TRACE Global Enforcement Report 2018

Global Enforcement
Report 2018
TRACE
Report
March 2019
Introduction
Almost every country in the world prohibits the payment of bribes to their own government officials.
Anti-bribery conventions sponsored by the United Nations, the Organisation for Economic Co-
operation and Development, the Organization of American States, the Council of Europe, and the
African Union require signatory countries to establish binding standards for the criminalization of
bribery of foreign public officials in international business transactions. Virtually every country in
the world has ratified one of these international conventions and many have enacted laws that
prohibit the payment of bribes to foreign government officials.
Despite the global denunciation of bribery, little information is publicly available on enforcement of
these anti-bribery regulations. This can make it difficult to recognize trends concerning the extent
to which countries are enforcing anti-bribery laws or where bribery is most prevalent, even though
such information is critical to promoting transparency in global business. TRACE publishes the
Global Enforcement Report (“GER”) annually in an attempt to provide this essential information.
The 2018 GER provides an updated summary of international anti-bribery enforcement trends,
based primarily on the cases and investigations tracked in the TRACE Compendium, TRACE’s
online database of transnational corruption cases. The TRACE Compendium contains summaries of
enforcement actions, investigations and declinations involving the alleged bribery of government
officials that crosses at least one border. Neither the TRACE Compendium nor the 2018 GER include
matters involving domestic companies bribing domestic government officials. The alleged bribe
must have a cross-border component and must involve a government official.
The 2018 GER offers both graphic and textual analyses of investigations and enforcement actions
concerning the bribery of government officials from the enactment of the U.S. Foreign Corrupt
Practices Act in 1977 through 31 December 2018. The 2018 GER reflects several revisions to the
statistics reported in earlier editions of the GER, as our data are updated whenever TRACE obtains
new or improved information regarding an investigation or enforcement action, or when the status
of an enforcement action changes. The 2018 GER also represents TRACE’s continuing efforts to
refine and improve the data utilized in the report. Neither the TRACE Compendium nor the 2018
GER can provide a precise and objective measurement of global anti-corruption enforcement.
Instead, they are meant to provide general information on trends in international anti-corruption
efforts on a broad scale.
The 2018 GER focuses on two distinct anti-bribery enforcement events undertaken by government
authorities: investigations and enforcement actions. An investigation is an ongoing investigation
by a government authority into allegations of bribery of government officials by a foreign company
or individual. TRACE recognizes that investigations into allegations of bribery are sometimes
dropped due to insufficient evidence, or for security or political considerations; they may be closed
without any resolution; or they may continue indefinitely with no other action ever being taken. For
purposes of the 2018 GER, investigations are no longer considered ongoing if 10 years have passed
since they were was last discussed in a publicly available document, or if 5 years have passed
since a government authority brought an enforcement action or issued a declination on the same
allegations. An enforcement action is an adjudication of allegations of bribery of government
officials by a foreign company or individual. That is, there must be a final resolution that involves
fines or penalties, a guilty plea, a sentencing or a settlement of charges.
The past year has seen the emergence of a novel form of case resolution: the “declination-with-
disgorgement,” in which authorities decline to bring charges against a company—based largely
on the company’s self-disclosure of the impropriety and full cooperation in any investigation—
but the company is nevertheless required to forfeit its gains from the improper behavior. The
©2019 TRACE International, Inc. All rights reserved. Global Enforcement Report 2018 - Page 1
GER has in recent years omitted information about declinations, on the grounds that it is often
difficult to ascertain whether or when they have occurred. That is not the case with this new
class of declination-with-disgorgement. Given their status as final resolutions that impose (non-
punitive) financial obligations on their subjects, we have opted in the GER to treat declinations-
with-disgorgement as enforcement actions for purposes of our quantitative aggregations.
The TRACE Compendium and 2018 GER also include cases in which bribery allegations have been
made against individual employees or representatives of companies (including employees of local
subsidiaries of international companies). When a company and its employees or representatives
face separate enforcement actions involving substantially the same conduct, only one enforcement
action is counted in the 2018 GER. Except where a company specifically receives a declination, if
a company does not face an enforcement action but its employees or representatives do, the
enforcement action is counted as one enforcement action. Finally, while separate enforcement
actions may be taken by different authorities in one country based on the same circumstances,
only one such enforcement action is counted against a company or individual.
Glossary of Terms
Investigation – An ongoing investigation by a government authority into allegations of bribery of
government officials by a foreign company or individual that has not been resolved by either an
enforcement action or a declination.
Enforcement Action – An adjudication of allegations of bribery of government officials by a foreign

company or individual that is a final resolution of charges involving fines or penalties, a guilty plea,
a sentencing or a settlement of charges.
Declination – Termination of an ongoing investigation by a government agency without any

enforcement action.
Bribery of Foreign Official – Improper payments made by a foreign company to a government

official who is not a citizen of the government undertaking the enforcement event.
Bribery of Domestic Official – Improper payments made by a foreign company to a government

official who is a citizen of the government undertaking the enforcement event.
Global Enforcement Report 2018 - Page 2 ©2019 TRACE International, Inc. All rights reserved.
Key Findings
>> While the number of open U.S. investigations into foreign-bribery allegations dropped slightly
in 2018, there was a notable increase in the number of open investigations worldwide, with
an expanding range of investigating countries. Europe in particular saw its number of open
investigations climb by approximately 37%, and the region now accounts for more than half of
all foreign-bribery investigations. (See Figure 1.)
>> The past year saw a notable growth in U.S. enforcement, with the number of U.S. enforcement
actions increasing by more than half, approaching the record-setting volume of 2016. The pace
of enforcement actions by non-U.S. authorities remained essentially steady. (See Figure 3.)
>> There was also an increase in the number of investigations concerning bribery of domestic
officials by foreign sources, showing a rise of approximately 15%. The total cumulative number
of domestic enforcement actions also demonstrated a healthy growth of approximately 22%.
(See Figure 8, Figure 9.)
>> The Financial Services industry remained the most heavily investigated by United States
agencies in connection with foreign-bribery allegations, accounting for approximately 17% of
all such investigations. In other jurisdictions, however, the focus remained elsewhere—most
prominently the Extractive Industries, Engineering/Construction, and Aerospace/Defense/
Security—with Financial Services accounting for only 6% of open investigations. (See Figures
13–16.)
Figures and Analysis
Figure 1: Investigations Concerning Bribery of Foreign Officials by Country
United States 107

United Kingdom 47
Germany 25
Switzerland 18
Australia 15
France 13
Italy 13
Sweden 8
Belgium 4
Canada 4
Israel 4
Netherlands 4
Norway 4
Austria 3
Denmark 3
Greece 3
South Korea 3
Argentina 2
China 2
Japan 2
Romania 2
Singapore 2
Slovakia 2
Bosnia and Herzegovina 1
Colombia 1
Czech Republic 1
Hong Kong 1
Hungary 1
Malaysia 1
Monaco 1
Russia 1
South Africa 1
Spain 1
Taiwan 1
Turkey 1 © 2019 TRACE International, Inc.
Ukraine 1
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
This chart addresses where investigations of bribery of foreign officials are occurring. In total, there were 303
investigations concerning alleged bribery of foreign officials being conducted by authorities in 36 countries as of
31 December 2018. The United States was conducting 107 investigations, which represents 35% of all ongoing
investigations concerning alleged bribery of foreign officials. European countries now account for more than
half of all investigations—a total of 157. An increase was also seen in the Asia Pacific region, in which 9% of all
ongoing investigations were being conducted, followed by the Americas (excluding the U.S.) with approximately
2%, the Middle East with approximately 1%, and Africa with fewer than 1%.
Figure 2: Enforcement Actions Concerning Bribery of Foreign Officials by Country
United States 263

United Kingdom 37
Netherlands 14
Denmark 12
Germany 12
Switzerland 7
Canada 6
Australia 4
France 4
Japan 4
Norway 4
Sweden 4
Israel 3
Italy 3
Singapore 3
Austria 2
Brazil 2
South Korea 2
Spain 2
Belgium 1
China 1
Georgia 1
© 2019 TRACE International, Inc.
Romania 1
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
From 1977 through 2018, 23 countries concluded 392 enforcement actions concerning alleged bribery of foreign
officials. The United States maintained the strongest enforcement record during this period with 263 enforcement
actions, representing 67% of all enforcement actions concerning alleged bribery of foreign officials taken to
date and seven times as many as the country with the next highest total (the United Kingdom). Countries in
Europe undertook 104 enforcement actions, approximately 27% of all such actions concerning alleged bribery
of foreign officials. Countries in Asia Pacific were responsible for approximately 4% of the total enforcement
actions concerning the alleged bribery of foreign officials, followed by the Americas (excluding the U.S.) with 2%
and the Middle East with fewer than 1%.
Figure 3: Enforcement Actions Concerning Bribery of Foreign Officials
2004–2018

35
31
30
25
24
25
20 18
16 16 16
15
14 16
15 13
12 16
14 9
10
6 11 10 11
5 10
4 8 8
5 7
2
1 1
3 3
0
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
U.S. Enforcement Actions Non-U.S. Enforcement Actions
Figure 3 modifies the analysis in Figure 2 to examine enforcement actions concerning alleged bribery of foreign
officials undertaken from 2004 through 2018. The United States showed a moderate increase in its enforcement
activity, while the number of non-U.S. enforcement actions declined slightly.
Figure 4: U.S. Investigations Concerning Bribery of Foreign Officials by Company Headquarters or
Individual Citizenship
United States 68
Switzerland 7
United Kingdom 7
Germany 5
Canada 2
Netherlands 2
Norway 2
Unspecified 2
Cayman Islands 1
Guernsey 1
India 1
Ireland 1
Italy 1
Japan 1
Luxembourg 1
Mexico 1
Monaco 1
Russia 1
Sweden 1
Turkey 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
The United States was conducting 107 investigations concerning alleged bribery of foreign officials in 19
countries as of 31 December 2018. There were 37 investigations concerning alleged bribery of foreign officials
involving companies headquartered outside of the United States or individuals with non-U.S. citizenship,
representing 35% of all such investigations being conducted by the United States. Of the investigations
concerning alleged bribery of foreign officials being conducted against non-U.S. companies and individuals,
the highest number involved companies or individuals in the United Kingdom and in Switzerland, followed
by Germany. Companies or individuals from Europe made up 84% of U.S. investigations concerning alleged
bribery of foreign officials being conducted against non-U.S. companies and individuals, followed by the
Americas (excluding the U.S.) with 11% and Asia Pacific with 5%.
Figure 5: U.S. Enforcement Actions Concerning Bribery of Foreign Officials by Company Headquarters
or Individual Citizenship
United States 174

United Kingdom 12
Netherlands 9
Switzerland 9
France 8
Japan 7
Germany 6
Brazil 4
Unspecified 3
Canada 2
Curacao 2
India 2
Israel 2
Italy 2
Singapore 2
South Korea 2
Sweden 2
Australia 1
Barbados 1
Belgium 1
Bermuda 1
Cayman Islands 1
Chile 1
China 1
Denmark 1
Hungary 1
Luxembourg 1
Macao 1
Norway 1
Philippines 1
South Africa 1 © 2019 TRACE International, Inc.
Venezuela 1
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
The United States has concluded 263 enforcement actions concerning alleged bribery of foreign officials from
1977–2018. A total of 89 of these enforcement actions have involved companies headquartered outside of the
United States or individuals with non-U.S. citizenship, representing approximately 34% of all enforcement
actions initiated by the United States concerning alleged bribery of foreign officials. Of the enforcement actions
undertaken against non-U.S. companies and individuals, the highest number involved companies or individuals
in the United Kingdom, followed by the Netherlands, Switzerland, and France. Companies or individuals from
Europe represent approximately 60% of U.S. enforcement actions concerning alleged bribery of foreign officials
undertaken against non-U.S. companies and individuals, followed by Asia Pacific with 19%, the Americas
(excluding the U.S.) with 15%, the Middle East with 2%, and Africa with 1%.
Figure 6: U.S. Investigations Concerning Bribery of Foreign Officials by Country of Headquarters
60 59
60
50
46
40
37
30
20
United States
10
Non-U.S.
0
DOJ Investigations SEC Investigations © 2019 TRACE International, Inc.
While separate investigations may be conducted by different authorities in one country based on the same
circumstances, generally only one such investigation is counted in this report against a company or individual. This
chart addresses where separate investigations are conducted by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC) and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ).
Between the SEC and the DOJ, the U.S. is conducting a total of 202 foreign bribery investigations, with 41%
involving companies headquartered outside of the U.S. or individuals with non-U.S. citizenship. Of those 202,
106 are conducted by the DOJ (52%) and 96 by the SEC (48%). DOJ investigations account for approximately 55%
of the total agency investigations involving non-U.S. companies and individuals, but only 50% of investigations
involving U.S.-based companies and individuals.
Figure 7: U.S. Enforcement Actions Concerning Bribery of Foreign Officials by Country of Headquarters
118
112
120
100
80
68
60 57
40
United States
20
Non-U.S.
0
DOJ Enforcements SEC Enforcements © 2019 TRACE International, Inc.
While separate enforcement actions may be taken by different authorities in one country based on the same
circumstances, generally only one such enforcement action is counted in this report against a company or
individual. This chart addresses separate enforcement actions taken by the SEC and the DOJ.
Between the SEC and the DOJ, the U.S. has concluded 355 enforcement actions concerning the alleged bribery
of foreign officials, with 125—approximately 35%—involving companies headquartered outside of the U.S.
or individuals with non-U.S. citizenship. The SEC has been slightly more active in prosecuting U.S.-based
companies (51% to 49%). With respect to non-U.S.-based companies and individuals, the DOJ has concluded
the greater number of enforcement actions, at a ratio of approximately 54% to 46%.
Figure 8: Investigations Concerning Bribery of Domestic Officials by Country
Algeria (2) Guinea (1) Norway (1)

Antigua and Barbuda (1) Hong Kong (3) Panama (1)
Argentina (7) Hungary (4) Papua New Guinea (1)
Armenia (1) India (16) Peru (3)
Australia (1) Indonesia (6) Philippines (6)
Middle East Austria (3) Iraq (3) Poland (8)
2% Bahrain (1) Israel (1) Portugal (2)
Bangladesh (2) Italy (5) Romania (3)
Europe Americas Barbados (1) Kenya (3) Russia (3)
25% 24% Bermuda (1) Kyrgyzstan (2) Rwanda (2)
Bolivia (1) Latvia (2) Samoa (1)
Brazil (25) Lesotho (2) Serbia (1)
Bulgaria (1) Liberia (3) Sierra Leone (1)
Canada (3) Libya (1) Slovakia (1)
Chile (2) Lithuania (1) Slovenia (1)
China (13) Macedonia (2) Somalia (1)
Colombia (3) Malawi (3) South Africa (7)
Costa Rica (1) Malaysia (6) Spain (1)
Croatia (4) Mauritania (1) Sri Lanka (2)
Cyprus (2) Mexico (4) Switzerland (1)
Czech Republic (2) Monaco (1) Tanzania (1)
Africa Denmark (1) Mongolia (2) Thailand (5)
20% Asia Pacific
29% Dominican Republic (1) Montenegro (1) Tunisia (1)
Ecuador (1) Mozambique (1) Turkey (2)
Egypt (1) Namibia (1) Uganda (2)
France (3) Nepal (3) United States (2)
Germany (1) Netherlands (1) Venezuela (3)
Ghana (1) New Zealand (1) Vietnam (4)
Greece (7) Nigeria (13) Zambia (2)
© 2019 TRACE International, Inc. Guatemala (3) Northern Ireland (1)
Of the 86 countries conducting investigations concerning alleged bribery of domestic officials as of 31 December
2018, Brazil was conducting the most, followed by India, China and Nigeria. Countries in Asia Pacific accounted
for approximately 29% of all such investigations, followed by Europe with 25%, Europe with 25%, the Americas
with 24%, and the Middle East with 2%. Of the 18 countries conducting four or more investigations concerning
alleged bribery of domestic officials, 7 are in Asia Pacific, 5 are in Europe, 4 in the Americas, and 2 in Africa.
Of the 68 countries conducting one to three investigations concerning alleged bribery of domestic officials, 23
are in Europe, 19 are in Africa, 13 in the Americas, 11 in Asia Pacific, and 2 in the Middle East.
Figure 9: Enforcement Actions Concerning Bribery of Domestic Officials by Country
Algeria 10
China 10
Nigeria 7
South Korea 7
Brazil 6
Cuba 5
Germany 5
Indonesia 5
Lesotho 4
United States 4
Bangladesh 3
India 3
Israel 3
Mexico 3
Oman 3
South Africa 3
Costa Rica 2
Italy 2
United Arab Emirates 2
United Kingdom 2
Argentina 1
Australia 1
Bahrain 1
Cambodia 1
Dominican Republic 1
Greece 1
Guatemala 1
Guinea 1
Japan 1
Latvia 1
Pakistan 1
Poland 1
Public International Organization 1 © 2019 TRACE International, Inc.
Thailand 1
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
As of 31 December 2018, there were more than twice as many investigations (254) as there have been enforcement
actions concerning alleged bribery of domestic officials from 1977–2018 (103). Algeria and China have brought
the most enforcement actions concerning alleged bribery of domestic officials, followed by Nigeria, South Korea
and Brazil. Countries in Asia Pacific have undertaken 32% of the enforcement actions concerning alleged bribery
of domestic officials, followed by Africa with approximately 24%, the Americas with 22%, Europe with 12%, and
the Middle East with 9%. Four countries had undertaken seven or more enforcement actions: 2 in Africa and 2
in Asia Pacific. Six countries had undertaken between four and six enforcement actions: 3 in the Americas and
one each from Asia Pacific, Europe and Africa. Of the 23 countries that had undertaken between one and three
enforcement actions concerning alleged bribery of domestic officials, 7 are in Asia Pacific, 5 in the Americas, 5 in
Europe, 4 in the Middle East, and 2 in Africa.
Figure 10: Prevalence of Bribery
1977–2018
Number of Enforcement Events

0-4 5-14 15-24 25-34 35-54 55-74 75+ N/A © 2019 TRACE International, Inc.
This Figure shows the prevalence of alleged bribery of government officials. Each country indicated on the
map has a corresponding number of enforcement events concerning the alleged bribery of that country’s
government officials. China surpasses every other country, with Chinese officials being the alleged recipients
of bribes in more than 100 different enforcement events. Iraq has the next-highest number of enforcement
events, followed by Brazil, Nigeria, and India. Officials in Asia Pacific were the alleged recipient of bribes
in approximately 27% of enforcement events, followed by Africa with approximately 21%, Europe and the
Americas with approximately 16% each, and the Middle East with 13%. Twelve countries had more than 20
enforcement events, with 4 in Asia Pacific, 3 in Africa, 2 each in the Middle East and the Americas, and 1
in Europe. There were 22 countries with between 11 and 20 enforcement events: 7 in Asia Pacific, 5 each in
Africa and Europe, 3 in the Americas, and 2 in the Middle East. There were 117 countries with between 1 and 10
enforcement events: 35 in Africa, 30 in Europe, 22 in Asia Pacific, 21 in the Americas, and 9 in the Middle East.
There were 88 enforcement events where the nationality of the government officials who were allegedly
bribed is unspecified. This is because the information is taken from publicly available resources, and there
may be instances where companies do not specify information about where alleged bribery took place.
Figure 11: Total Investigations Concerning Bribery by Companies Headquartered in the U.S.
China 29
Unspecified 23
Brazil 14
India 12
Russia 11
Poland 8
Mexico 7
Argentina 6
Canada 6
Kazakhstan 5
Nigeria 5
Ukraine 5
Libya 4
Bangladesh 3 Middle East
Kuwait 3
Liberia
4%
3 Americas
Malaysia 3 (Excluding U.S.)
Romania 3
23%
Vietnam 3 Europe
Cyprus 2 25%
Ghana 2
Hungary 2
Indonesia 2
Italy 2
Northern Ireland 2
Pakistan 2
South Korea 2
Turkey 2
Albania 1
Bahrain 1 Africa
Colombia 1 10%
Egypt 1
Germany 1
Greece 1 Asia Pacific
Guatemala 1 38%
Haiti 1
Iraq 1
Israel 1
Japan 1
Kenya 1
Lithuania 1
Peru 1 © 2019 TRACE International, Inc.
Thailand 1
Venezuela 1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
This Figure shows the 43 countries where U.S.-based companies under investigation as of 31 December 2018
have allegedly paid bribes. Chinese officials are the alleged recipients of bribes in 30 investigations, followed
by Brazil, India and Russia. Officials in Asia Pacific were the alleged recipient of bribes in approximately 34% of
investigations, followed by Europe with approximately 22%, the Americas (excluding the U.S.) with approximately
20%, Africa with approximately 9%, and the Middle East with approximately 3%. Four countries were implicated
in more than 10 investigations: 2 in Asia Pacific and 1 each in Europe and the Americas (excluding the U.S.). There
were 39 countries implicated in between one and ten investigations: 12 in Europe, 9 in Asia Pacific, 8 in the
Americas (excluding the U.S.), 6 in Africa, and 4 in the Middle East.
There were 23 investigations where the nationality of the government officials who were allegedly bribed
is unspecified. This is because the information is taken from publicly available resources, and there may be
instances where companies do not specify information about where alleged bribery took place.
Figure 12: Total Enforcement Actions Concerning Bribery by Companies Headquartered in the U.S.
Middle East Germany (5) Nigeria (18)

11% Americas Ghana (1) Oman (1)
Greece (5) Pakistan (6)
(Excluding U.S.)
Guinea (3) Panama (4)
17%
Haiti (3) Peru (1)
Europe Honduras (1) Philippines (4)
14% India (15) Poland (7)
Indonesia (17) Public International Organization (5)
Iran (1) Qatar (1)
Iraq (17) Republic of the Congo (1)
Israel (2) Romania (3)
Italy (2) Russia (12)
Ivory Coast (2) Rwanda (1)
Jamaica (1) Saudi Arabia (8)
Africa Kazakhstan (9) Senegal (1)
17% Kenya (1) Serbia (1)
Asia Pacific Kuwait (5) South Africa (1)
40% Kyrgyzstan (1) South Korea (8)
Liberia (1) Spain (1)
Libya (4) Sri Lanka (1)
Algeria (1) Chad (1) Lithuania (1) Taiwan (2)
Angola (6) Chile (1) Luxembourg (1) Tanzania (1)
Argentina (11) China (51) Macao (1) Thailand (12)
Aruba (1) Colombia (1) Malawi (1) Trinidad and Tobago (1)
Azerbaijan (5) Cook Islands (1) Malaysia (2) Turkey (4)
Bahrain (3) Costa Rica (3) Mali (1) Uganda (1)
Bangladesh (8) Croatia (1) Mauritania (1) Ukraine (4)
Barbados (1) Czech Republic (1) Mexico (15) United Arab Emirates (5)
Belgium (1) Democratic Rep. of the Congo (2) Mongolia (1) United Kingdom (2)
Benin (1) Dominican Republic (2) Morocco (1) Unspecified (9)
Brazil (11) Ecuador (1) Mozambique (1) Uzbekistan (1)
Bulgaria (3) Egypt (9) Nepal (2) Venezuela (6)
Burkina Faso (1) Equatorial Guinea (1) Netherlands (1) Vietnam (8)
Burma (2) France (2) Nicaragua (2) Yemen (1)
Canada (3) Gabon (2) Niger (2) Zimbabwe (1)
This Figure shows the 98 countries where U.S.-based companies who were subject to an enforcement action
between 1977 and 2018 allegedly paid bribes. Chinese officials are the alleged recipients of bribes in 51 enforcement
actions, followed by Nigeria, Iraq and Indonesia. Officials in Asia Pacific were the alleged recipient of bribes in
approximately 38% of enforcement actions, followed by the Americas (excluding the U.S.) and Africa with 17%
each, Europe with 14%, and the Middle East with 11%. Ten countries were implicated in more than 10 enforcement
actions: 4 in Asia Pacific, 3 in the Americas (excluding the U.S.), and 1 each in Africa, the Middle East, and Europe.
There were 88 countries implicated in between one and ten enforcement actions: 28 in Africa, 18 in Europe, 17 in
Asia Pacific, 16 in the Americas (excluding the U.S.), and 9 in the Middle East.
There were 9 enforcement actions where the nationality of the government officials who were allegedly bribed
is unspecified. This is because the information is taken from publicly available resources, and there may be
instances where companies do not specify information about where alleged bribery took place.
Figure 13: Total Investigations Concerning Bribery of Domestic and Foreign Officials by Industry
(excluding United States)
Extractive Industries 47 42
Engineering/Construction 30 45
Aerospace/Defense/Security 36 29
Manufacturer/Service Provider 20 31
Transportation/Communications 22 21
Financial Services 11 17
Technology/Software 4 14
Health Care 3 12
Pharmaceutical 3 9
Consulting/Advertising/Other 4 6
Government Agency 3 6
Agriculture/Food 2 5
Energy/Utilities 2 3
Entertainment/Film 3 2
Retail 1 4
Property Development/Real Estate 1 3
Non-Profit 2 2
Education/Publishing 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Non-U.S. Foreign Investigations Non-U.S. Domestic Investigations
This Figure shows the industries that have experienced the most investigations of alleged bribery of foreign
or domestic officials, excluding investigations being conducted by the United States, as of 31 December 2018.
The Extractive Industries represent the highest number of bribery investigations, with 20% of all non-U.S.
investigations, followed by Engineering/Construction with 17% and Aerospace/Defense/Security with 15%.
Figure 14: Total Enforcement Actions Concerning Bribery of Domestic and Foreign Officials by Industry
(excluding United States)
Extractive Industries 40 17
Engineering/Construction 15 21
Manufacturer/Service Provider 18 16
Aerospace/Defense/Security 15 7
Financial Services 15 4
Transportation/Communications 6 8
Pharmaceutical 3 5
Agriculture/Food 2 4
Consulting/Advertising/Other 3 2
Technology/Software 2 3
Energy/Utilities 2 2
Health Care 2 2
Retail 3
Entertainment/Film 2
Non-Profit 2
Property Development/Real Estate 2

Government Agency 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Non-U.S. Foreign Enforcement Actions Non-U.S. Domestic Enforcement Actions
This Figure shows the industries that have experienced the most enforcement actions concerning alleged bribery
of domestic or foreign officials, excluding enforcement actions brought by the United States, from 1977–2018.
The Extractive Industries represent the highest number of bribery enforcement actions, with 25% of all non-U.S.
bribery enforcement actions, followed by Engineering/Construction with approximately 16% and Manufacturer/
Service Provider with 15%.
Figure 15: U.S. Investigations Concerning Bribery of Domestic and Foreign Officials by Industry
Financial Services 19
Extractive Industries 17
Manufacturer/Service Provider 13
Transportation/Communications 12
Engineering/Construction 9
Technology/Software 8
Pharmaceutical 4
Health Care 4
Consulting/Advertising/Other 4
Retail 2
Non-Profit 2
Energy/Utilities 1
Chemicals 1
Aerospace/Defense/Security 1 © 2019 TRACE International, Inc.
0 5 10 15 20
This Figure shows U.S. investigations concerning alleged bribery of domestic and foreign officials as of 31
December 2018, separated by industry. Financial Services faced the most investigations, with approximately
17% of all U.S. investigations, followed by the Extractive Industries with 16% and Manufacturer/Service Provider
with 12%.
Figure 16: U.S. Enforcement Actions Concerning Bribery of Domestic and Foreign Officials by Industry
Extractive Industries 50
Manufacturer/Service Provider 41
Aerospace/Defense/Security 33
Health Care 29
Transportation/Communications 24
Engineering/Construction 17
Technology/Software 16
Financial Services 16
Agriculture/Food 16
Consulting/Advertising/Other 6
Pharmaceutical 5
Non-Profit 3
Retail 3
Energy/Utilities 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
This Figure shows U.S. enforcement actions concerning alleged bribery of domestic and foreign officials from
1977–2018, separated by industry. The Extractive Industries have seen the most enforcement actions, with
approximately 19% of all such U.S. enforcement actions, followed by Manufacturer/Service Provider with 15%
and Aerospace/Defense/Security with 12%.
About the Global Enforcement Report
TRACE’s annual Global Enforcement Report provides graphic and textual analyses of all known enforcement events—including
investigations, enforcement actions and declinations—since the first bribery cases were prosecuted in the United States
following the enactment of the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Data from the GER is based primarily on the cases and
investigations tracked in the TRACE Compendium, TRACE’s online database of transnational corruption cases. TRACE cannot
know or accurately estimate how many enforcement events may be underway but not made public or not included in a major
international publication. The analyses exclude purely domestic matters involving local companies bribing local government
officials, reflecting only enforcement events for an alleged bribe with an international component that involve an alleged
payment to a government official or an employee of a state-owned entity.
The GER 2018, TRACE’s ninth annual compilation, provides anti-bribery enforcement data from 2018 and provides a
summary of 42 years of anti-bribery enforcement activity. The complete GER 2018 is available for download online at
www.TRACEinternational.org/publications.
About TRACE
TRACE is a globally recognized anti-bribery business organization and leading provider of cost-effective third party risk
management solutions. Members and clients include over 500 multinational companies headquartered worldwide.
For more information, visit www.TRACEinternational.org. Follow TRACE:
EMAIL:
info@TRACEinternational.org
WEBSITE:
www.TRACEinternational.org
TEL: +1 410.990.0076
FAX: +1 410.990.0707
TRACE International, Inc.

151 West Street
Annapolis, MD 21401
WORLDWIDE OFFICES:
Dubai Paris
Manila Vancouver
New York
©2019 TRACE International, Inc. All rights reserved.

TRACE Global Enforcement Report 2018

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

TRACE Global Enforcement Report 2018

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Global Enforcement

Enforcement Action – An adjudication of allegations of bribery of government officials by a foreign

Declination – Termination of an ongoing investigation by a government agency without any

Bribery of Foreign Official – Improper payments made by a foreign company to a government

Bribery of Domestic Official – Improper payments made by a foreign company to a government

United States 107

United States 263

© 2019 TRACE International, Inc.

U.S. Enforcement Actions Non-U.S. Enforcement Actions

United States 174

Algeria (2) Guinea (1) Norway (1)

Number of Enforcement Events

Middle East Germany (5) Nigeria (18)

Non-U.S. Foreign Investigations Non-U.S. Domestic Investigations

Property Development/Real Estate 2

Non-U.S. Foreign Enforcement Actions Non-U.S. Domestic Enforcement Actions

TRACE International, Inc.

You might also like