What a difference a year makes. As 2025 began, many observers anticipated an ongoing focus on enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), without any dramatic departure from recent trends mirroring FCPA enforcement in the first Trump Administration. Those expectations came to a screeching halt on 10 February 2025, when President Trump ordered the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to pause FCPA enforcement and issue new guidelines prioritizing U.S. national security and the competitiveness of U.S companies abroad.
Through a series of statements – culminating in the issuance of enforcement guidelines in June and the “unpausing” of FCPA enforcement – the Administration has made clear its intent to focus on cases linked to drug cartels and organized crime and otherwise implicating U.S. competitiveness and national security. Yet none of 2025’s developments, including any apparent narrowing of U.S. efforts, provides any comfort to companies and individuals continuing to find themselves in the crosshairs of FCPA enforcement.
The FCPA’s unpausing and enforcement guidelines
The Trump Administration’s objectives in enforcing the FCPA are laid out in the enforcement guidelines issued on 9 June 2025 by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche. The guidelines also apply to the still-new and largely untested counterpart, the Foreign Extortion Prevention Act (FEPA), which targets the “demand-side” activity of corrupt foreign officials. These new guidelines appear to narrow the facts that are likely to lead to FCPA and FEPA enforcement, signaling a move away from cases premised on routine business practices and low-dollar payments. In particular, the guidelines direct prosecutors to consider a non-exhaustive list of factors before initiating FCPA investigations or enforcement actions:
- Connection with narcotics trafficking cartels, Transnational Criminal Organizations (TCOs), and Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs): A “primary consideration” in deciding whether to pursue an FCPA investigation or enforcement action is connections of the alleged corrupt conduct with narcotics trafficking cartels, TCOs, and FTOs, or involvement of money launderers or shell companies that also work for such organizations in the corrupt conduct.
- Competitiveness of U.S. companies: DOJ will prioritize FCPA enforcement that “seeks to vindicate” the “growth and expansion of U.S. business opportunities abroad” by pursuing targets that corruptly “skew markets and disadvantage” specific U.S. entities in competing fairly and/or resulting in economic injury.
- U.S. national security: FCPA enforcement will focus on “the most urgent threats to U.S. national security” resulting from bribery involving key infrastructure or assets in “sectors like defense, intelligence, or critical infrastructure.” Aerospace and defense is the third most common industry for historical FCPA enforcement, according to Stanford University. We expect companies such as those involved in critical minerals, deep-water ports, semiconductor manufacturing supply chains, digital and electrical grid infrastructure, critical transportation infrastructure, space security, and communications assets to face increased scrutiny.
- Complex schemes: Prosecutors should prioritize FCPA cases involving “substantial bribe payments, proven and sophisticated efforts to conceal bribe payments, fraudulent conduct in furtherance of the bribery scheme, and efforts to obstruct justice,” instead of cases that involve “routine business practices” or “de minimis or low-dollar, generally accepted business courtesies.”
On their face, the guidelines underscore particular risks for companies in sensitive sectors and with operations in countries – particularly in Latin America – where business operations might intersect in some way with cartel and organized criminal activity. At the same time, the guidelines leave a number of questions unanswered – including the extent to which U.S. authorities will pursue otherwise viable cases that do not closely align with these criteria.
Resumption of enforcement activity
The Trump Administration’s resumption of FCPA enforcement is occurring amid other efforts to target transnational crime involving gangs and cartels. Among other steps, the Administration has designated multiple Latin American cartels as FTOs, while dedicating additional resources to investigating and prosecuting cartel-linked corruption.
DOJ’s actions following the lifting of the FCPA pause – including a number of criminal indictments and resolutions alike – provide clues as to the scope of enforcement going forward. In the near term, some resolutions will likely involve ongoing cases predating the FCPA pause and new enforcement guidelines; regardless, the underlying facts, magnitude of penalties, and nature of the resolution will illustrate how DOJ is choosing to exercise its prosecutorial discretion.
For instance, in August 2025, Liberty Mutual reached a settlement agreement with DOJ in which the company agreed to pay US$4.7 million related to bribery charges linked to its subsidiary’s operations in India. The government alleged that, between 2017 and 2022, Liberty Mutual paid nearly US$1.5 million through its subsidiary to officials at six state-owned banks in India, to obtain or retain business with those banks. As part of the resolution, Liberty Mutual committed to fully cooperate with DOJ’s ongoing investigation and disgorge US$4.7 million.
The resumption in FCPA enforcement confirms that companies cannot abandon their years of efforts in implementing anti-bribery compliance programs.
Then, in November, a European-based telecommunications services provider announced that a Guatemalan subsidiary had entered into a two-year deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) with DOJ, agreeing to pay more than US$118 million in penalties and forfeiture. The DPA resolved allegations that the subsidiary made improper payments to Guatemalan government officials between 2012 and 2018, totaling approximately US$58 million.
Steps for global companies
FCPA enforcement is occurring in the context of broader criminal enforcement efforts that include ongoing efforts to invite whistleblower reporting, reward meaningful cooperation, and incentivize voluntary self-disclosures if misconduct is uncovered. We expect DOJ to continue refining its corresponding policies and incentives, even as it navigates how it will exercise its prosecutorial discretion.
So, what are global companies to do? The resumption in FCPA enforcement confirms that companies cannot abandon their years of efforts in implementing anti-bribery compliance programs. At the same time, companies must direct their attention to those areas – both within and beyond the FCPA context – of greatest focus for U.S. authorities.
As U.S. officials have also emphasized, the FCPA is just one of several tools, including trade fraud as well as export controls and sanctions enforcement, for U.S. enforcement efforts that affect cross-border business. As the second Trump Administration enters 2026, companies are well advised to monitor U.S. enforcement developments particularly closely, to understand the still-evolving landscape of FCPA enforcement, and to consult with U.S. counsel if potential compliance issues or government investigations emerge.