Want help making the case for compliance at the top? Visit volkovlaw.com

First, content monitoring.

The content that you generate through ChatGPT or any AI service can raise real risks with regard to improper intellectual property, data privacy risks where you name certain individuals or name certain identifiers, and most importantly, remember your third-party risks.

When it comes to AI, you're using vendors, and those vendors have their own AI policies, and you need to analyze and mitigate those risks as part of the due diligence process and as part of the monitoring process once you've onboarded them.

So be careful, take all our six steps and hold them together and mitigate your risks.



The Ethics and Compliance Q and A show is produced by One Stone Creative.

AI has to be implemented in a methodical way, a step-by-step program. So let's talk about those steps.

First, you need a governance structure, meaning you have to have an organization responsible across the entire organization for all your uses of AI.

Second, like every issue that we deal with in ethics and compliance, you need a risk assessment. And you need to look at specific use cases and how those are going to impact your risk profile. This is critical. Only then you can start to tailor your program.

Third, you need to decide and investigate what exactly your risks are.

Is it algorithmic, meaning you're using it for your business purpose, or non-algorithmic?

Stay tuned to part two, and we're gonna talk about the rest of the steps.

The Ethics and Compliance Q and A show is produced by One Stone Creative.

But one theme remains clear: individual FCPA enforcement is alive and well.

While corporate resolutions may benefit from evolving DOJ policy and a renewed emphasis on negotiated dispositions, individuals continue to face indictment, trial, sentencing, forfeiture, and reputational destruction

First, the Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) imposed a $374,474 civil penalty against California-based satellite technology supplier Vizocom for unlawfully exporting controlled technical data related to military antennas to a Chinese manufacturer.

Second, (BIS) imposed a $1 million civil penalty against Teledyne FLIR, a U.S. manufacturer of thermal imaging cameras, for multiple violations of the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) involving exports to China and Hong Kong. The enforcement action highlights a recurring compliance challenge for multinational exporters: the complex application of the EAR’s de minimis rules, as well as the importance of careful screening and strict adherence to license conditions.

This is not a case about liability for the September 11 attacks. Instead, it raises a fundamental constitutional question: can the UK government refuse to reopen an inquest—without meaningful judicial oversight? After the Attorney General denied Campbell’s request for a fresh inquest based on what he argues is new evidence, UK courts largely closed the door on review. Now, the Supreme Court will decide whether that decision is beyond challenge or subject to legal scrutiny.

At stake is more than a single case. This litigation tests the boundaries of executive power, the scope of judicial review, and the rights of families seeking to revisit official findings long after tragedy strikes. It also highlights the tension between finality in legal determinations and the pursuit of truth.

In our conversation, Matt Campbell explains what has driven his persistence, how the legal battle has evolved, and why this case could have broader implications for accountability in the UK legal system.

Whether you approach this from a legal, historical, or human perspective, this episode explores a compelling intersection of law and loss—and the enduring question of when a case is truly closed.

She is the Executive Director of Boards of the Future™, a non-profit that works with corporate boards globally to advocate for stronger ethics, risk, and compliance backgrounds.

She spends time between Milan and Los Angeles and serves as a Chair, director, and ethics advisor for global professional bodies, corporations, and international nonprofits.

Anik started his career at the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), where he investigated anti-fraud, anti-bribery, and other violations by multi-national financial institutions and technology companies and their executives.

At the SEC, Anik routinely partnered with law enforcement and regulatory authorities throughout the U.S. and in Europe, Africa, and Asia on multi-jurisdictional investigations and enforcement. He was also selected for a special detail assignment as a federal prosecutor with the U.S. Department of Justice.

Prior to joining Sandisk, Anik worked on compliance, regulatory, and corporate governance issues at multi-national financial institutions. As a leading anti-bribery and anti-corruption practitioner, Anik routinely presents at industry, professional, and trade association events.

Based on surveys of more than 2,500 compliance professionals and employees worldwide, the report paints a picture of a profession that is progressing—but unevenly. Compliance programs are becoming more sophisticated and technologically enabled, yet many organizations are still struggling to translate technology investments into measurable improvements in culture, risk detection, and program effectiveness.

BIS imposed a $252 million penalty against Applied Materials — the second-largest fine in the agency’s history — for illegally exporting semiconductor manufacturing equipment to China’s Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corp. (SMIC), an Entity List company since 2020. The size of the penalty alone warrants attention. But the facts and legal analysis underlying the case provide even more important compliance lessons.

Early in the year, DOJ paused FCPA enforcement activity while it reviewed policy priorities. That pause, followed by the issuance of revised enforcement guidance mid-year, produced a measurable decline in announced actions. Several investigations slowed, at least one long-running prosecution was dismissed, and the SEC brought no new FCPA cases during the year.

DOJ’s revised guidance emphasized selectivity, signaling that enforcement would focus on higher-impact cases—large bribe payments, clear evidence of corrupt intent, sophisticated concealment, and conduct implicating U.S. national security or competitiveness. Lower-value cases and routine “business courtesy” fact patterns were explicitly deprioritized.

The public numbers reflect that shift. 2025 was one of the lightest FCPA enforcement years in more than a decade. DOJ announced only a small handful of corporate outcomes, while continuing to emphasize voluntary self-disclosure and cooperation through declinations and deferred prosecution agreements.

At its core, the ADM matter highlights how breakdowns in accounting controls and disclosure practices — even when aimed at projecting performance — can quickly spiral into regulatory enforcement, civil penalties, and individual liability.

On January 27, 2026, the SEC announced a settlement against ADM, as well as actions against two former executives, and a litigated complaint against a third. The SEC found that ADM materially overstated the performance of its nutrition business segment by recording intersegment transactions on terms that did not approximate market, thereby misleading investors about the segment’s profitability and growth.

According to the order, executives directed “adjustments” to nutrition’s results — including retroactive rebates and price changes not available to third parties — to hit targeted profit levels and mask underperformance in key fiscal years. These adjustments were inconsistent with ADM’s internal policies and its public representations, creating materially false and misleading financial statements for multiple annual and quarterly reporting periods.

ADM settled the matter and agreed to pay a $40 million civil penalty. Two former executives agreed to pay civil penalties and disgorgement, and one agreed to an officer and director bar. Meanwhile, the SEC is pursuing litigation against a third executive for fraud-based claims.

Regulators do not view financial reporting risk as an isolated technical issue. The SEC’s enforcement approach in this case reflects several core priorities that every compliance leader should internalize.

A conflict of interest program, when thoughtfully designed and actively managed, is far more than a static policy on a shelf. It is a risk identification and mitigation engine that anticipates where incentives might diverge from organizational interests, assesses control effectiveness, and embeds ethical decision-making into everyday business processes.

Conflicts of interest arise wherever personal interests have the potential to interfere — or appear to interfere — with the objective performance of professional duties. Classic examples include financial interests in third parties, personal relationships that influence work decisions, and outside employment that competes with an employer’s interests.

FCA whistleblowers filed a record number of new cases -- 1,297 lawsuits and the government initiated 401 investigations. Since 1986, DOJ has recovered a total in excess of $85 billion.

DOJ is taking full advantage of the power provisions of the FCA that include treble damages, broad liability coverage, and favorable amendments adopted to increase government leverage.

Health care fraud remained the primary source of FCA settlements. Approximately $5.7 billion of the total $6.8 billion related to actions against healthcare companies. Notably, DOJ continued and expanded its success in three major areas: Managed Care, Prescription Drugs, and Medically Unnecessary Care.

The compliance industry appears to be taken over by AI-this and AI-that. Third party risk bleeds into major AI risks, corporate governance needs to incorporate AI risks, and policies and procedures have to incorporate AI risks, while of course no risk assessment is worth its sale unless there is a discussion of dramatic AI risks.

My first response is whoa -- let's all take a deep breath. The best self-help tactic when experiencing anxiety is to take a deep breath, a proven remedy. The AI discussion is veering off into a racing brain phenomena where the compliance profession is sprinting to keep up with the newest hypothetical risk.

So let's take a calm and deliberate review of some of the key issues.

With all the hype on the trade compliance front, when you calculate the numbers relating to criminal enforcement, 2025 was a slower year than 2024. That is understandable since there is always a hiccup or delay when a new Administration takes power. 

From the administrative standpoint, however, OFAC and Commerce's Bureau of industry and Security ("BIS") posted increased in 2025 over 2024. For OFAC, 2024 was a relatively slow year, and 2025 showed an uptick in numbers of cases. Notwithstanding these increases, OFAC brought big cases involving Russian oligarchs.

For the year, OFAC brought 14 cases and recovered over $265 million in penalties. What was missing, however, was OFAC's steady enforcement against a variety of industries -- the spread of OFAC cases was fairly limited.

From the numbers, for 2025, DOJ indicted, took guilty pleas or participated in sentencing proceedings in a total of forty-one (41) cases. For 26 of these cases, the illegal exports were intended to customers in Russia (16) and China (10); after that, Iran was involved in 5 cases, and Haiti was involved in 4, and Venezuela and North Korea had only 2 cases respectively.

In this Episode, Michael Volkov reviews overall trade enforcement activities for 2025.

This is Part 2 of a 2-Part Episode.

This is Part 1 of a 2-Part episode.



Legal and compliance officers are used to adjustments and continuous improvement of their compliance programs. Building and maintaining an effective ethics and compliance program never ends — it is a continuous process. In a climate of rapid change, the strategies may feel familiar, but the risks themselves are taking new shape. To that end, Michael outlines five specific strategies for evolving your compliance program without losing your footing.

You'll hear him discuss:

• Why culture isn't just a buzzword—it's the first and most critical line of defense in volatile times
• How to run a quick-turn, focused risk assessment to identify new hotspots like sanctions, tariffs, and supply chain gaps
• The rising danger of indirect exposure to foreign terrorist organizations and cartels through third parties
• What companies need to know about tariff classification, scope, and enforcement to avoid legal and economic penalties
• Why sanctions and export controls enforcement is heating up—and what that means for your global operations
• How to recalibrate third-party risk management to account for trade-based threats and hidden ownership structures

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

In this episode, Michael Volkov takes a comprehensive look at third-party risks from the distribution and supply sides and outlines appropriate strategies to manage these risks.

• Epsilon Electronics serves as a stark reminder of the financial consequences of non-compliance. The company faced an OFAC enforcement action due to a shipment to Iran, resulting in a staggering penalty of over $4 million.
• Apollo Aviation Group settled with OFAC for $210,600 for leasing aircraft engines which ultimately ended up being placed in to aircraft of a prohibited entity, Sudan Airways, violating sanctions regulations.
• ELF Cosmetics settled with OFAC for $996,000 for importing false eyelash kits containing materials sourced from North Korea, highlighting supply chain due diligence failures.
• The ELF Cosmetics case underscores the crucial role of supply chain due diligence in preventing sanctions violations. Instead of sticking their heads in the sand, companies must undertake basic supply chain due diligence when sourcing products from regions close to high-risk countries or regions.
• “Reason to know” is now the key phrase guiding the New FCPA era. OFAC does not need to prove goods ultimately end up in a sanctioned country. When you see red flags, you must resolve them or they could be considered a “reason to know” in OFAC’s eyes.
• Seven essential elements to boost your compliance program and effectively mitigate third-party sanctions risks include risk assessment, varying levels of due diligence, end-user documentation, monitoring, training, and red flag identification.

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

You’ll hear him discuss:

• Why Liberty Mutual’s $4.7 million disgorgement shows DOJ is sticking closely to its Corporate Enforcement Policy
• How voluntary disclosure and cooperation continue to all but guarantee a declination
• The details behind Liberty Mutual’s misconduct in India and the factors DOJ weighed in its decision
• What the Pemex indictment tells us about DOJ’s push to hold individuals accountable
• The role of disgorgement in DOJ resolutions and whether the policy might be applied with more flexibility going forward
• How luxury goods and personal perks were used in the Pemex scheme and why DOJ zeroed in on those details
• What these developments signal for companies trying to strengthen compliance programs in a shifting enforcement landscape

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group



In this episode of Corruption, Crime, and Compliance, Michael Volkov explains why an AI compliance program is essential to corporate governance today.

You’ll hear him discuss:

• Why companies need to start with a clear use case and weigh benefits against potential legal and compliance risks before rolling out AI
• The evolving patchwork of regulations, including the FTC, state-level laws in the US, and the EU’s AI Act
• How sector-specific rules in healthcare, financial services, and defense add new layers of complexity
• The two biggest risks: AI-generated false content that can cause liability and reputational harm, and decision-making systems that create unfair or discriminatory results
• What strong AI governance looks like, from board oversight and compliance officers to clear policies and cross-functional committees
• The role of training, documentation, and incident reporting in ensuring responsible, transparent AI use
• Why embedding responsible AI into company values and employee performance reviews helps build a culture of accountability

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

In this episode, Michael dives into the DOJ’s criminal enforcement action against Cadence Design Systems - a case that marks yet another major step in the DOJ’s rapidly unfolding trade enforcement strategy. We’re no longer in the FCPA era. This is a whole new ballgame, where national security and trade compliance have collided, and companies that haven’t adjusted are already behind.

You’ll hear him discuss:

• Why Cadence’s plea deal - not a DPA or NPA - is such a big deal
• How the DOJ and BIS coordinated to secure over $140 million in criminal and civil penalties
• The simple, sloppy scheme that involved fake names, hidden aliases, and blatant attempts to skirt export controls
• Why partial cooperation didn’t earn Cadence a full credit reduction - and what they failed to do
• The shocking compliance gap: only one export control officer handling global risk
• What this case signals about the DOJ’s growing focus on national security and semiconductor enforcement
• Why ethics, due diligence, and transaction monitoring are still your best defense
• How companies can avoid getting blindsided by embracing the new trade enforcement landscape

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

You’ll hear him discuss:

• Why Europe’s sharp spike in reporting rates is likely tied to the EU Whistleblower Directive
• How North American companies resolve reports faster and what that says about handling HR-driven complaints
• Why anonymous reporting is much higher in APAC, Europe, and South America and what it might reveal about employee trust
• How retaliation claims are being substantiated at drastically different rates depending on geography and legal frameworks
• What’s behind the higher substantiation rates at privately owned companies compared to public ones
• How reporting channel preferences are shifting and why phone-based hotlines may be on the way out
• What “time to report” stats reveal about fear, hesitation, and the need for cultural change in the workplace

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

You’ll hear him discuss:

• Why DOJ is combining trade enforcement and FCA cases, and what that means for companies that import goods into the U.S.
• How “reverse false claims” work in the trade context, and why import misclassification, undervaluation, or incorrect country-of-origin declarations are now high-risk areas.
• Recent high-dollar settlements - including $45 million in one case - where companies paid the price for customs fraud violations.
• The significance of the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Island Industries v. Sigma Corp., which confirmed DOJ’s ability to pursue customs fraud claims under the FCA in federal court.
• How whistleblowers, including competitors, are using FCA claims as a strategic tool in the marketplace, leading to sealed complaints and increased litigation.
• What companies should be doing now to evaluate and reinforce their trade compliance programs, from reviewing documentation and broker relationships to training and internal reporting.
• Why ignoring tariff and duty obligations - or failing to investigate them thoroughly - could be seen as deliberate indifference, exposing companies to both civil and criminal liability.

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

You’ll hear him discuss:

• BIS’s $4.25 million penalty against Alpha and Omega Semiconductor (AOS) for 15 violations of the Export Administration Regulations (EAR), including unauthorized shipments to Huawei
• How AOS disregarded legal advice and internal compliance warnings while continuing to export EAR99 items from the U.S. to an Entity List company
• The significance of BIS’s finding that even non-willful violations will trigger serious enforcement consequences
• OFAC’s $608,825 settlement with Key Holding LLC over Cuban sanctions violations linked to its Colombian subsidiary, Key Colombia
• How a failure to implement sanctions compliance after acquiring a foreign affiliate exposed Key Holding to U.S. jurisdiction - and liability
• The importance of post-acquisition compliance integration and automated screening in mitigating enforcement risk
• Why these cases mark a return to traditional administrative enforcement priorities and serve as stark reminders of jurisdictional reach

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

You’ll hear him discuss:

• How DOJ’s new two-pronged enforcement strategy is bringing corporate facilitators of cartels and TCOs into the crosshairs
• Why traditional due diligence no longer goes far enough, especially with "Nth Party" risks buried deep in supply chains
• How cartels and TCOs exploit legitimate businesses in sectors like logistics, agriculture, mining, and construction
• The importance of identifying beneficial ownership and tracing complex corporate structures across jurisdictions
• Red flags to watch for, from nominee arrangements and shell companies to unexplained wealth and layered financial flows
• How cartels are adapting with fake websites, fake bios, and cryptocurrency to mask illicit activities
• What companies must do to modernize their compliance systems with open-source tools and workflow automation
• Why trade-based money laundering, remittance services, and decentralized platforms are growing areas of concern

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

You’ll hear him discuss:

• How DOJ, OFAC, BIS, and CBP coordinated parallel resolutions against UNICAT
• The $3.3 million forfeiture and additional penalties tied to underpaid duties and unlawful exports
• Why DOJ declined prosecution of UNICAT’s parent company, White Deer, under its M&A policy
• The former CEO’s role in orchestrating 23 unlawful sales to Iran, Venezuela, and Cuba
• The importance of identifying willful intent in sanctions violations — and when DOJ disclosure is required
• The risks of failed pre-acquisition due diligence and the value of strong post-acquisition integration
• How concealment tactics like falsified invoices and coded emails were used to hide dealings with sanctioned entities
• Key lessons for global companies navigating the new era of trade compliance and enforcement

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

You’ll hear him discuss:

• Why Customs and Border Patrol and Homeland Security Investigations are stepping up referrals and actions
• How companies try to gain a competitive advantage by evading tariffs - and why it’s an “inevitable result” regulators are watching closely
• The most common tariff evasion schemes, including misclassification under HTS codes, transshipment, undervaluation, and false certification of origin
• Why importing from China under Section 301 is now considered a high-risk activity
• The specific risks surrounding steel and aluminum imports under Section 232 tariffs
• Examples of recent DOJ cases, including plywood, flooring, and mosaic tile fraud, and what they signal for future enforcement
• How AI and data analytics are being used by investigators to spot anomalies and build cases
• The difference between Section 301 and 232 tariffs - and how they reflect different policy objectives
• How rising tariffs and fewer exclusions under the Trump administration are reshaping the trade compliance landscape
• The statutes DOJ is using for criminal charges, including 18 U.S.C. §§ 371, 545, and 1341

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

In this episode, Michael discusses the return of the Justice Department to the FCPA enforcement arena. In a significant development, DOJ announced the resumption of FCPA enforcement, accompanied by a new set of enforcement guidance principles. This guidance is more than policy - it’s a statement of priorities and strategy that will shape how FCPA investigations and prosecutions unfold. While the number of attorneys in DOJ’s FCPA Unit has declined, U.S. Attorneys' Offices across 94 districts now have increased authority to investigate and prosecute FCPA cases with less oversight. The result? Potentially broader, faster, and more decentralized enforcement. As always, the devil is in the details - and the June 9 DOJ FCPA Guidance Memo delivers plenty.

You'll hear him discuss:

• DOJ’s renewed emphasis on prosecuting individuals over corporations, especially when misconduct can’t be directly linked to senior leadership
• How companies may now have stronger arguments to avoid liability if the wrongdoing is isolated to a small group
• Expanded autonomy for U.S. Attorneys’ Offices and what this means for enforcement volume and consistency
• The DOJ’s prioritization of cases that directly impact U.S. national interests and corporate competitiveness
• Increased scrutiny of links to cartels and transnational criminal organizations, including risks hidden in supply chains and third-party relationships
• The push for faster, more efficient investigations to avoid the years-long white-collar case backlog
• Guidance on when facilitating payments, gifts, or travel fall under FCPA exceptions - and why these rarely matter in major prosecutions
• Why cooperation, early disclosure, and individual accountability may now be companies’ best bet for avoiding charges altogether
• The DOJ’s sharpened focus on national security sectors like defense, critical infrastructure, and technology

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

What really happens when you let algorithms near your risk decisions?



In this episode of Corruption, Crime and Compliance, Christian Focacci, founder and CEO of Threat.Digital, returns for a thoughtful and highly practical conversation about the state of artificial intelligence in compliance and third-party risk management. Christian’s platform is at the forefront of using large language models and real-time data to transform how companies identify and manage risk - without losing sight of the human judgment that still needs to guide every decision. He and Michael explore what's changed in the AI landscape over the past year, what’s misunderstood about the technology, and how compliance teams can strike the right balance between innovation and accountability.

You’ll hear them discuss:

• Why Christian believes you shouldn’t use AI unless it’s truly the right tool for the job, and how this philosophy shapes how Threat.Digital builds and deploys its systems
• What large language models actually are, how they function under the hood, and why most people fundamentally misunderstand how they learn and process information
• The growing demand for corporate AI governance, how some risk committees are creating unnecessary delays, and why many internal processes are still focused on the wrong questions
• How Threat.Digital uses AI to reduce noise in due diligence, replacing bloated, unfiltered search results with clear, high-quality summaries supported by verifiable sources
• Why the real power of AI isn’t about replacing humans, but about expanding what can be reviewed - moving from 10 data points to 10,000, while helping compliance professionals focus only on what matters
• The future of due diligence: chaining AI tasks to build multi-layered investigations that trace ownership, pull third-party records, and surface hidden risks in real time
• How AI is revolutionizing name screening and sanctions checks by eliminating irrelevant fuzzy matches, freeing teams from chasing meaningless alerts and allowing them to act on true risks with confidence

Resources

Christian Focacci on the Threat.Digital | LinkedIn | Email: chris@threat.digital

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

You’ll hear him discuss:

• Why corporate leaders should not confuse the pause in FCPA enforcement with a wider drop in corporate prosecutions, as the DOJ is intensifying its focus on other high-risk areas like customs and trade compliance
• How the False Claims Act is being used to prosecute companies for tariff evasion, misclassification of goods, and country-of-origin fraud, creating major new exposure for import-heavy businesses
• The administration’s positioning of trade compliance as a national security priority, which signals tougher penalties and more aggressive enforcement tactics
• Examples of recent DOJ cases, including multimillion-dollar settlements with Barco Uniforms, International Vitamins Corporation, and Danco Laboratories, that highlight how quickly companies can become targets
• The expanding role of whistleblowers under new DOJ incentives, making it more likely that internal missteps will be reported and investigated
• Why supply chains involving China and other flagged jurisdictions are under heightened scrutiny, and how companies can prepare for increased oversight
• The risks of becoming a public example of trade fraud, and the steps companies should take now to stay ahead of enforcement and protect their brand and bottom line

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

You’ll hear him discuss:

• How companies that voluntarily disclose, cooperate, and remediate can now qualify for a declination, even with aggravating circumstances
• Why the DOJ is promising greater transparency and fairness in enforcement to reduce fear and uncertainty around self-reporting
• What changes have been made to limit when corporate monitors are imposed, and how DOJ will control their cost and scope
• How the whistleblower program has been significantly expanded to include sanctions, tariffs, trade violations, and federal program fraud
• What benefits may still be available for companies that report after DOJ has begun an investigation, including reduced fines and no monitorship
• Why DOJ is pushing prosecutors to shorten the length of corporate investigations and avoid drawn-out resolutions
• What’s at stake if a whistleblower reports first, and how companies could lose access to key benefits by waiting too long

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

When the United States hit pause on FCPA enforcement, the global anti-corruption landscape shifted. Scott and Josh explore how companies are reacting, how allies are stepping up enforcement, and why transparency is emerging as a national security imperative. They offer a forward-looking conversation filled with insights for compliance professionals, risk officers, and anyone committed to ethical business in a volatile world.

You’ll hear them discuss:

• Why the U.S. government's pause on FCPA enforcement shocked the global anti-corruption community—and why companies should still stay the course with compliance regardless of political signals.
• How the Corporate Transparency Act, once seen as the most significant U.S. anti-money laundering law in a generation, has been quietly gutted—leaving a dangerous gap in the fight against shell companies and financial crime.
• What it means that U.S. companies are now incentivized to form anonymously domestically to avoid ownership disclosure—inviting kleptocrats, traffickers, and foreign adversaries to hide in plain sight.
• Why global businesses must prepare for a sharp rise in trade compliance enforcement, as tariffs, export controls, and sanctions take center stage in economic security—and why transparency is essential to managing these risks.
• How foreign enforcers, especially in Europe, are beginning to step up—but why no alliance or coalition can truly fill the vacuum left by a retreating United States.
• What makes transparency not just a compliance tool, but a weapon against geopolitical threats—from Xinjiang’s forced labor camps to Russian shadow fleets and fentanyl trafficking.
• How transparency can be hardwired into foreign aid policy to protect U.S. taxpayer money, prevent narco-state development, and give American businesses a fair shot abroad.
• Why there’s still hope—from new bipartisan support for anti-corruption measures to the emergence of a national security lens on transparency across Congress, federal agencies, and the private sector.

About Guests

Scott Greytak is an anticorruption attorney and the Director of Advocacy for TI US. His work focuses on designing anticorruption laws and policies, organizing and leading ideologically inclusive coalitions, and lobbying the U.S. Congress and administration. Greytak was named a Top Lobbyist in 2021, 2023, and 2024 by the National Institute for Lobbying & Ethics.

Josh Birenbaum is the deputy director of FDD’s Center on Economic and Financial Power, focusing on illicit finance risks and global corruption. Previously, Josh was the research and policy analyst at TRACE International, producing articles, book chapters, op-eds, model policies, industry reports, and speeches on sanctions, export controls, corruption, conflict minerals, money laundering, human rights, illicit finance, and other topics.

Resources

Scott Greytak on LinkedIn | Email - sgreytak@us.transparency.org

Josh Birenbaum on LinkedIn | Email - jbirenbaum@fdd.org

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

You’ll hear him discuss:

• The Trump Administration’s focus on fair trade and why CPB has become a central enforcement agency under this new agenda
• How CPB exercises its authority to impose regulatory penalties, seize goods, and refer serious cases for civil or criminal prosecution
• The legal standards that determine the severity of violations — fraud, gross negligence, or negligence — and how each carries different penalty thresholds
• Why the materiality of a false statement or omission is a key factor in determining whether a violation has occurred
• The importance of voluntary disclosure and how it can significantly reduce potential penalties and protect company reputation
• The step-by-step process of CPB administrative enforcement, including investigations, pre-penalty notices, appeals, and mitigation options
• The expanding impact of the Enforce and Protect Act (EAPA), and how companies can be held accountable for evading anti-dumping and countervailing duties
• Why businesses must now take a closer look at their import documentation, supply chain practices, and overall trade compliance posture

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

You’ll hear him discuss:

• How high-impact programs are defined by their strategic use of automation, data analytics, and benchmarking tools to drive measurable compliance outcomes
• Why third-party risk management—including due diligence and supply chain oversight—is a defining trait of the most effective programs today
• The growing trust gap between Gen Z employees and middle managers, and why this generational shift poses a cultural red flag
• The continued dominance of outdated internal systems, regulatory complexity, and budget pressure as top operational challenges facing compliance leaders
• How high-impact programs are integrating AI into both their codes of conduct and employee training, preparing teams for emerging tech risks
• What medium-impact programs can do to evolve: focus on training, automation, and peer collaboration to elevate impact and resilience

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

You’ll hear him talk about:

• The launch of a new International Anti-Corruption Prosecutorial Task Force formed by the UK, France, and Switzerland, designed to intensify cross-border enforcement and cooperation in bribery and corruption cases.
• The task force’s formation as a direct response to the U.S. enforcement pause, signaling that European agencies are prepared to take a more prominent role in prosecuting international corruption, especially involving multinational corporations.
• California’s bold move to pursue foreign bribery under its Unfair Competition Law (UCL), reinforcing that FCPA violations remain prosecutable at the state level despite federal hesitation.
• A continued commitment by global companies to maintain strong compliance programs, reflecting awareness that international and local enforcement can still pose serious legal and financial risks.
• The unexpected dismissal of the long-running FCPA case against Cognizant executives, contrasted with the DOJ's decision to move forward with prosecutions in other high-profile cases, suggesting a selective enforcement pattern under current policy shifts.
• A landmark case by the UK Serious Fraud Office (SFO), charging a company with failure to prevent bribery—a first for the SFO to bring such a case before a jury, potentially setting a new standard for corporate liability in the UK.

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

You’ll hear him discuss:

• The origins of the DSP, created through Executive Order 14117 under the Trump Administration, and the key national security concerns it addresses.
• What constitutes a “covered data transaction” and the thresholds for U.S. personal and government data that trigger compliance obligations.
• The list of “countries of concern” and what it means for companies doing business with entities tied to these regions.
• The types of U.S. data covered by the DSP, including biometric, genomic, financial, and geolocation data, and the specific quantity thresholds that trigger restrictions.
• Why data brokerage and bulk human genomic data transactions are prohibited outright, raising new compliance challenges for affected industries.
• How “restricted transactions” like cloud computing services and vendor agreements are subject to conditional exceptions under the DSP.
• The critical actions U.S. companies must take during the 90-day enforcement hiatus, including vendor assessments, renegotiations, and compliance system updates before the July 8th deadline.

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

Cases discussed:

• British American Tobacco (BAT): The company faced a staggering $629 million settlement for circumventing North Korean trade sanctions. This case illustrates how corporate prosecutions are evolving to resemble Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) cases, emphasizing the growing scrutiny on multinational corporations.
• Epsilon Electronics: This case clarifies the liabilities companies face when third-party distributors divert products to prohibited countries, such as Iran. Even if the company had no direct involvement in the diversion, it still bears responsibility, underscoring the importance of diligent monitoring of distribution channels.
• ELF Cosmetics: The company received a $1 million fine for importing goods containing materials sourced from North Korea. This case underscores the critical importance of conducting thorough supply chain due diligence to ensure compliance with international sanctions.
• Murad LLC: This case focuses on post-acquisition compliance failures, demonstrating the urgent need for thorough pre- and post-acquisition audits. These audits are essential to uncover potential sanctions violations and ensure that newly acquired companies adhere to compliance standards.

Resources:

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

Links to the four cases: British American Tobacco | Epsilon Electronics I Elf Cosmetics | Murad LLC

A Framework for OFAC Compliance Commitments (May 2019)

Legal and compliance officers are used to adjustments and continuous improvement of their compliance programs. Building and maintaining an effective ethics and compliance program never ends — it is a continuous process. In a climate of rapid change, the strategies may feel familiar, but the risks themselves are taking new shape. To that end, Michael outlines five specific strategies for evolving your compliance program without losing your footing.

You'll hear him discuss:

• Why culture isn't just a buzzword—it's the first and most critical line of defense in volatile times
• How to run a quick-turn, focused risk assessment to identify new hotspots like sanctions, tariffs, and supply chain gaps
• The rising danger of indirect exposure to foreign terrorist organizations and cartels through third parties
• What companies need to know about tariff classification, scope, and enforcement to avoid legal and economic penalties
• Why sanctions and export controls enforcement is heating up—and what that means for your global operations
• How to recalibrate third-party risk management to account for trade-based threats and hidden ownership structures

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

How can companies build trust and drive growth in a region as politically and economically volatile as Latin America? In this episode, Nicolas Garcia - Vice President, Legal, Regional and Compliance Manager for LATAM and Orica - joins Michael Volkov to discuss the complexities of navigating compliance and leadership in LATAM. The conversation highlights how regional dynamics, such as the crisis in Venezuela, influence business operations and how cultural shifts are changing the role of compliance officers. Nicolas provides valuable insights on the evolving compliance landscape, emphasizing the importance of trust, leadership, and a strong compliance culture in driving business success in challenging environments.

Listen in as Nicolas and Mike discuss:

• The ongoing political and economic crisis in Venezuela has led to massive immigration into neighboring countries like Colombia, Chile, and Brazil, creating both economic challenges and opportunities in the region.
• Guyana is experiencing rapid growth due to foreign investment, particularly in the oil and gas sectors, standing in stark contrast to Venezuela’s decline.
• Nicholas emphasizes the shift from compliance officers being seen as enforcers to becoming strategic business partners. This transition helps companies not only meet regulatory requirements but also drive success.
• Establishing a trust-based relationship between compliance officers and leadership is essential. When compliance is integrated into the business strategy, it becomes a tool for enabling growth rather than a barrier.
• Trust in reporting systems is growing in Latin America, though fear of retaliation remains a concern. Anonymous reporting is on the rise, and substantiation rates are increasing as employees gain confidence in the system’s integrity.
• Ensuring that investigations follow due process is critical to maintaining credibility in compliance programs. It also helps improve trust and the success rate in legal outcomes.

Resources:

Nicolas Garcia on LinkedIn

Nicolas Garcia on Email: Nicolas.Garcia@Orica.com

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

Carlos Villagrán is the Director of Compliance at CMPC, a 100-year-old Chilean-based holding company, one of the worldwide leading pulp, paper, packaging, personal care, and other forest products manufacturers. With more than 20,000 employees, CMPC has industrial operations in 9 countries (LatAm and the US) and commercial offices in the US, Europe, and China, selling and distributing its products to more than 45 countries around the world. Carlos joined CMPC to remediate and rebuild CMPC's culture and compliance program after a devastating scandal -- CMPC was prosecuted for its involvement in a decade-long conspiracy to fix prices in Peru and Chile for consumer paper products. Carlos discusses the challenges he faced in rebuilding CMPA's culture and commitment to compliance. His story is an inspiration to all legal and compliance professionals and provides important instructive lessons to corporate leaders and compliance professionals.

You'll hear Michael and Carlos discuss:

• The importance of rebuilding and rediscovering the values and purpose of CMPC after a major corporate crisis.
• The effects on market share quotas and sales prices when CMPC faced an investigation and found to be the leader of a cartel in Chile and Peru.
• How the crisis significantly impacted CMPC's reputation, leading to public protests and consumer backlash in Chile and Peru.
• CMPC’s compliance team addressed the company’s complex nature because of its diverse workforce, including data analytics experts, IT professionals, and engineers.
• How the compliance program at CMPC shifted from a traditional approach to a more cultural and system-thinking perspective, aligning with the company's values and operations.
• Success for the compliance program at CMPC is defined by the number of critical tables the team is seated on, indicating their value and integration within the business operations.

Resources

Carlos Villagran on the Web | LinkedIn

Email: carlos.villagran@cmpc.cl or cfvillagran@gmail.com

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

Have you heard of the recent controversies around Boeing 737 MAX and its safety? Have you wondered what is being done about the concerns around it? In this episode of Corruption, Crime, and Compliance, Michael Volkov delves into the latest developments in the Boeing 737 MAX case, highlighting the recent plea agreement proposed by the Department of Justice (DOJ). The Boeing 737 MAX case took another dramatic turn. On July 24, 2024, the Department of Justice filed with the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas a proposed plea agreement with Boeing. Under the Plea Agreement, Boeing will plead guilty to the original Information filed in 2021 with the Deferred Prosecution Agreement ("DPA"). The discussion focuses on Boeing's alleged failure to implement adequate compliance measures, leading to significant risks and violations, and the ongoing legal and ethical implications of the case. Tune in to hear a detailed analysis of the complexities and legal ramifications of Boeing’s recent plea agreement and what it means for corporate compliance and accountability.

You’ll hear him talk about:

• Certification Issues: Boeing failed to ensure its 737 MAX certifications were accurate, risking false certifications to the FAA.
• DOJ Plea Deal: Boeing agreed to plead guilty to conspiracy to defraud the U.S., facing opposition from victims' families who find the resolution insufficient. The plea agreement, which has been filed under Federal Rule Criminal Procedure 11(c)(1)(C), requires the Court to approve and accept the deal. The Court can reject the plea deal and require the parties to renegotiate the terms.
• Victims’ Rights: The proposed resolution has been controversial because of the opposition of the families of the victims, who have opposed the plea agreement and general disposition of DOJ's investigation and prior resolutions as insufficient to vindicate the public interest and their rights as victims of Boeing's malfeasance
• Compliance Failures: Boeing breached its DPA by not implementing effective compliance controls, particularly in safety and quality processes.
• Independent Monitor: Boeing will be monitored for three years and must invest $455 million in compliance and safety improvements.
• Ongoing Challenges: Boeing’s anti-fraud measures still have gaps, with broader implications for industries where safety is critical.

Resources:

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

How do you manage risk when the vulnerabilities are outside your organization aren’t in your hands? In this episode of Corruption, Crime, and Compliance, we delve into the world of third-party risk management with our guest, Natalie Druckman, from Certa. As we discuss the regulatory landscape in EMEA and the US, Natalie highlights the higher regulatory burden faced by companies in EMEA, and how Certa uses AI to streamline workflows, provide intuitive data visualization, and enhance risk forecasting capabilities. AI is the future of third-party risk management, now and in the future.

• Cybersecurity has become one of the top concerns for organizations. In 2012, Target worked with a third-party vendor and, as a result, suffered an attack that exposed their customers’ credit data. Since then, compliance departments have started working closely with IT to prevent such vulnerabilities. 
• Unlike the US, EU companies don’t benefit from gaps created between state and federal regulations. EMEA faces a mandatory and substantial regulatory burden, particularly in areas like ESG and compliance. A forced labor scandal can sink a company, so ESG’s importance is on par with cyber security.
• Global companies are increasingly recognizing the importance of addressing ESG topics alongside cybersecurity and financial risks. ESG considerations, such as diversity, modern slavery, and gender pay gaps, have significant reputational and revenue impacts.
• AI is changing the world in many ways, including compliance. Certa aims to provide a comprehensive solution for third-party risk management, compliance, and operational risks by streamlining processes and incorporating AI capabilities to enhance efficiency and effectiveness.
• Certa utilizes various AI capabilities, including design AI, which allows users to create workflows using plain language. They don’t need to know anything about tech; they can simply dictate the process, and AI generates the necessary code and infrastructure for it. This allows the company to remain flexible and able to quickly adapt to change.
• Insights AI is another capability that collects and analyzes data, making it far more accessible and efficient in managing up-to-the-minute risks and developments. This technology also uses design AI, allowing for plain language inputs to immediately create actionable, detailed reports.
• Recall AI allows companies to guarantee rapid and consistent responses from suppliers and customers by recalling past interactions to create surveys, forms, workflows, and processes. This removes the back-and-forth burden on all parties while still retaining the human touch.
• Smaller and midsize companies should prioritize their risk management processes and consider automated solutions like Certa. These companies can benefit from the efficiency and effectiveness of an automated platform, regardless of their industry or size.

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

Natalie Druckman on LinkedIn

Certa

Email Natalie: nat@certa.ai

Directive 2019/1937 of the European Parliament and Council dated 23 October 2019 on the “protection of persons who report breaches of Union law” (the “Directive”) is currently being implemented by EU Member States. The directive has broad applicability to organizations operating in the EU internal market and applies to both public and private sector organizations alike. Whistleblowers are guaranteed legal protection to the extent: (1) they have reasonable grounds to believe that the information reported was true at the time of the report; and (2) the whistleblower reported either internally to the organization, externally to a competent authority, or publicly. Private sector organizations with 50 or more workers are legally required to establish channels and procedures for internal reporting of EU law breaches and conduct appropriate follow-up. 

In this episode, Mike Volkov is joined by Daniela Melendez and Alex Cotoia from the Volkov Law Group, who bring their expertise to the table as they delve into the EU Directive and its implementation by several member states. Listen to this discussion to understand and navigate the complexities of the EU Whistleblowing Directive.

• The EU Whistleblower Directive shifts the burden of proof on retaliatory actions to the person taking the detrimental action, requiring them to demonstrate it was not linked to reporting concerns.
• Global companies are taking a proactive stance by increasingly focusing on robust ethics and compliance programs. This strategic move is aimed at mitigating risks and promoting positive corporate citizenship in today's economy, where adherence to legal and ethical standards is paramount.
• France signed the EU Directive into law on March 21, 2022, outlining protocols for gathering and handling whistleblower reports, including a two-month deadline for imposing disciplinary sanctions.
• Germany enacted the EU Directive on May 12, 2023, allowing anonymous reports and setting a three-month investigation deadline after receiving the report.
• Spain addressed the EU Directive on February 2023 by covering additional topics like occupational health and safety breaches. The directive established a three-month deadline for investigations and allowed anonymous reports.
• Italy transposed the EU Directive on August 4, 2022, including administrative, financial, civil, and criminal offenses not covered by the Directive, with a 30-day deadline to conduct investigations upon receipt of reports.
• Companies are advised to make resources available to conduct investigations quickly due to the short timeframes set by various countries' whistleblower protection laws.

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

Alex Cotoia on LinkedIn 

Email: acotoia@volkovlaw.com

Daniela Melendez on LinkedIn

Email: dmelendez@volkovlaw.com

In this episode of Corruption, Crime, and Compliance, Michael Volkov unpacks the rapidly shifting risk landscape facing businesses today. From trade compliance and supply chain disruptions to cybersecurity and government enforcement, he highlights the top legal and compliance challenges of the year and offers practical guidance on how companies can stay ahead. While the regulatory world is in flux, one thing remains certain—organizations that fail to adapt will face significant financial, legal, and reputational consequences.

You'll hear him discuss:

• The evolving trade landscape, including tariff enforcement, import risks, and the potential economic fallout of aggressive trade policies
• Why supply chain mapping is no longer optional, with companies needing to identify vulnerabilities, alternative sourcing strategies, and compliance risks to avoid costly disruptions
• How businesses should approach the FCPA enforcement pause, what it signals about the government’s priorities, and why global companies remain committed to anti-corruption programs
• Why compliance teams must elevate import control and export control programs, particularly as the US expands restrictions on advanced computing, AI, and semiconductor exports
• How transnational criminal organizations are infiltrating legitimate supply chains for money laundering, and what companies must do to strengthen their due diligence efforts
• The importance of a strong compliance culture in a time of regulatory uncertainty—how companies can remain flexible, proactive, and aligned with their core values despite the shifting landscape

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

You'll Hear Him Discuss:

• Why companies must reassess their risk priorities in today’s unpredictable business environment, as corporate risks continue to shift in response to new regulatory and enforcement trends.
• The impact of the FCPA enforcement pause, what it really means for global businesses, and why companies cannot afford to dismantle their anti-corruption programs despite the temporary halt in enforcement.
• How the DOJ is shifting its focus toward prosecuting criminal cartels and transnational organizations, and what that means for businesses operating in high-risk regions or industries.
• The evolving landscape of antitrust enforcement, including key takeaways from Gail Slater’s confirmation hearing and how the administration’s new approach may impact high-tech competition cases.
• How businesses should prepare for heightened tariffs, trade compliance risks, and increased customs enforcement, particularly as the U.S. targets imports from China, Southeast Asia, Mexico, and Canada.
• Why workplace immigration enforcement is becoming a bigger concern, with the government ramping up workplace raids, audits, and compliance checks for companies employing immigrant workers.
• The growing scrutiny around government grants, the potential for fraud investigations, and how businesses receiving federal funds must ensure strict compliance with evolving regulatory requirements.

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

You'll hear him discuss:

• The Trump administration’s rationale for halting FCPA enforcement and why the decision was both surprising and expected
• The executive order’s directive to the Attorney General to reassess FCPA investigations and enforcement priorities
• The shift in DOJ focus from corporate bribery cases to prosecuting cartels and transnational criminal organizations
• The potential impact on global anti-corruption efforts, as countries like the UK, France, and Brazil continue enforcing their own bribery laws
• The uncertainty surrounding DOJ’s forthcoming guidance and what companies should anticipate in the next 180 days
• The broader implications for corporate compliance programs, risk assessments, and international business strategy
• The historical context of past efforts to reform the FCPA and why similar arguments were made over a decade ago
• The potential for companies to seek remedial measures for past FCPA enforcement actions and the challenges in implementing such a policy
• How this shift in enforcement priorities may affect corporate ethics, internal investigations, and global compliance expectations

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

You'll hear him discuss:

• The $1.07 million OFAC settlement and the criminal charges against Roman Sinyavsky for sanctions evasion and money laundering
• How sanctioned Russian oligarchs used non-sanctioned family members and shell companies to obscure their ownership of U.S. properties
• The key role of real estate professionals, lawyers, and financial advisors in facilitating these schemes and why they should have raised red flags
• The use of text messages as critical evidence proving intent and knowledge of sanctions violations
• The specific techniques used to transfer property ownership and avoid detection by authorities
• The increasing enforcement focus on commercial and residential real estate transactions as a high-risk area for financial crime
• Predictions for 2024, including tighter sanctions enforcement on Russia and Iran and what it means for businesses and compliance professionals

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

In this episode of Corruption, Crime, and Compliance, Michael Volkov dives deep into the legal, ethical, and compliance challenges surrounding AI. He explores how businesses are navigating AI adoption, the risks they face, and the safeguards they must implement to protect themselves.

You’ll hear him discuss:

• Why AI’s economic impact, while significant, may not match the transformative power of the internet
• Goldman Sachs’ prediction that AI could add $7 trillion to global GDP over the next decade
• The massive investments required to scale AI, from semiconductors and data centers to energy and infrastructure
• How generative AI is reshaping industries by creating human-like content with limitless applications
• The hidden dangers of AI, including misinformation, deepfakes, fraud, and identity theft risks
• Why businesses are cautiously adopting AI while grappling with privacy, copyright, and security concerns
• The importance of AI compliance programs to mitigate legal, ethical, and reputational risks
• Best practices for companies to ensure AI-generated content is accurate, transparent, and responsibly used

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | X (Twitter)

The Volkov Law Group

You'll hear him discuss:



• Key FCPA enforcement matters in 2024 including the Raytheon, Trafigura, Gunvor, and SAP cases.
• The shift in DOJ’s approach, where individual prosecutions now play a larger role than ever before.
• The rise in penalties: 2024 saw a significant jump, with a total of $1.7 billion in fines.
• The return of travel, hospitality, and gifts as common bribery techniques, despite increased focus on compliance.
• DOJ's major industry sweeps, particularly targeting the energy commodity trading industry.
• The emergence of new compliance challenges with a focus on artificial intelligence and emerging technologies in corporate settings.
• The controversial SAP settlement and the DOJ’s approach to a lack of voluntary disclosure.
• The impact of mergers and acquisitions on compliance processes and the integration of acquired companies.
• DOJ’s new whistleblower program designed to incentivize individuals to report misconduct.
• How companies should approach merger and acquisition integration to ensure compliance and prevent risks.

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

You’ll hear him discuss:

• The DOJ’s record-breaking prosecution of 70 individuals in 2024 and predictions for a surge in enforcement in 2025.
• OFAC’s evolving enforcement strategy, including secondary sanctions tied to U.S. dollar transactions and new compliance commitments.
• Key lessons from major enforcement actions like SCG Plastics, Aotech, and MondoTV, which paid millions for sanctions violations.
• The consequences of neglecting sanctions compliance during mergers and acquisitions, including inherited liabilities and enforcement risks.
• Predictions for heightened scrutiny on trade with China, aggressive tariffs, and evolving Iran sanctions under the new administration.
• How emerging issues like advanced computing, AI, and dual-use technologies are becoming focal points for sanctions enforcement.
• The role of voluntary self-disclosure in mitigating penalties, with examples of companies that uncovered and corrected compliance gaps.

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

You’ll hear him discuss:

• The details of the Illinois-based provider of aviation products AAR Corporation FCPA settlement with the DOJ and SEC.
• How Deepak Sharma orchestrated bribery schemes in Nepal and South Africa.
• The separate civil resolution with Deepak Sharma under which Sharma agreed to pay a disgorgement of $130,835 plus prejudgment interest of $53,762.
• The role of third-party agents in facilitating corrupt practices.
• Julian Aires, a former third-party agent of AAR, pleaded guilty in the District of Columbia on July 15, 2024 to a conspiracy to violate the FCPA for his role in the South Africa scheme.
• Why insider information from government officials is a "kiss of death" in compliance.
• How bribes were disguised through sham invoices and shell companies.
• The importance of robust compliance programs in high-risk industries like aviation.
• Red flags to watch for in industries dealing with state-owned enterprises.
• How the DOJ and SEC weigh cooperation and remediation in enforcement actions.
• Key takeaways for compliance professionals from the AAR case.

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

You’ll hear him discuss:

• The details of McKinsey's settlement with the DOJ for $122 million, including the 35% discount and the cooperation credits granted by the government.
• The role of Vikas Sagar, McKinsey's former senior partner, and his guilty plea in 2022 for orchestrating bribery payments.
• How McKinsey Africa used sensitive, non-public information obtained through bribes to secure multi-million dollar contracts with Transnet and Eskom.
• The ongoing issue of engaging third-party intermediaries and the importance of conducting thorough due diligence before entering into business relationships.
• The lessons learned from McKinsey’s lack of proper oversight and controls that allowed a small group of corrupt executives to facilitate bribery schemes.
• The broader impact of local content requirements in international business and the associated risks of partnering with unqualified entities that have ties to corrupt government officials.

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

Michael examines the tactics used to conceal illicit payments, the role of Japanese authorities in uncovering the misconduct, and the broader implications for corporate compliance and executive accountability.

You’ll hear him discuss:

• How BIT Mining’s former CEO, Zhengming Pan, supervised a $2 million bribery scheme targeting Japanese government officials to secure entry into Japan’s integrated resort (IR) market.
• The specific tactics used to launder bribe payments, including the use of sham consulting agreements, inflated lecture fees, and misclassification of bribes as "management advisory fees" and "travel expenses" in company records.
• The DOJ’s charges against Pan, which included conspiracy to violate the anti-bribery and books-and-records provisions of the FCPA, as well as multiple counts of books-and-records violations and substantive anti-bribery offenses.
• The terms of Bit Mining’s three-year Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA) with the DOJ, which included an agreed-upon $10 million criminal penalty, reduced from an initial $54 million based on the company’s inability to pay.
• The SEC’s parallel enforcement action, which resulted in a $4 million civil penalty, later credited against the DOJ’s settlement amount.
• How Japanese enforcement authorities played a crucial role in uncovering the scheme and what ultimately led to Bit Mining’s failure to win the integrated resort bid.
• Practical compliance takeaways for corporate boards and executive teams, including the importance of strong third-party due diligence, financial control safeguards, and executive oversight to prevent and detect misconduct at the top.

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group



This episode dives into Telefónica Venezolana's $85.2 million settlement with the DOJ for bribery violations under the FCPA. Michael Volkov unpacks how the Venezuelan subsidiary exploited a government-controlled currency auction system, paid nearly $29 million in bribes, and concealed it through inflated equipment purchases. The case reveals systemic flaws and offers essential lessons on preventing corporate misconduct.

You’ll hear him discuss:

• How Telefónica Venezuela used inflated supplier contracts to fund $28.9 million in bribes
• The role of shell companies and intermediaries in concealing bribery schemes
• How bribery enabled access to $110 million in undervalued U.S. currency
• DOJ's assessment of cooperation, compliance efforts, and penalty reductions
• Telefónica’s failure to address red flags in its financial controls and due diligence processes
• The importance of vetting third parties and managing high-risk transactions
• How Telefónica implemented compliance reforms, including anti-corruption measures and internal audits
• Lessons for compliance professionals on detecting and preventing similar schemes

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

You’ll hear him discuss:

• How the usage of codes of conduct differs across geographic regions, with India, China, and Australia showing the highest engagement rates.
• The surprising statistic that 35% of employees in the Netherlands reported never consulting their company’s code of conduct.
• The impact of training, with countries like China and India seeing the highest percentage of employees trained on their code of conduct.
• The generational divide, with Gen Z employees consulting their codes of conduct more than Baby Boomers, despite prior reports suggesting Gen Z's tendency to bend rules.
• The significant gap in perceptions of code usage between senior leaders, middle managers, and frontline employees.
• The role of hybrid work in fostering higher engagement with codes of conduct, contrary to the common assumption that remote work leads to disengagement.

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

You’ll hear Michael discuss:

• Key enforcement priorities under the second Trump administration, including changes to DOJ oversight and trade compliance.
• The implications of aggressive foreign policy shifts, including potential changes to sanctions on Russia, Iran, and China.
• The focus on immigration enforcement, workplace audits, and I-9 compliance.
• The anticipated reduction in environmental and workplace safety enforcement.
• Trends in corporate criminal enforcement, including a steady focus on healthcare fraud but limited activity in other areas.
• Strategies for companies to enhance trade compliance and prepare for expanded tariffs and sanctions.

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

Hear Michael talk about:

• Raytheon Company (Raytheon) -- a subsidiary of defense contractor, RTX (formerly known as Raytheon Technologies Corporation) — agreed to pay over $950 million to resolve the Justice Department’s investigations into three areas of violation. 
• The settlement addresses three main issues:
• A major government fraud scheme involving defective pricing on certain government contracts
• Violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA)
•  the Arms Export Control Act (AECA) and its implementing regulations, the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR)
• As part of the settlement, Raytheon entered into a three-year deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) and agreed to the filing of criminal information in the District of Massachusetts charging Raytheon with two counts of major fraud against the United States. Raytheon admitted to engaging in two separate schemes to defraud the Department of Defense (DOD) relating to the provision of defense articles and services, including PATRIOT missile systems and a radar system. 
• Separately, Raytheon entered into a three-year DPA in connection with a criminal information in the Eastern District of New York charging Raytheon with two counts: conspiracy to violate the anti-bribery provision of the FCPA for a scheme to bribe a government official in Qatar and conspiracy to violate the AECA for willfully failing to disclose the bribes in export licensing applications with the Department of State as required by part 130 of ITAR.
• The Justice Department’s FCPA and ITAR resolution is coordinated with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Both DPAs require that Raytheon retain an independent compliance monitor for three years, enhance its internal compliance program, report evidence of additional misconduct to the Justice Department, and cooperate in any ongoing or future criminal investigations. Raytheon also reached a separate False Claims Act settlement with the Justice Department relating to the defective pricing schemes.

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | X (Twitter)

The Volkov Law Group

Listen in as he discusses:



• Moog, Inc. ("Moog"), a New York-based global manufacturer of motion controls systems for aerospace, defense, industrial, and medical markets, agreed to pay a civil penalty of $1.1 million and disgorge nearly $600,000 for a total of $1.7 million, to resolve FCPA charges arising out of bribes paid by its wholly owned Indian subsidiary, Moog Motion Controls Private Limited (Moog Motion Controls).
• Moog India allegedly bribed officials from the South Central Railway (SCR) and Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) to influence tender processes and exclude competitors. These bribes were often disguised as “contractor services.”
• From 2020 to 2022, Moog employees bribed various Indian officials to win business. Also, they used a variety of schemes to make improper payments, including funneling them through third-party agents and distributors. These same Moog employees also offered cash bribes to Indian officials in an attempt to cause public tenders in India to favor Moog’s products and exclude competitors.
• The case highlights significant gaps in Moog’s internal controls, including improper invoice recording, inadequate oversight of third-party agents, and a lack of compliance training.
• Moog self-reported the misconduct, terminated those involved, enhanced its compliance program, and strengthened accounting controls and auditing procedures for third-party interactions.

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | X (Twitter)

The Volkov Law Group



Hear him discuss: 

• TD Bank’s $3 billion penalty sets a new high for banking compliance cases. In yet another reminder of the scope of Justice Department enforcement powers, and an important demonstration of the risks of non-compliance, the Justice Department and relevant banking agencies announced a $3 billion settlement with TD Bank companies to resolve systemic and pervasive Bank Secrecy Act ("BSA") and money laundering violations.
• TD Bank’s internal culture sidelined AML compliance, leading to massive oversights, including unmonitored transactions worth $18.3 trillion from 2018 to 2024. 
• TD Bank enforced a “flat-cost paradigm,” restricting the compliance budget, which prevented updates and adaptations needed to meet new risk levels.
• TDBUSH pleaded guilty to causing TDBNA to fail to maintain an AML program that complies with the BSA and to fail to file accurate Currency Transaction Reports ("CTRs").
• Despite multiple warnings from internal audits and third-party consultants, the bank maintained its flawed AML protocols without significant action.
• TD Bank earned the ignominious record: TD Bank is the largest bank in U.S. history to plead guilty to Bank Secrecy Act program failures, and the first US bank in history to plead guilty to conspiracy to commit money laundering.   
• With this settlement, TD Bank joins a list of high-profile compliance failures alongside companies like Wells Fargo and Wirecard, furthering the call for financial institutions to prioritize ethical compliance in their growth models.

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

Listen in as Michael talks about:

• Conducting personal interviews with key staff to assess the compliance culture and operational challenges.
• Reviewing and testing transactions across various vendor categories to ensure compliance with protocols.
• Evaluating the effectiveness of training programs and employee understanding of ethical standards and compliance awareness.
• Verifying compliance with internal policies and conduct due diligence on charitable contributions.
• Assessing the compliance processes surrounding sponsorships and their alignment with company policies.
• Implementing thorough due diligence practices for third-party vendors to mitigate risks.
• Reviewing employee expense reports to ensure proper documentation and compliance with gift, meals, entertainment, and hospitality policies.

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

Listen in as Michael discusses:

• The DOJ has charged Visa with monopolization and exclusionary conduct under Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act.
• Visa holds over 60% of the U.S. debit transaction market, with MasterCard as its closest competitor at 25%.
• The complaint alleges Visa engages in exclusionary agreements that penalize banks and merchants for using alternative debit networks.
• The 2010 Durbin Amendment aimed to increase competition but has had minimal effect on Visa’s dominance, leading to ongoing scrutiny.
• Visa's strategies include partnering with potential competitors while leveraging significant market power to suppress competition.
• Following successes in technology sector enforcement, the DOJ is now expanding its scrutiny into financial markets, indicating a potential shift in antitrust enforcement dynamics.

Resources

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

You’ll hear him discuss:

• The DOJ raises the bar for corporate compliance, including technology risk management through their updated Compliance Guidance (2024).
• Companies must evaluate AI in both business and compliance contexts, ensuring controls for trustworthiness and legal alignment.
• Firms need to incorporate lessons from other companies and adapt policies and procedures to reflect emerging tech.
• Employee training must now be interactive, tailored, and measured for effectiveness.
• With their focus on whistleblower protection, the DOJ emphasizes tracking employee comfort in reporting issues and ensuring protection from retaliation.
• Companies are encouraged to continuously monitor third-party relationships beyond the onboarding phase.
• Stronger processes are needed for compliance audits and integration after mergers.
• DOJ pushes for the use of data analytics tools in compliance and better coordination between HR and compliance teams.

Resources:

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

DOJ Evaluation of Corporate Compliance Programs

Cases discussed:

• British American Tobacco (BAT): The company faced a staggering $629 million settlement for circumventing North Korean trade sanctions. This case illustrates how corporate prosecutions are evolving to resemble Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) cases, emphasizing the growing scrutiny on multinational corporations.
• Epsilon Electronics: This case clarifies the liabilities companies face when third-party distributors divert products to prohibited countries, such as Iran. Even if the company had no direct involvement in the diversion, it still bears responsibility, underscoring the importance of diligent monitoring of distribution channels.
• ELF Cosmetics: The company received a $1 million fine for importing goods containing materials sourced from North Korea. This case underscores the critical importance of conducting thorough supply chain due diligence to ensure compliance with international sanctions.
• Murad LLC: This case focuses on post-acquisition compliance failures, demonstrating the urgent need for thorough pre- and post-acquisition audits. These audits are essential to uncover potential sanctions violations and ensure that newly acquired companies adhere to compliance standards.

Resources:

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

Links to the four cases: British American Tobacco I Epsilon Electronics I Elf Cosmetics I Murad LLC

A Framework for OFAC Compliance Commitments (May 2019)

Key Insights:

• Deere’s subsidiary, Wirtgen Thailand, secured government tenders through cash bribes, entertainment at massage parlors, and lavish trips for officials from the Royal Thai Air Force (RTAF), Department of Highways (DOH), and Department of Rural Roads (DRR).
• Wirtgen disguised entertainment and bribe payments in expense reports with vague descriptions and round-number amounts, which were improperly approved by regional managers.
• Wirtgen organized extravagant trips disguised as factory visits for Thai officials, which included sightseeing and luxury hotels in Europe. These trips were arranged to win government tenders but involved no legitimate business activities.
• Bribes were also funneled through a third-party consultant via sham commission agreements. This consultant acted as a middleman, facilitating bribe payments to government officials to secure high-value tenders.
• Deere's failure to fully integrate Wirtgen into its compliance program after acquisition allowed the bribery schemes to continue. This highlights the risks of not harmonizing compliance protocols in newly acquired subsidiaries.
• In response to the SEC investigation, Deere terminated employees involved in the misconduct, revamped its compliance program, and introduced initiatives like a bi-monthly compliance newsletter and enhanced anti-bribery training.

Resources:

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

Listen in as Nicolas and Michael discuss:

• The ongoing political and economic crisis in Venezuela has led to massive immigration into neighboring countries like Colombia, Chile, and Brazil, creating both economic challenges and opportunities in the region.
• Guyana is experiencing rapid growth due to foreign investment, particularly in the oil and gas sectors, standing in stark contrast to Venezuela’s decline.
• Nicholas emphasizes the shift from compliance officers being seen as enforcers to becoming strategic business partners. This transition helps companies not only meet regulatory requirements but also drive success.
• Establishing a trust-based relationship between compliance officers and leadership is essential. When compliance is integrated into the business strategy, it becomes a tool for enabling growth rather than a barrier.
• Trust in reporting systems is growing in Latin America, though fear of retaliation remains a concern. Anonymous reporting is on the rise, and substantiation rates are increasing as employees gain confidence in the system’s integrity.
• Ensuring that investigations follow due process is critical to maintaining credibility in compliance programs. It also helps improve trust and the success rate in legal outcomes.

Resources:

Nicolas Garcia on LinkedIn

Nicolas Garcia on Email: Nicolas.Garcia@Orica.com

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group



Key Points Covered:

• Declinations Explained: While DOJ declinations allow companies to avoid criminal charges, they require disgorgement of illegal profits.
• Boston Consulting Group Case: BCG reported bribery violations related to securing contracts in Angola. The company earned a declination by cooperating with DOJ, firing involved employees, and enhancing compliance. Total disgorgement: $14.4 million.
• Hitachi Cable (Proterial) Case: Hitachi Cable disclosed fraudulent safety violations in its motorcycle brake hoses. The company’s proactive disclosure and internal reforms led to a declination. Disgorgement: $15.1 million, with partial credit for prior payments.
• The Risk of Concealment:  Companies that hide misconduct face higher penalties. Voluntary disclosure offers the potential for leniency through declinations.
• DOJ’s Corporate Compliance Focus: DOJ continues to push for transparency and proactive corporate compliance, using declinations as a tool to incentivize self-reporting and improve internal controls.

Resources:

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group



You’ll hear him discuss:

• DOJ’s Whistleblower Pilot Program: The DOJ introduced a three-year whistleblower pilot program that offers financial rewards to individuals who provide original information leading to significant criminal or civil forfeitures. This program, effective from August 1, 2024, mirrors aspects of the SEC’s program but is specifically tailored to corporate criminal enforcement.
• Non-Appealable Rewards: Unlike the SEC’s program, decisions made under the DOJ’s whistleblower program are not appealable, minimizing litigation risks for the DOJ.
• Focus on Privately Held Companies: The program significantly impacts privately held companies and non-public financial institutions, areas previously not covered by the SEC’s whistleblower program. This shift increases risks for these entities, particularly in cases involving foreign bribery, money laundering, and healthcare fraud related to private insurers.
• Incentives for Internal Reporting: The program introduces a 120-day window for companies to act on internal reports of misconduct. If companies fail to take action within this period, whistleblowers can report directly to the DOJ, potentially earning financial rewards, while companies risk losing potential non-prosecution agreements.
• Implications for Corporate Compliance: The new whistleblower program pressures companies to enhance their ethics and compliance programs. Companies must now navigate the risks associated with delayed reporting and the potential for whistleblowers to bypass internal controls in favor of DOJ reporting.
• Impact on DOJ Enforcement: The program is expected to bolster DOJ’s corporate enforcement actions by encouraging more reports of misconduct, particularly in areas not previously covered by similar programs. However, the adequacy of the reward fund to incentivize significant whistleblower reporting remains uncertain.

Resources:

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group

Whistleblower Awards Pilot Program



You’ll hear him discuss:

• Judge's Decision: The court ruled that the SEC's claims were overly reliant on hindsight and speculation, particularly regarding SolarWinds’ early-stage disclosure during the investigation of cyber incidents.
• Pre- and Post-Sunburst Disclosures: While the court upheld charges related to SolarWinds' pre-Sunburst cybersecurity statements, it dismissed the SEC’s claims about the company’s post-Sunburst disclosures, finding them not misleading under the circumstances.
• Internal Controls vs. Cybersecurity: The court rejected the SEC's attempt to apply internal accounting controls provisions to cybersecurity policies, marking a significant limitation on the SEC's enforcement scope.
• Implications for SEC's Approach: This decision contradicts the SEC's previous stance in cases like R.R. Donnelly, potentially influencing future SEC actions regarding cybersecurity and internal controls.
• Broader Impact: The ruling may affect how cybersecurity risks are reported and how companies manage their disclosure obligations, particularly in light of potential appeals and further litigation by the SEC.

Resources:

Michael Volkov on LinkedIn | Twitter

The Volkov Law Group