9/15/2014 1 Global Antitrust Compliance and Risk—Creating an Effective Program 13 th Annual SCCE Compliance & Ethics Institute Chicago, IL ‒ Timothy Bridgeford, Senior Compliance Counsel – FCPA, Antitrust & Investigations, Tyco ‒ Douglas Tween, Partner, Baker & McKenzie ‒ Robert Connolly, Partner, GeyerGorey LLP What We Will Cover ‒ Overview of global legislation, cartel enforcement activity and trends. ‒ Learn about why the United States and the EU have given little guidance on and no credit for antitrust compliance programs ‒ Learn how to effectively promote antitrust compliance in your organization and build an effective program that supports the effective management and mitigation of risk 2
Transcript
9/15/2014
1
Global Antitrust Compliance andRisk—Creating an Effective Program
13th Annual SCCE Compliance & Ethics InstituteChicago, IL
‒ Douglas Tween, Partner, Baker & McKenzie‒ Robert Connolly, Partner, GeyerGorey LLP
What We Will Cover
‒ Overview of global legislation, cartel enforcement activity and trends.
‒ Learn about why the United States and the EU have given little guidance on and no credit for antitrust compliance programs
‒ Learn how to effectively promote antitrust compliance in yyour organization and build an effective program that supports the effective management and mitigation of risk
DenmarkUnlimited fines on individuals involved in anti-competitive conduct.
EstoniaUp to 3 years’ imprisonment and/or a fine on any member of the management board of a company found guilty of breaching competition law.
Companies: Cartel offences attract criminal fines of up to CDN$25 million (approx. €18.3 million)
Canada
Germany
Slovak RepublicUp to 3 years' imprisonment or fines of up to €332,000 on any individual found guilty of a serious breach of competition law.
SloveniaUp to 5 years, a monetary fine or prohibition from performing an occupation for a period of up to 5 years.
United KingdomUp to 5 years' imprisonment and unlimited fines on any individual who is found guilty of taking part in a cartel.
United StatesCompanies: Up to US$100 million (approx. €72.7 million), or alternatively twice the amount the conspirators gained from the illegal acts or twice the money lost by the victims of the crime. Corporations may also be sentenced to a term of probation of up to 5 years.
Individuals: May be fined up to US$1 million (approx. €727,000) or twice the total gain or twice the total loss, and sentenced to a maximum of 10 years in prison on each count.
IrelandUp to 5 years' imprisonment and/or up to €4 million or 10% of the annual income on any individual involved in a cartel.
AustriaUp to 3 years' imprisonment on any individual guilty of a bid-rigging offence.Certain antitrust infringements may amount to fraud which can be punishable by up to 10 years' imprisonment. Unrelated to competition law, companies may be held liable for their employees’ criminal acts and fined up to EUR 1.8 mio.
Czech RepublicUp to 8 years' imprisonment or fines for cartel conduct. The persons signing the restrictive agreement can be jointly and severally liable to the company for damage caused by such action.
FranceUp to 4 years' imprisonment and a fine of up to €75,000 for anyone who played a personal and decisive role in anticompetitive
HungaryUp to 5 years' imprisonment for price-fixing and bid-rigging in public procurement or concession context
JapanUp to 5 years' imprisonment and/or a fine of up to JPY5 million (approx. €47,000) on any
Mexico
Russian FederationUp to 7 years' imprisonment and fines of up to RUB500,000 (approx. €11,790) or fines equivalent to the amount of their salary for a period of up to 3 years and disqualification of up to 3 years.
Up to 5 years' imprisonment and fines on any individual involved in bid-rigging. Other competition law violations could be prosecuted as fraud, which carries the same penalties.
Up to 10 years'
million).
Individuals: Up to 14 years' imprisonment and/or a fine of up to CDN$25 million (approx. €18.3 million) on an individual director, officer or employee found guilty of conspiracy.
South AfricaFine of up to ZAR500,000 (approx. €45,940) and/or a maximum sentence of 10 years' imprisonment on individuals who engage in cartel conduct, commit procedural breaches or fail to comply with interim or final orders of the Competition Tribunal or the Competition Appeal Court.
AustraliaUp to 10 years' imprisonment and a fine of AU$220,000 (approximately €140,000) per contravention for those who make, or give effect, to a cartel provision with the intention of dishonestly obtaining a benefit.
BrazilThe court may impose a sentence on individuals of between 2 to 5 years’ imprisonment and fine.
behaviour.
GreeceIndividuals fined up to €1 million depending on the type of the infringement or sentenced to up to 5 years' imprisonment.
IndiaCivil penalty: fine of up to 250 million Indian Rupees (approx. €3.7 million).
Criminal penalty: breaches of competition law can result in imprisonment for a period of up to three years.
MaltaUp to 3 years (5 years for severe violations) or fines of up to ILS2 million (approx. €400,000).
ItalyUp to 3 years' imprisonment on individuals who are involved in boycotts.
individual who is found guilty of taking part in a cartel.
IsraelA company officer found guilty of participating in a cartel is personally liable to the company for the payment of a fine of up to 10% of a company’s turnover.
imprisonment and a fine of 1000 to 3000 times the individual's salary for cartels.
Up to 3 years' imprisonment and/or a fine of up to THB6 million (approx. €142,000) may be imposed on a managing partner or a person in charge of operations unless the offence at stake was committed without his/her knowledge or consent and/or reasonable measures were taken to prevent such offence.
ColombiaUp to 12 years, fines up to 1000 Minimum Monthly Wage (US$315 million) and inability to contract with state agencies on any individual involved in bid rigging. Bid rigging is the only antitrust violations criminally sanction in Colombia.
9/15/2014
4
The ‘long arm’ of US cartel enforcement
Of the $7.8 billion in criminal antitrust fines imposed by the Division between FY 1997 and the end of FY 2012, approximately 97 percent imposed re international cartels
65 foreign defendants from France, Germany, Japan, South Korea Taiwan the Netherlands Norway Sweden
South Korea, Taiwan, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom have served, or have been sentenced to serve, prison sentences in the United States as a result of the Division’s cartel investigations
US Cartel Statistics – Ten Highest Fines by Company
Defendant (FY) Product Fine($ Millions)
Geographic Scope Country
AU O t i C ti f T i (2012) Li id C t l Di l (LCD) $500 I t ti l T iAU Optronics Corporation of Taiwan (2012) Liquid Crystal Display (LCD) Panels
$500 International Taiwan
F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Ltd. (1999) Vitamins $500 International Switzerland
Yazaki Corporation (2012) Automobile Parts $470 International Japan
Bridgestone Corporation (2014) Anti-vibration rubber products for automobiles
$425 International Japan
LG Display Co., Ltd LG Display America (2009)
Liquid Crystal Display (LCD) Panels
$400 International Korea
Société Air France andKoninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij, N.V. (2008)
Air Transportation(Cargo)
$350 International France (Société-Air France)The Netherlands
6-10 dawn raids per year1-5 dawn raids per year0 dawn raids per year
30 + dawn raids per year21-30 dawn raids per year
11-20 dawn raids per year
Dawn raid powers, no publicly available figuresSignificant investigatory powers
Argentina
Chile SouthAfrica
Australia
New Zealand
Kingdom
France
Switzerland
Spain
GermanyPoland
Italy
Slovakia
HungaryLithuania
Latvia
Romania
Bulgaria
Greece
Czech Republic
Austria
Slovenia
9/15/2014
7
The U.S. and EU Position on Compliance Programs‒ Amnesty or Leniency is the big carrot – will not also
give credit for a compliance program‒ Cartel violation = a failed compliance program‒ Cartel violation = a failed compliance program‒ If your company had an effective compliance
program, your company would have gotten the leniency
‒ Little to no official guidance on antitrust corporate compliance programs
13
FCPA, UK Bribery Act
FCPA‒ Significant guidance from the DOJ and SEC in 2012
Significant credit for self disclosing and having an‒ Significant credit for self disclosing and having an effective compliance program under the FCPA
‒ Liberal use of NPA and DPA’s for companies‒ Fines can be enormous
UK Bribery Act‒ Significant guidance from the SFO and the Ministry of
JusticeJustice‒ Adequate compliance program is a defense‒ Appear to be going to DPA model
14
9/15/2014
8
Antitrust Compliance Program Necessary?
ABSOLUTELY!!‒ To comply with the law ‒ Builds stakeholder confidence ‒ Build company reputation for compliance ‒ Prevent disastrous violation from occurring Potential enormous criminal/civil fines in multiple jurisdictions Employee jail time Customer class action lawsuits Shareholder class action lawsuits Shareholder class action lawsuits Potential debarment from government contracts Enormous brand/company reputational damage
‒ Increase chance of detection and qualifying for leniency‒ Cost of failure heavily outweighs the cost of compliance
15
Highlights of Effective Overall Compliance Program
High Level Commitment or Tone at the Top
Risk Assessment
H tlithe Top
Code of Conduct
Oversight & Autonomy by Compliance Staff
Adequate Global Compliance Resources
Specific Policies and Procedures
Hotline
Internal Investigations
Enforcement and Discipline
Third Party Management
M&A Due Diligence
Integration of Newly Acquired E titi i t Y C li
Effective compliance programs must be tailored to the company’s specific business and risks and be dynamic to evolve with the business and its risks.
16
Comprehensive Internal Audits –Rotational and Proactive
Robust Internal Controls
Entities into Your Compliance Program
9/15/2014
9
Key Components of Effective Antitrust Compliance Programs
‒ Be sure to win “tone from the top” and senior management commitment specifically on competition matterscommitment specifically on competition matters
‒ Be certain competition compliance is specifically addressed in the code of conduct
‒ Drafting a policy
‒ Risk assessment
‒ Tailored trainings
‒ Auditing and testing
‒ Mergers and acquisitions
‒ Internal reporting and investigations
17
Business and Industry Risk Assessment
Proper regulatory risk assessment - Know your company, industry, and jurisdiction(s)
How much cartel risk do you have? How much cartel risk do you have?‒ Commodity product?
Very Important to get a handle on your trade associations!
Due Diligence
Risk Analysis
Bid /T d ?‒ Bids/Tenders?
Non- cartel risk?‒ Monopolization risks? Market power very much a jurisdictional
risk
‒ Vertical price/nonprice restraints risk?
18
9/15/2014
10
Tailored Trainings
‒ Tailor your trainings to your company’s specific antitrust risksHow do you make antitrust training understandable and‒ How do you make antitrust training understandable and entertaining?
‒ Don’t forget the “backroom” or office people Administrative assistants and T&E processors
‒ Don’t forget about your purchasing people – don’t let your company become a victim
19
Auditing, Monitoring, and Testing
‒ With no evidence, is this really feasible to uncover a clandestine cartel? Where do you look? Where do you look?
Incredibly expensive
Data privacy implications
‒ Possible options: Proactive email review using keyword hits
T&E auditsT&E audits
Antitrust employee questionnaires or surveys
Full blown proactive audits of “risky” businesses
20
9/15/2014
11
Mergers and Acquisitions
‒ Is your business properly trained for “initial discussions?”
‒ Does your M&A team and business have appropriate safeguards to firewall information during due diligence?
‒ Is the M&A team and business properly informed of dangers of “gun jumping?”
21
Internal Reporting and Investigations
‒ You have a cartel allegation, what do you do? ‒ Have your “break the glass” plan ready Speed will be of the essence in a race for amnesty Speed will be of the essence in a race for amnesty Don’t want to be caught flat footed
‒ Is amnesty always the correct decision when available?
