Articles Posted in Whistleblower Cases

According to the Wall Street Journal and other news sources, The United StatesTreasury Department has changed how it calculates fines related to sanctions violations, which means larger penalties. The amount of the increases cannot be calculated yet. Treasury will no longer credit many fines paid to other government agencies as part of joint settlements. Two recent sanctions settlements fit the Treasury’s new approach: The Treasury and other agencies reached settlements totaling $1.1 billion with Standard Chartered Bank PLC, which was charged with violating U.S. sanctions, including those against Iran; and settlements totaling $1.3 billion reached with UniCredit Group SpA, which faced similar charges.

The Justice Department, the Federal Reserve and the New York State Department of Financial Services were part of those settlements. The U.K.’s Financial Conduct Authority also reached a separate settlement with Standard Chartered . In the settlements, the Treasury deducted penalties paid to other agencies from its own for matching conduct occurring over the same period of time. Gacki said the department was trying to balance its desire to avoid “unnecessary piling-on” with “a strategic use of its enforcement authorities.”

The Treasury Department issued new guidance on how companies should design effective sanctions compliance programs in May. The framework issued by the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control suggests that the agency wants companies to have an active sanctions compliance program, rather than a written policy alone, as the U.S. sanctions program becomes more dynamic and complex.framework_ofac_ccViolations of US sanction concerning foreign nations, including Iran, Cuba, North Korea and China are frequently the basis of whistleblower cases under The False Claims Act, which allows individuals with original information not known to the Government, to sue on behalf of the Government and if money are collected for the violations the whistleblower may collect a reward of up to 30% of what the government receives. Frequently the information known to employees of violating corporations is the only way in which the Government can find out about major violations including banks that do business with particular nations on the Treaury’s list. Here is the latest list of named nations with active US sanctions programs:

Active Sanctions Programs: Program Last Updated:
Balkans-Related Sanctions 02/03/2017
Belarus Sanctions 10/24/2018
Burundi Sanctions 06/02/2016
Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act of 2017 (CAATSA) 12/19/2018​​
Central African Republic Sanctions 12/13/2017
Counter Narcotics Trafficking Sanctions 05/23/2019
​Counter Terrorism Sanctions 06/12/2019
​Cuba Sanctions 06/04/2019
Cyber-related Sanctions ​12/19/2018
Democratic Republic of the Congo-Related Sanctions ​03/21/2019
Foreign Interference in a United States Election Sanctions 04​​/26/2019
​Global Magnitsky Sanctions 05/17/2019​​
Iran Sanctions 06/12/2019
Iraq-Related Sanctions ​12/27/2017
Lebanon-Related Sanctions ​07/30/2010
Libya Sanctions 11/19/2018
Magnitsky Sanctions ​05/16/2019
​Nicaragua-related Sanctions ​04/17/2019
Non-Proliferation Sanctions 06/07/2019
North Korea Sanctions  03/21/2019
Rough Diamond Trade Controls 06/18/2018
Somalia Sanctions ​07/19/2018
Sudan and Darfur Sanctions 06/28/2018
South Sudan-related Sanctions ​12/14/2018
Syria Sanctions 06/11/2019
Transnational Criminal Organizations 10/02/2018
Ukraine-/Russia-Related Sanctions 03/15/2019
Venezuela-Related Sanctions 06/06/​2019
Yemen-Related Sanctions 04/14/2015
Zimbabwe Sanctions ​04/12/2017
Click here for information on OFAC sanctions lists program tags and their definitions​

About santions on Iran:

  On November 5, 2018, the United States fully re-imposed the sanctions on Iran that had been lifted or waived under the JCPOA.  These are the toughest U.S. sanctions ever imposed on Iran, and will target critical sectors of Iran’s economy, such as the energy, shipping and shipbuilding, and financial sectors.  The United States is engaged in a campaign of maximum financial pressure on the Iranian regime and intends to enforce aggressively these sanctions that have come back into effect.
On November 5, 2018, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) posted to its website additional frequently asked questions (FAQs) that provide guidance on the sanctions that have been re-imposed.  In addition, OFAC amended FAQ 256 and FAQ 417, and archived outdated FAQs.
As part of the re-imposition of U.S. sanctions, in its largest ever single-day action targeting the Iranian regime, OFAC sanctioned more than 700 individuals, entities, aircraft, and vessels on November 5, 2018.  This action was a critical part of the re-imposition of the remaining U.S. sanctions that were lifted or waived in connection with the JCPOA.  For more information on this action, click here.
Additionally, on November 5, 2018, OFAC moved persons identified as meeting the definition of the terms “Government of Iran” or an “Iranian financial institution” from the List of Persons Blocked Solely Pursuant to E.O. 13599 (the “E.O. 13599 List”) to the SDN List and removed the E.O. 13599 List from its website.
Finally, OFAC also amended the Iranian Transactions Sanctions Regulations (ITSR), effective November 5, 2018 to, among other things, reflect the re-imposition of sanctions pursuant to certain sections of Executive Order 13846 and technical changes that remove references to the E.O. 13599 List.
Here is a summary from the Department of Justice about the recent billion dollar settlement with Standard Chartered Bank (SCB) relating to its charged violations of US sanctions against Iran:

Standard Chartered Bank (SCB), a global financial institution headquartered in London, England, has agreed to forfeiture of $240 million, a fine of $480 million, and to the amendment and extension of its deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) with the Justice Department for an additional two years for conspiring to violate the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).  This criminal conspiracy, lasting from 2007 through 2011, resulted in SCB processing approximately 9,500 financial transactions worth approximately $240 million through U.S. financial institutions for the benefit of Iranian entities. 

Assistant Attorney General Brian A. Benczkowski of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney Jessie K. Liu of the District of Columbia, Assistant Director in Charge William F. Sweeney, Jr. of the FBI’s New York Field Office, Chief Don Fort of the IRS Criminal Investigation (CI), and District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance Jr. of New York County made the announcement.

The New York County District Attorney’s Office (DANY) is also announcing today that SCB has agreed to amend its DPA with DANY and extend for two additional years, and to pay an additional financial penalty of $292,210,160.  Under the amended DPA with DANY, SCB has admitted that it violated New York State law by, among other things, falsifying the records of New York financial institutions.  SCB has also entered into separate settlement agreements with the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the Federal Reserve), the New York State Department of Financial Services (DFS), and the United Kingdom’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) under which SCB shall pay additional penalties totaling more than $477 million.  The Justice Department has agreed to credit a portion of these related payments and, after crediting, will collect $52,210,160 of the fine, in addition to SCB’s $240 million forfeiture.

In connection with the conspiracy, a former employee of SCB’s branch in Dubai, United Arab Emirates (UAE), referred to as Person A, pleaded guilty in the District of Columbia for conspiring to defraud the United States and to violate IEEPA.  A two-count criminal indictment was unsealed today in federal court in the District of Columbia charging Mahmoud Reza Elyassi, an Iranian national, 49, and former customer of SCB Dubai, with participating in the conspiracy.

“Today’s resolution sends a clear message to financial institutions and their employees: if you circumvent U.S. sanctions against rogue states like Iran—or assist those who do—you will pay a steep price,” said Assistant Attorney General Benczkowski.  “When a global bank processes transactions through the U.S. financial system, its compliance program must be up to the task of detecting and preventing sanctions violations—and when it is not, banks have an obligation to identify, report, and remediate any shortcomings.  The Justice Department is committed to protecting our U.S. financial system and will continue to hold financial institutions and individuals to account when they violate U.S. sanctions laws.”

“SCB and the individuals whose charges were unsealed today undermined the integrity of our financial system and harmed our national security by deliberately providing Iranians with coveted access to the U.S. economy,” said U.S. Attorney Liu.  “The financial penalty announced today leaves no doubt that repeat corporate offenders with deficient compliance programs will pay a steep price.  When bank employees and customers conspire to violate U.S. sanctions and subvert our national security, we will bring them to justice no matter where they reside or operate.”

“U.S. sanctions laws exist to protect our national security and the integrity of our financial systems,” said FBI Assistant Director in Charge Sweeney.  “Global banks that facilitate transactions through our financial institutions have to play by these rules, plain and simple.  Allowing hostile nations access to our economy is dangerous business.  The deferred prosecution agreement and charges announced today make it abundantly clear that any alleged violation of IEEPA, whether on behalf of an individual or entity, will not be taken lightly.”

“The financial penalty announced today should dissuade other financial institutions around the world from thinking they can circumvent U.S. sanctions by moving money around the world through various institutions and in various forms,” said IRS-CI Chief Fort.  “Following complex money trails is what we do—so too is holding those accountable who try to avoid following the law.”

“Our office’s unique jurisdiction and expert personnel have again enabled us to deliver hundreds of millions in ill-gotten gains to the People of New York while contributing to America’s longstanding effort to promote democratic values around the world,” said Manhattan District Attorney Vance.  “We are honored and privileged to collaborate in this shared endeavor with the supremely talented public servants of the U.S. Departments of Justice and Treasury, the New York Department of Financial Services, and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.”

A two-count felony criminal information was filed today in the District of Columbia charging SCB with illegally conspiring to violate IEEPA.  The first count alleges SCB’s participation in a criminal conspiracy from 2001 through 2007; the United States first charged SCB with this illegal conduct on Dec. 10, 2012, and under the terms of a DPA entered the same day, the government agreed to defer prosecution and SCB agreed to pay a financial penalty of $227 million.  The second count alleges SCB’s participation in a criminal conspiracy to violate IEEPA from 2007 through 2011.  This latter conspiracy resulted in SCB intentionally processing U.S. dollar transactions through the U.S. financial system for the benefit of Iranian individuals and entities worth approximately $240 million.  In the amended DPA, SCB admitted and accepted responsibility for its criminal conduct, agreed to extend the term of the agreement for an additional two years and, among other things, agreed to additional cooperation, compliance and disclosure obligations.

As part of the amended DPA announced today, SCB admitted that, from 2007 through 2011, two former employees of its branch in Dubai, willfully conspired to help Iran-connected customers conduct U.S. dollar transactions through the U.S. financial system for the benefit of Iranian individuals and entities.  One of these Iran-connected customers was Elyassi, an Iranian national who operated business accounts with SCB’s Dubai branch while residing in Iran.  SCB’s former employees helped Elyassi manage these accounts, concealed their Iranian connections, and facilitated foreign currency transactions in U.S. dollars.  SCB’s former employees knew that Elyassi’s business organizations operated from Iran and conducted U.S. dollar transactions for the benefit of Iranian interests, and helped Elyassi disguise his Iranian connections to avoid suspicion.

According to the indictment unsealed today, Elyassi and his co-conspirators registered numerous supposed general trading companies in the UAE, and used those companies as fronts for a money exchange business located in Iran.  Between November 2007 and August 2011, Elyassi used a business account at SCB’s Dubai branch to cause U.S. dollar transactions to be sent and received through the U.S. financial system for the benefit of individuals and entities ordinarily resident in Iran in violation of U.S. economic sanctions.  The charges in the indictment as to Elyassi are merely allegations, and Elyassi is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

SCB admitted to processing approximately 9,500 U.S. dollar transactions through the United States totaling approximately $240 million on behalf of Elyassi’s companies between 2007 and 2011.  More than half of these U.S. dollar transactions were the result of deficiencies in SCB’s compliance program which allowed customers to request U.S. dollar transactions from within sanctioned countries, including Iran.

Since mid-2013, SCB has engaged in significant remediation, including the comprehensive enhancement of its U.S. economic sanctions compliance program and significant improvements to its financial crime compliance program.  Once presented with evidence of potential post-2007 sanctions violations, SCB provided substantial cooperation in the government’s investigation, including by producing significant evidence of criminal wrongdoing perpetrated by its employees and customers.

This matter was investigated by the FBI’s New York Field Office and the IRS-CI’s Washington D.C. Field Division.  The cases are being prosecuted by the Criminal Division’s Money Laundering and Asset Recovery Section’s Bank Integrity Unit and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia.  Trial Attorney Jennifer Wine of the Bank Integrity Unit and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Michael Friedman and Peter Lallas of the District of Columbia are handling the matters.

The Bank Integrity Unit investigates and prosecutes complex, multi-district, and international criminal cases involving financial institutions.  The Unit’s prosecutions focus on banks and other financial institutions, including their officers, managers, and employees, whose actions threaten the integrity of the individual institution or the wider financial system.

The New York County District Attorney’s Office conducted its own investigation in conjunction with the Justice Department, including Assistant District Attorneys Jose Fanjul and Kevin Wilson serving as Special Assistant U.S. Attorneys in the District of Columbia.  The Justice Department expressed its gratitude to OFAC, the Federal Reserve, DFS, and the FCA.  The Justice Department’s Office of International Affairs provided assistance.

Yesterday I wrote about the CEO of a clothing company who has been charged criminally by the U.S. Attorney in the Southern District of New York for falsely stating the value of children’s clothing imported from China, to evade U.S. customs tariffs. A quick review of recent criminal and civil cases reveals that the Department of Justice is now pursuing cases involving customs tariff fraud particularly as so many goods are imported from China and so many companies are creating ways of evading the tariffs placed on those goods. The issue has become even more prominent since tariffs have been hiked recently. Here are some other cases:

  • The Virginia based home furnishing company Bassett Mirro Company paid the U.S. $10.5 million to settle allegations that it knowingly made statements on customs declarations to avoid paying duties. This involved bedroom furniture that the company imported from China.
  • Toyo Ink SC Holdings Co Ltd paid $45 million to settle charges of tariff evasion by knowingly misrepresenting the country of origin for a particular colorant product. Toyo said it was made in Japan and Mexico when it was actually imported from China.

opioid-300x200Opioid manufacturer Insys Therapeutics  will pay $225 million to resolve civil and criminal complaints stemming from  Insys’s payment of kickbacks and other unlawful marketing practices in connection with the marketing of Subsys. Insys’s drug Subsys is a sublingual fentanyl spray, a powerful, but highly addictive, opioid painkiller. In 2012, Subsys was approved by the Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of persistent breakthrough pain in adult cancer patients who are already receiving, and tolerant to, around-the-clock opioid therapy.
Today, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Massachusetts filed an Information charging Insys and its operating subsidiary with five counts of mail fraud. According to the charging document, from August 2012 to June 2015, Insys began using “speaker programs” purportedly to increase brand awareness of Subsys through peer-to-peer educational lunches and dinners. However, the programs were actually used as a vehicle to pay bribes and kickbacks to targeted practitioners in exchange for increased Subsys prescriptions to patients and for increased dosage of those prescriptions. One practitioner targeted by Insys was a physician’s assistant who practiced with a pain clinic in Somersworth, New Hampshire. During the first year that Subsys was on the market, the physician’s assistant did not write any Subsys prescriptions for his patients. In May 2013, the physician’s assistant joined Insys’s sham speaker program knowing that it was a way to receive kickbacks for writing Subsys prescriptions. After joining the sham speaker program, the physician’s assistant wrote approximately 672 Subsys prescriptions for his patients – many of which were medically unnecessary – and in turn, received $44,000 in kickbacks from Insys.

As part of the criminal resolution, Insys agreed to a detailed statement of facts outlining its criminal conduct with respect to the illegal marketing of Subsys. Insys will enter into a five-year deferred prosecution agreement with the government, while Insys’s operating subsidiary will plead guilty to five counts of mail fraud pursuant to the plea agreement that will be filed in the District of Massachusetts. According to the terms of the criminal resolution, Insys will pay a criminal fine of $2 million and forfeiture of $28 million. The Court has not yet scheduled the plea hearing. Last month, five former Insys executives were convicted after trial of racketeering conspiracy in connection with the marketing of Subsys. In total, eight company executives have now been convicted in Boston for crimes relating to the illegal marketing of Subsys.

The United States filed a complaint under the False Claims Act against Mallinckrodt ARD LLC, formerly known as Questcor Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Mallinckrodt”), in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The government alleges that Mallinckrodt violated the False Claims Act by using a foundation to pay illegal kickbacks in the form of copay subsidies in connection with its drug H.P. Acthar Gel (“Acthar”) from 2010 through 2014. Mallinckrodt then raised the price of a vial of Acthar from $50 to $32,000.  Acthar is a drug available to treat certain conditions including acute exacerbations in multiple sclerosis, lupus, and rheumatoid arthritis. The case was filed after two whistleblowers filed lawsuits under the False Claims Act revealing the wrongdoing to the Government. Those individuals are represented by Attorneys Ross Bagelman of Cherry Hill New Jersey and Brian McCormick of Philadelphia Pennsylvania.

When a Medicare beneficiary obtains a prescription drug covered by Medicare, the beneficiary may be required to make a partial payment, which may take the form of a copayment, coinsurance, or a deductible (collectively, “copays”). Congress included copay requirements in the Medicare program, in part, to serve as a check on health care costs, including the prices that pharmaceutical manufacturers can demand for their drugs. The Federal Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits a pharmaceutical company from offering or paying, directly or indirectly, any remuneration—which includes money or any other thing of value—to induce Medicare patients to purchase the company’s drugs. This prohibition extends to the payment of patients’ copay obligations.

The government alleges that Mallinckrodt used a foundation which paid illegal kickbacks in the form of copay subsidies for Acthar, so it could market the drug as “free” to doctors and patients despite increasing Acthar’s price astronomically. Mallinckrodt allegedly paid these illegal subsidies through three funds that it established at the foundation to the exclusion of other drugs. The government alleges that Mallinckrodt was the sole “donor” to these funds and routed Acthar patients there to receive virtually guaranteed copay subsidies to counteract doctor and patient concerns about the drug’s high cost. By doing so, Mallinckrodt marketed Acthar as “free” to patients and caused the submission of millions of dollars in false Acthar claims to Medicare.  The subsidies it routed through these funds drove Acthar prescribing and was a proven method that negated concerns about the cost of the drug, allowing Mallincrkodt to continually raise its price.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has issued a $4.5 million whistleblower award, the first given under a provision incentivizing employees to submit allegations to the agency within 120 days of internal reporting. “In this case, the whistleblower was credited with the results of the company’s internal investigation, which were reported to the SEC by the company and led to the Commission’s resulting enforcement action and the related action,” said Jane Norberg, chief of the SEC’s Office of the Whistleblower, in a statement Friday.

The  award goes to an unnamed company and employee who, according to the SEC, sent an anonymous tip to the employer alleging “significant wrongdoing.” The whistleblower also notified the SEC within 120 days, making the employee eligible for an award under 2011 rules adopted by the agency to promote internal reporting.

After receiving the tip, the company launched an internal investigation into the ”allegations of misconduct” and self-reported to the SEC, which began its own probe. Upon completing the internal investigation, the company shared its findings with the SEC.

The Internal Revenue Service awarded more than $312 million to whistleblowers last year.  This exceeds the previous record of $125 million awarded in 2012. The 2018 rewards, paid in the fiscal year ended Sept. 30, were for additional collected revenue of $1.4 billion, compared with $191 million in fiscal 2017.

And the agency has already paid $115 million to whistleblowers for 2019, and there is more coming. Last year, one tipster alone was awarded  $100 million, nearly one-third of the total collected by the government.

To date, the largest known IRS whistleblower award of $104 million went to Bradley Birkenfeld, a former private banker for UBS AG who did go public. His 2012 payment was for turning in the Swiss banking giant, which admitted it encouraged U.S. taxpayers to hide assets abroad.

Three companies and two individuals have agreed to pay a total of $2.6 million to resolve allegations that they violated the False Claims Act by obtaining reimbursements from a federal renewable energy program to pay for costs they never actually incurred, U.S. Attorney Jason Dunn announced today.

Under a program created by Congress in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, companies that place into service “renewable energy properties,” including biomass power plants, can apply to get reimbursements for up to 30 percent of the costs they incurred in placing those properties into service.  Companies submitted applications for these payments to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (“NREL”) in Golden, Colorado.  The funds for the reimbursement came from the U.S. Treasury.  Those funds were set aside under section 1603 of the 2009 Act, under a program commonly known in the renewable energy industry as the “1603 Program.”

The resolution at issue involves three companies that developed a biomass power plant in Gypsum, Colorado.  The companies were Eagle Valley Clean Energy, LLC (“Eagle Valley”), its parent company Evergreen Clean Energy Corporation (the “Corporation”), and Evergreen Clean Energy, LLC (“Evergreen”).  Dean Rostrom and Kendric Wait were principals and had ownership interests in the three corporate entities.

The Swiss drug manufacturer Novartis has been accused by the U.S. government of a kickback scheme involving paying doctors millions in kickbacks to promote and prescribe their drugs.The drugs involved in this case including Lotrel and Valturna, which treat hypertension, as well as Starlix for diabetes. The kickbacks to the docs also included what was considered a speaking fee, where doctors would be paid to discuss the drugs at educational events and even within their own office. The doctors were also treated to meals that can be considered lavish at the price point of $9,750 for three dinners at a Japanese restaurant.

Unlike a straightforward bribe, kickbacks involve an action being completed after negotiated bribery in the form of a commission or rebate. It is generally viewed as illegal since it gives many companies an unfair advantage in the industry they work for. The False Claims Act is what pushes liability for such actions onto those who attempt to defraud governmental programs such as health insurance.

The Novartis case started in 2011, when a former sale representative, Oswald Bilotta, filed a whistleblower lawsuit under the federal False Claims Act. This type of action allows individuals who have discovered criminal action or intent to come forward on behalf of the government. When a case such as this is filed, the government does hold the right to get involved whenever they deem necessary. In the case of Novartis, Bilotta made the principal claim in 2011 followed by the U.S. government and state of New York intervening in 2013.

New information, some from former Russian spies in America who are now cooperating with us, reveals an increasing and pervasive use of social media by Russian members of an elite intelligence unit in Russia, to influence broad groups of U.S. citizens in significant ways. It is considered a new and insidious kind of warfare. US intelligence agencies and social media companies are struggling to find ways to prevent Russians operatives from making phony accounts  to spread their messages as well as circulate misinformation without removing the freedom U.S citizen’s treasure. Many relate freedom to the core of the U.S., making this the ideal form of attack. Russia is well aware of the limitations the U.S. has when it comes to big social media companies, and they plan to use that in their favor.

report (pdf) released late in 2018 by Oxford University’s Computational Propaganda Research Project is the most detailed analysis yet of the scope and effect of Russia’s Internet Research Agency (IRA) social media campaign and its impact on America’s elections.The analysis found that the main goal of the interference was to polarize the American public, in three main ways: by feeding political extremism (particularly for the far right), by spreading incendiary fake news, and by exploiting and exacerbating existing divisions—in particular those of a racial nature.The IRA’s social media activities campaigned “for African American voters to boycott elections or follow the wrong voting procedures in 2016, and more recently for Mexican American and Hispanic voters to distrust US institutions,” the report found.

African Americans were the majority of users targeted by the IRA (other minorities were engaged significantly only after the election). Of a total of 2,855 ads purchased by the IRA, nearly 1,000—which reached over 13 million users—were about African-American politics or culture. Those messages were much cheaper than ones on other topics, averaging 905 rubles, or $14, per ad, compared with nearly 6,200 rubles, or $93, for ads about conservative politics. Accounts opened in connection with the website Black Matters (they are now deactivated) helped spread the messages, which misled readers about the voter registration process, encouraged them to boycott the election, and attempted to sow mistrust in established democratic procedures.

Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA (Fresenius), provider of medical products and services, has agreed to pay $231 million to end investigations by the Department of Justice and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) into violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) in connection with Fresenius’s participation in various corrupt schemes to obtain business in multiple foreign countries. According to Fresenius’s admissions in connection with the resolution, between 2007 and 2016, Fresenius paid bribes to publicly employed health and/or government officials to obtain or retain business in Angola and Saudi Arabia.  In Angola and Saudi Arabia, as well as in Morocco, Spain, Turkey and countries in West Africa, Fresenius knowingly and willfully failed to implement reasonable internal accounting controls over financial transactions and failed to maintain books and records that accurately and fairly reflected the transactions, the company admitted.

“Fresenius doled out millions of dollars in bribes across the globe to gain a competitive advantage in the medical services industry, profiting to the tune of over $140 million,” said Assistant Attorney General Benczkowski.  “Today’s resolution, under which Fresenius has agreed to retain an independent compliance monitor for at least two years, reflects the Department’s firm commitment to both rooting out bribery and promoting the kind of effective corporate compliance programs that will prevent misconduct going forward.”

“This case shows the FBI will hold accountable those who treat corruption as the cost of doing business,” said FBI Special Agent in Charge Bonavolonta.  “Fresenius’s admissions are incredibly concerning because no company should break the law by paying-off international partners to obtain or retain business.  We will continue to work with our law enforcement partners to root out corrupt schemes and ensure they do not become common practice at the expense of other hard-working businesses.”