On March 22, 2010, the Department of Justice charged Daimler AG (“Daimler”) with conspiracy and violations of the books and records provision of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. According to the criminal information, between 1998 and 2008, Daimler made hundreds of improper payments worth tens of millions of dollars to foreign officials in at least 22 countries, including: China, Croatia, Egypt, Greece, Hungary, Indonesia, Iraq, Ivory Coast, Latvia, Nigeria, Russia, Serbia and Montenegro, Thailand, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Vietnam. These improper payments assisted Daimler in securing contracts with government customers for the purchase of Daimler vehicles valued at hundreds of millions of dollars.
According to the information, Daimler engaged in a long-standing practice of paying bribes to foreign officials using a variety of mechanisms, including: corporate ledger accounts known as “third party accounts” or “TPAs,” corporate “cash desks,” offshore bank accounts, deceptive pricing arrangements, and third-party intermediaries. These payments were often recorded as “commissions,” “special discounts,” and/or “necessary payments,” which was understood to mean “official bribe.”
The information states that Daimler had an inadequate compliance structure and a corporate culture that tolerated and encouraged bribery. In fact, certain key executives and the head of internal auditing are alleged to have been involved in the bribery. The information states Daimler’s Board of Management was aware of the systematic bribery and held a meeting in response to Germany’s enactment of foreign anti-bribery legislation. In the meeting, the Board discussed their knowledge of past payments and discussed that adopting anti-bribery policies would result in losing business. At the meeting, an anti-bribery policy was adopted, but Daimler failed to make sufficient efforts to enforce the policy and to train employees on compliance.
The information further details the extensive and systematic bribery perpetrated by Daimler, including: violations of the U.N. Iraq Oil for Food program; commission payments to officials in Moscow; direct payments to family members of foreign officials; and, providing Mercedes passenger cars to the girlfriends of foreign officials in China. The information also alleges that Daimler provided, as a birthday gift to a high-level executive official of Turkmenistan’s government, an armored Mercedes Benz S-class passenger car valued at more than 300,000 Euros. In total, the information alleges the various bribery payments resulted in business that generated over $50 million pre-tax profits for Daimler.
This settlement will be subject to the court’s approval, and a hearing has been set for April 1, 2010, before Judge Richard J. Leon of the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia. It has been reported that Daimler has agreed to pay approximately $185 million in fines and that two of its subsidiaries will plead guilty to bribing foreign government officials in order to settle the corruption investigation with the Department of Justice and the Securities and Exchange Commission.
According to the information, Daimler engaged in a long-standing practice of paying bribes to foreign officials using a variety of mechanisms, including: corporate ledger accounts known as “third party accounts” or “TPAs,” corporate “cash desks,” offshore bank accounts, deceptive pricing arrangements, and third-party intermediaries. These payments were often recorded as “commissions,” “special discounts,” and/or “necessary payments,” which was understood to mean “official bribe.”
The information states that Daimler had an inadequate compliance structure and a corporate culture that tolerated and encouraged bribery. In fact, certain key executives and the head of internal auditing are alleged to have been involved in the bribery. The information states Daimler’s Board of Management was aware of the systematic bribery and held a meeting in response to Germany’s enactment of foreign anti-bribery legislation. In the meeting, the Board discussed their knowledge of past payments and discussed that adopting anti-bribery policies would result in losing business. At the meeting, an anti-bribery policy was adopted, but Daimler failed to make sufficient efforts to enforce the policy and to train employees on compliance.
The information further details the extensive and systematic bribery perpetrated by Daimler, including: violations of the U.N. Iraq Oil for Food program; commission payments to officials in Moscow; direct payments to family members of foreign officials; and, providing Mercedes passenger cars to the girlfriends of foreign officials in China. The information also alleges that Daimler provided, as a birthday gift to a high-level executive official of Turkmenistan’s government, an armored Mercedes Benz S-class passenger car valued at more than 300,000 Euros. In total, the information alleges the various bribery payments resulted in business that generated over $50 million pre-tax profits for Daimler.
This settlement will be subject to the court’s approval, and a hearing has been set for April 1, 2010, before Judge Richard J. Leon of the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia. It has been reported that Daimler has agreed to pay approximately $185 million in fines and that two of its subsidiaries will plead guilty to bribing foreign government officials in order to settle the corruption investigation with the Department of Justice and the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Related Insights
05 December 2024
Foley Viewpoints
New Requirements for Franchise Brokers in California
On September 24, 2024, Governor Gavin Newsom signed Senate Bill 919, amending California’s Franchise Investment Law to regulate franchise brokers and franchise sales organizations.
04 December 2024
Foley Viewpoints
Five Compliance Best Practices for … USMCA Management
The United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement replaced the North American Free Trade Agreement and came into effect on July 1, 2020.
04 December 2024
Manufacturing Industry Advisor
What Every Multinational Company Should Know About … Nearshoring into Mexico: Key Considerations in Weighing the Pros and Cons
Mexico is a key player in both the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) and Latin American regions.