On February 10, 2025, President Trump signed an executive order instructing the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Attorney General (AG) Pamela Bondi to “cease initiation of any new [Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) (15 U.S.C. §§ 78dd-1 et seq.)] investigations or enforcement actions” for 180 days, and, in that same time period, “review in detail all existing FCPA investigations or enforcement actions” to determine if those actions meet the new administration’s view of “proper” FCPA enforcement, and match the “Presidential foreign policy prerogatives.”

This “pause” in any new FCPA investigations or enforcement actions shocked many in DOJ and the legal community who focus on defending corporations and individuals from investigations and enforcement actions related to potential FCPA violations, even after the AG issued a memorandum titled Total Elimination Of Cartels And Transnational Criminal Organizations on February 5, 2025 (AG February 5 memo), which instructed the DOJ Fraud Section’s FCPA Unit to “prioritize investigations related to foreign bribery that facilitate the criminal operations of Cartels and [Transnational Criminal Organizations].”

While on its face the executive order appears to significantly alter future FCPA investigations and prosecutions, and will limit for 180 days, DOJ’s enforcement of the FCPA, multinational companies should not sit back and relax their efforts to comply with the FCPA.

Takeaways

First, the pause in new FCPA investigations and enforcement actions is in effect only for 180 days (although it may be extended for another 180 days, if deemed necessary), and it is unknown how long it will take and in what format DOJ will review the existing FCPA investigations and enforcement actions to determine if they should proceed.

Second, the pause does not ensure that DOJ will not investigate and prosecute FCPA violations, or related money laundering violations, against individuals or corporations completely after the 180-day pause period. The law enforcement officers and the prosecutors who work on these investigations are highly skilled and could potentially obtain an “exemption” for a new investigation or action from AG Bondi and convince the AG to continue an already initiated investigation or action during the 180-day period.

Third, while the statute of limitations to charge a pure violation of the FCPA is five years, the statute of limitations of money laundering charges related to the bribery of a foreign public official is seven years, 18 U.S.C. § 1956(j), and both of those statues of limitations can be tolled for three additional years if DOJ seeks evidence from foreign nations pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3292.

Fourth, the current Trump administration is only in power for four years, and if a new administration takes over DOJ in the next Presidential election, FCPA investigations and enforcement could be ramped up again, and FCPA violations committed in the past four years could be investigated and enforced by the future leaders of DOJ.

Finally, many foreign countries have their own anti-bribery laws. Over the past few years, the DOJ Fraud Section’s FCPA Unit has successfully worked with the U.K., South Africa, Brazil, Colombia, and many other countries on investigating and resolving several FCPA violations. That experience should assist these countries’ anti-bribery law enforcement arms in potentially filling the gap in such investigations during the pause in FCPA enforcement in the United States.

Recommendations

Whether this executive order, coupled with the AG February 5 Memo, signals a permanent change in corporate FCPA enforcement or a temporary reallocation of resources aimed at meeting DOJ’s new enforcement priorities, remains to be seen. However, despite the uncertainties surrounding the current FCPA enforcement landscape, multinational corporations should continue to maintain robust, carefully designed, and properly resourced anti-corruption and anti-money laundering compliance programs, including whistleblower programs.

Likewise, companies seeking to acquire foreign businesses, especially in countries known to have large transnational narcotics-trafficking organizations, should continue to perform adequate due diligence reviews of their target companies, both prior to and after the acquisition, to avoid legal and business risks and all the attendant harms to the business’s profitability and reputation, as well as a potential civil and criminal liability.