FCPA Resolutions: What the Company Actually Admitted

A criminal FCPA DPA defers prosecution of charges filed in court, an NPA conditionally avoids filing charges, and a declination records a decision not to prosecute. Each can leave a detailed account of the payments inside the business. If you know what the consultant did, why the reseller received an extra discount or who approved the cash, that account matters more than the word settlement in a headline. The agreement may contain the company’s admissions, the agency’s allegations or obligations that still depend on cooperation. Your knowledge belongs beside the document that actually addresses it.

What Does an FCPA Resolution Establish?

In a Foreign Corrupt Practices Act resolution, the kind of document determines what the company has agreed to and what the government has done. The FCPA Resource Guide from the Justice Department and the Securities and Exchange Commission distinguishes the principal resolution forms, and the individual agreement supplies the facts and conditions.

The distinction also matters to the benefit available to a whistleblower. Corporate cooperation credit belongs to the company, while an award depends on the person’s information and the applicable program.

Does a DPA Mean the Company Pleaded Guilty?

A criminal DPA defers prosecution rather than entering a guilty plea, but it can contain an explicit admission that the charged facts are true. TIGO Guatemala’s criminal deferred prosecution agreement does exactly that. It identifies the telecommunications company as the defendant and says that its parent, Millicom, also accepts specified obligations.

Under the agreement, TIGO admitted making monthly cash payments to Guatemalan legislators for support of legislation benefiting its business. Political officials or members of their security teams typically picked up the cash at TIGO’s offices. The admitted business benefits included renewal of spectrum rights, the rights the company needed to provide mobile service. We see lawmakers collecting cash from the business that wanted their votes.

The agreement also explains why an earlier closure did not settle the facts. Millicom disclosed misconduct in 2015, but the local shareholder used operational control to block access to critical information and prevent cooperation. The Justice Department closed its initial investigation in 2018 and reopened it in 2020 after developing new evidence from outside TIGO and Millicom. That evidence expanded the government’s understanding of the conduct, including conduct that continued during and after the earlier closure.

What Remains Conditional Under a DPA?

Dismissal depends on the company’s performance under the agreement. Under that agreement, cooperation, compliance changes and reporting come before the promised request for dismissal. Prosecutors can resume the case after a breach.

Ericsson shows why a later document can change the outcome. Its 2019 DPA was followed by a 2023 guilty plea to previously deferred charges. The factual basis for the breach describes delayed disclosure affecting the China and Djibouti investigations and Iraq-related disclosure failures. The company’s handling of information after its first resolution became part of the next one.

Scoular shows how the original business records can make a DPA useful to an insider. In its account of Scoular’s criminal agreement, the Justice Department described customs brokers bribing Mexican officials to move shipments that inspections had found contained dirt, soil or other impurities. The brokers billed the payments back as reinspection fees, and employees discussed the shipments and bribes through WhatsApp and other communications. The department reported more than $400,000 in authorized bribes against more than $6.5 million in avoided fees and costs. The invoice called it another inspection. The criminal case describes a payment that bought passage through one.

Does an NPA Mean No Wrongdoing?

An NPA can contain admitted wrongdoing even though prosecutors agree not to file charges. In its 2019 criminal non-prosecution agreement, Microsoft Hungary admitted conduct involving false justifications for discounts on government sales. Resellers retained the extra margin for improper payments instead of passing the discount to the government customer. The false explanations entered Microsoft’s U.S. systems and consolidated records.

For a sales or finance employee, the commercial comparison is specific: the price Microsoft charged its reseller, the price the customer paid and the reason entered for the discount. An insider’s knowledge of who requested and approved a discount helps connect those records to the transaction.

The Justice Department’s March 2026 corporate enforcement policy distinguishes qualifying declinations, certain disclosures or aggravating circumstances that can lead to an NPA, and other resolutions. Disclosure, cooperation and correction of the misconduct help determine that corporate treatment. The policy explains the government’s resolution choice. The company’s own agreement still supplies its admissions and obligations.

What Does a Declination Establish?

A declination establishes the government’s decision not to prosecute the company on the stated terms. It can sit alongside a detailed account of criminal conduct and separate charges against individuals. Balt’s March 17, 2026 declination letter records Balt’s acceptance of responsibility.

In that letter, the Justice Department described evidence that Balt paid approximately $602,000 through a Belgian consultant to a senior physician at a French public hospital. The purpose was to secure purchases of medical devices, including endovascular embolization coils. Fake invoices and purported bonuses concealed the payments. The department credited Balt’s disclosure during an ongoing internal investigation, cooperation and corrective action, and the company agreed to the letter’s facts and conditions. We see a company accepting responsibility for bribery while avoiding prosecution.

The separate criminal indictment described in the announcement charged an executive at Balt’s U.S. subsidiary and a consultant over their alleged roles. Those allegations included sham consulting agreements, fake invoices and personal email accounts. Balt’s letter credits the company with providing all known relevant facts and information about the individuals involved. For someone who dealt with the consultant, the approval chain and the purpose of the invoice remain concrete questions even after the company receives a declination.

What Does an SEC Settled Order Establish?

An SEC settled order records the Securities and Exchange Commission’s civil findings and the company’s agreed obligations. Oracle’s September 2022 order addressed alleged discount schemes and sham marketing reimbursements at subsidiaries in India, Turkey and the United Arab Emirates. Those mechanisms put funds at distributors and resellers, where sales employees could direct their use.

The Commission described purchase orders below $5,000 that supervisors could approve without evidence that the marketing activity occurred. It also alleged that employees justified discounts by claiming intense competition even when public tenders required Oracle products. Someone familiar with the tender, the discount request and the customer price could see the contradiction the approval process missed.

One Turkish transaction put the supposed business purpose in unusually clear perspective. The order described a week-long California trip for ministry officials, including entertainment in Los Angeles, Napa Valley and a theme park, built around a headquarters meeting:

We call that a thin business explanation for a week of entertainment. The Commission also described a discount request used to fund the trip, tying the travel back to the sales transaction.

Oracle had already agreed to a $2 million civil penalty in 2012 over alleged unauthorized distributor funds in India. The later order required a $15 million civil penalty for the later conduct. We see the same side-fund problem in both actions. The recurring use of money held outside Oracle’s own accounts matters to a channel employee: the reseller’s records may explain what the supplier’s ledger leaves out.

What Money Determines the Reward?

FCPA whistleblower rewards depend on the applicable program and qualifying money collected. Securities and Exchange Commission awards generally range from 10% to 30% of collected monetary sanctions in qualifying actions. The Justice Department’s corporate awards pilot uses qualifying net proceeds from forfeited assets under its own rules. A payment required by a corporate resolution and an award to a person answer different questions.

The resolution also does not make the person’s award claim for them. We assess the information’s contribution, the relevant enforcement action and the award opportunity with you and FCPA whistleblower lawyers. The company’s cooperation and your information each need their own attention.

The False Claims Act has a separate whistleblower route for fraud against the government. A whistleblower case under the False Claims Act can pay 15% to 30% of what the government recovers. FCPA resolutions involve agency enforcement, and we assess which program fits the conduct you know about.

What Does a Guilty Plea Admit?

A guilty plea admits criminal guilt for the offenses covered by that plea. Alstom’s 2014 parent-company plea concerned books-and-records and internal-controls offenses. Its subsidiaries’ agreements addressed their own conduct separately.

The statement of facts attached to Alstom’s criminal plea describes a consultant’s commission falling from 3% to 1% when part of the assignment moved to another consultant. It also describes correspondence connecting hospitality for Egyptian electricity officials to unresolved commercial decisions. For an employee administering commissions or travel, the allocation of work and the pending customer decision help explain what a payment was buying. The plea makes those admitted facts available in the company’s own criminal case.

Does Dismissal Mean Acquittal?

A dismissal ends the charges it covers. It does not undo what the company admitted earlier. Och-Ziff admitted facts under its 2016 DPA, and the court dismissed the parent’s charges in May 2021.

The earlier criminal agreement addressed investment transactions, including a promised finder’s fee, backdated agreements and loans connected to opportunities in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The later dismissal does not turn those earlier admissions into an acquittal. An employee who understands the investment approvals or the consultant’s work still has a concrete account to compare with the admitted transactions.

What an Insider Adds to the Resolution

The useful connection runs from the business decision to the payment and its description in the books. Scoular’s broker invoices, Microsoft’s discount justifications and Balt’s consulting records each put an ordinary business document beside a different account of what the money bought. We work with the person who can explain that difference: the service actually performed, the customer price, the approval or the reason a description changed.

There is evidence that the prospect of such reporting changes behavior before a resolution appears. The March 2019 working paper Do Corporate Whistleblower Laws Deter Accounting Fraud?, hosted by MIT Sloan, studied exposure to state False Claims Acts through state pension-fund ownership. It found a 5% to 9% reduction in the estimated likelihood of accounting fraud among exposed firms, using accounting-based measures of fraud risk. That is evidence of the value of reporting incentives before a resolution, when the misleading entries are still inside the business.

When You Know What the Agreement Leaves Out

If a resolution describes transactions you worked on, speak with our whistleblower experts about what you know behind the payments. We test what you know against the company’s admissions and the government’s account to build your strongest FCPA whistleblower case. We bring in FCPA whistleblower lawyers who understand corporate agreements and cross-border evidence, and stay beside you through the whole process.