality. Foreign and U.S. companies face scrutiny when their conduct harms U.S. economic interests.
3. National Security Sectors
The third factor covers "corruption in sectors like defense, intelligence, or critical infrastructure." While the guidelines name these sectors specifically, the list isn't exhaustive. If your sector touches national security interests, semiconductors, telecommunications, energy infrastructure, expect DOJ to view misconduct through this lens.
4. Exclusion of Minor Practices
The fourth factor distinguishes between "substantial bribe payments, proven and sophisticated efforts to conceal bribe payments, fraudulent conduct in furtherance of the bribery scheme, and efforts to obstruct justice" versus "routine business practices or the type of corporate conduct that involves de minimis or low-dollar, generally accepted business courtesies."
This creates space for prosecutorial discretion on lower-dollar hospitality and gifts, but don't mistake this for a safe harbor. The guidelines don't define dollar thresholds, and what constitutes "routine" varies by jurisdiction and industry.
Implications for Your Organization
Your compliance program shouldn't narrow to match DOJ's enforcement priorities. The statute of limitations for FCPA violations extends beyond any administration's tenure. Foreign authorities continue aggressive anti-corruption enforcement. State attorneys general have signaled interest in foreign bribery cases. And anti-corruption controls overlap with sanctions compliance, export controls, and customs fraud prevention, all current enforcement priorities.
Instead, use the guidelines to inform two specific decisions: voluntary disclosure and resource allocation in high-risk regions.
The guidelines offer insight into whether DOJ would pursue an enforcement action if it learned of misconduct absent your disclosure. If your case doesn't implicate the four factors, voluntary disclosure carries a different risk calculus than it did six months ago. Weigh this against the revised Corporate Enforcement Policy when making disclosure decisions.
For companies already under investigation, the guidelines create advocacy opportunities. You can argue that evidence doesn't fit the framework, that foreign authorities are better positioned to investigate, or that collateral consequences are disproportionate to the conduct.
Action Items by Priority
Immediate (next 30 days):
Map your third-party intermediaries against cartel and TCO risk indicators. If you operate in regions with cartel activity, Mexico, Central America, parts of South America, conduct enhanced due diligence on logistics providers, customs brokers, and government relations consultants. Screen for shell company structures and money laundering red flags.
Review your disclosure protocol. Update the voluntary disclosure decision tree to incorporate the four factors. Document how potential misconduct does or doesn't implicate U.S. company harm, national security interests, cartel connections, or serious corrupt intent.
Within 90 days:
Calibrate risk assessments for national security sectors. If your business touches defense, intelligence, critical infrastructure, or adjacent sectors, increase monitoring frequency for interactions with government officials. Document the business rationale for hospitality and gifts with greater specificity.
Train compliance staff and regional managers on the indirect cartel connection standard. They need to recognize when a state-owned enterprise official's other relationships or a service provider's client base creates enforcement risk.
Ongoing:
Preserve the core elements of your anti-corruption program regardless of enforcement trends. Maintain robust due diligence, approval workflows for government interactions, financial controls, and training. These controls prevent misconduct that other authorities will pursue even if DOJ doesn't.
Document collateral consequences if you're facing investigation. Track business disruption, employee impact, and resource diversion. The guidelines direct prosecutors to consider these factors throughout the investigation, which creates opportunities to limit scope and duration.
