“An Ounce of Prevention” host Andrew Good is joined by colleagues Margot Sève and Vanessa McGoldrick for a discussion on the recent creation of the International Anti-Corruption Prosecutorial Taskforce by enforcement authorities in the U.K., France and Switzerland. The white collar defense and investigations team details what the new taskforce means for multinational companies, how enforcement standards are shifting and why compliance programs remain important for international companies.
Episode Summary
With the recent creation of the International Anti-Corruption Prosecutorial Taskforce in Europe, companies will now need to consider its impact on European and global regulatory enforcement matters.Margot Sève and Vanessa McGoldrick, who focus on cross-border enforcement matters at Skadden, describe how this collaboration between U.K., French and Swiss authorities represents a strategic response to evolving global enforcement priorities. With Skadden colleague and host Andrew Good, they share insights about the taskforce’s formation, its extraterritorial enforcement capabilities and the increased use of tools like deferred prosecution agreements.
Voiceover (00:03):
Welcome to an Ounce of Prevention, a podcast from Skadden’s White Collar Defense and Investigations Group that explores critical issues shaping the landscape of corporate compliance and enforcement around the globe. Join us for in-depth analysis and practical insights to help you navigate the complexities of corporate accountability.
Andrew Good (00:26):
Hi, and welcome to the second episode of Ounce of Prevention, [00:00:30] a podcast series presented by the White Collar Defense and Investigations team at Skadden. This podcast brings you regular analysis of key compliance and white collar crime trends, important industry news and developments, and insights from leading practitioners in the field. My name is Andrew Good, and I’m a partner at Skadden’s London office. I specialize in representing clients in complex governmental and internal investigation.
Andrew Good (00:56):
On today’s episode, we are going to discuss the creation of the [00:01:00] International Anti-Corruption Prosecutorial Taskforce by enforcement authorities in the UK, France, and Switzerland. We’ll be discussing the taskforce’s purpose and we’ll consider the impact of the taskforce’s founding on European and global regulatory enforcement matters. To help unpack what the founding of the taskforce means for companies and practitioners, I’m joined by two of my colleagues, Margot Sève and Vanessa McGoldrick. Margot’s a partner [00:01:30] in our Paris office, who works on cases involving complex cross-border compliance and enforcement matters. Vanessa’s a council on our team here in London and advises clients on a broad range of cross-border, regulatory, criminal, and civil investigations, and financial crime matters. Margot and Vanessa, welcome to the Ounce of Prevention podcast.
Margot Sève (01:51):
Thanks, Andrew. It’s lovely to be here.
Vanessa McGoldrick (01:53):
Hi, happy to be joining you both.
Andrew Good (01:55):
Excellent. So why don’t we get right into it? Margot, why don’t we start with the basics? [00:02:00] Who makes up this taskforce and what’s the taskforce’s purpose?
Margot Sève (02:04):
So the taskforce brings together three key agencies. First, the French financial prosecutor, the PNF; second, the UK’s Serious Fraud Office, the SFO; and third, the Swiss Office of the Attorney General, the OAG. Their joint founding statement outlines what will be the priorities of the taskforce. These include, one, creating a leaders group for regular [00:02:30] strategic discussions. Second, forming a working group to develop proposals for case cooperation. Third, sharing best practices more systematically. And fourth, building a stronger foundation for operational collaborations.
Margot Sève (02:48):
The details around these priorities are still emerging, however, the idea is clear. By pooling resources and expertise, the UK, French, and Swiss agencies aim to [00:03:00] investigate and prosecute bribery and corruption more efficiently. Importantly, the taskforce is open to expanding its membership, inviting other like-minded agencies from the rest of the world to join in the future.
Andrew Good (03:14):
Thanks for the overview, Margot. We’ll come back around to the intention of broadening the membership of the taskforce in a few moments. But before we do that, how did the cooperation between the SFO, Parquet National Financier, and OAG come [00:03:30] about?
Margot Sève (03:31):
It’s really the culmination of over a decade of close operational cooperation among these agencies. While the officials from the agencies haven’t pointed out specific probes that spurred the initiative, the formation of the task force is by no means a surprise, and it is consistent with recent statements made by the agencies that basically international cooperation is a central component of their enforcement policies.
Andrew Good (03:58):
I think it was notable that [00:04:00] this taskforce was announced shortly after a US executive order in February that paused enforcement under the US Foreign Practices Act, or FCPA, for a period of 180 days. That order directed that US Attorney General Pam Bondi would revise FCPA enforcement guidance to prioritize American interests, American economic competitiveness with respect to other nations, and the efficient use of federal law enforcement resources.
Andrew Good (04:30):
[00:04:30] We just received a first indication of where that guidance may come out. A memo published on the 12th of May by Matt Galeotti, who’s the head of the DOJ’s Criminal Division, suggests that the DOJ is going to prioritize its white collar enforcement efforts on crimes that harm government programs, US consumers and investors, US businesses, and US markets. We’ll likely cover that in a future episode of the Ounce of Prevention, but it seems likely that this is going to result in a narrowing [00:05:00] of US white collar enforcement from where it was under the Biden administration.
Andrew Good (05:04):
"Vanessa, do you think that the founding of the taskforce represents some kind of reaction to a perceived narrowing of US white collar enforcement efforts?
Vanessa McGoldrick (05:14):
That’s a great question, Andrew. I mean, while the SFO and the PNF have said that the taskforce isn’t a reaction to the FCPA pause, it’s clear that the timely announcement of the taskforce presents an opportunity for other international agencies to fill [00:05:30] any void created by the new US administration.
Vanessa McGoldrick (05:33):
Crucially, as Margot mentioned earlier, the founding statement of the taskforce does invite other like-minded agencies to join the taskforce. And in fact, Jean-Francois Bohnert, who leads the PNF, he recently said in a keynote speech at an FCPA conference at the beginning of May that he had actively extended the invitation to his US counterparty and commented that he thinks that the DOJ will be able to join at some point, granted he didn’t know when that would be.
Vanessa McGoldrick (05:59):
And he also [00:06:00] added that there are other agencies, particularly in Europe, Latin America, and elsewhere in the Western Hemisphere, they would be welcome to join. And the open invitation for other agencies to join only reinforces the message that Europe really is positioning itself as a leader in multi-jurisdictional bribery and corruption cases.
Andrew Good (06:18):
I think it’s going to be interesting to see how the task force evolves, including who else joins it. How do you guys see the SFO, PNF, and OAG taking a more active role in leading [00:06:30] cross-border cases in the near future?
Vanessa McGoldrick (06:33):
Well, the taskforce is still really new and hasn’t yet taken any affirmative steps since it’s founded. And the agencies comprising of the taskforce could decide to utilize to an even greater extent the laws with extraterritorial effect that already form part of their national legal framework.
Vanessa McGoldrick (06:49):
So take the UK Bribery Act 2010 for example. The act makes failing to prevent bribery by an associated person a criminal offense, not just for companies incorporated in the UK, [00:07:00] but also for those carrying on business in the UK. And an associated person includes employees, agents, and subsidiary companies, just to state a few examples. And the only defense a company has to that failure to prevent bribery offense is that of adequate procedures, meaning that the company would need to show that it has appropriate policies, procedures, and safeguards in place for preventing bribery at the time the offense occurs.
Vanessa McGoldrick (07:26):
And it’s also worth noting that there is a new failure to prevent fraud offense under the [00:07:30] Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023, which makes it easier to prosecute companies for failing to prevent fraud, even if they’re not incorporated in the UK, so long as an element of the fraud offense took place in the UK or the conduct effects UK victims.
Andrew Good (07:47):
We went into some depth on the impact of that new failure to prevent fraud offense on our last episode, and we discussed what companies need to do to prepare ahead of the offense coming into a force on September 1st of this year. So [00:08:00] I’d encourage listeners to go check that episode out if they missed it.
Andrew Good (08:04):
Margot, do you see France making broader use of its own extraterritorial laws now that the taskforce is in place?
Margot Sève (08:10):
Yeah, I think that’s the way that the wind is blowing. The PNF has explicitly made clear that they will hold an organization to the same standard, regardless of its origin, when it cooperates with the UK and Swiss prosecutors on cross-border corruption cases. They will expect the same standard from a French [00:08:30] company as from a foreign company that has a subsidiary in France.
Margot Sève (08:35):
And as you and Vanessa mentioned, the founding, the taskforce suggests that its members will likely increase use of laws with extra extraterritorial effects that are already part of their national legal frameworks. And actually, it may be helpful to remind the audience that France’s Sapin II law goes even further that the UK Bribery Act [00:09:00] of 2010 in some respects. In broad terms, the Sapin II law applies to French companies with revenues exceeding 100 million euros that have at least 500 employees. And those companies have a positive obligation to develop and maintain a robust compliance program that includes a code of conduct, internal whistleblowing frameworks, risk assessment procedures, and internal [00:09:30] counting [inaudible 00:09:31] controls among others.
Margot Sève (09:33):
So if these companies are found to not have maintained an anti-corruption program, they can be fined by the French Anti-Corruption Agency of up to one million euros for companies and up to 200,000 euros for their CEOs. And these large penalties and Sapin II’s more general heightened compliance standards compared to some other jurisdictions, really highlights [00:10:00] the need for global companies to pay close attention to the different compliance standards in each jurisdictions, even though at the end of the day you realize that those standards really all meet a international standard threshold.
Andrew Good (10:17):
That’s a really important point, Margot. I totally agree. The taskforce’s creation is a timely reminder for companies, especially those who maybe have focused their compliance programs to meet the FCPA’s standards, to [00:10:30] review and update their policies to make sure that they’re meeting other countries’ standards as well, so the international standards rather than just the US standards.
Vanessa McGoldrick (10:39):
Yeah, precisely, Andrew. A tangible example of how a compliance program with an FCPA focus may not meet the standards required by certain European regulators is a compliance program which doesn’t prohibit facilitation payments, which include low level payments meant to facilitate nondiscretionary government acts.
Vanessa McGoldrick (10:59):
So the [00:11:00] FCPA generally permits facilitation payments as an exception to its anti-bribery provisions. The UK’s Bribery Act and France’s Sapin II on the other hand prohibit facilitation payments. And anti-bribery laws in the UK, France, and Switzerland are also broader than the FCPA in the sense that they target both commercial bribery and bribery involving government officials.
Andrew Good (11:24):
These distinctions really are important for companies that are operating globally. They [00:11:30] really do need to make sure that they’re meeting these standards, especially because in many instances they are less permissive than the FCPA is.
Andrew Good (11:39):
Why don’t we switch gears slightly and talk a little bit about enforcement tools themselves. Margot, what do you think the taskforce will be doing to drive its enforcement or the three agencies’ enforcement efforts?
Margot Sève (11:51):
When you look at the UK, France, and Switzerland, founding members of the taskforce, they have a number of similar enforcement [00:12:00] tools that can help deter and punish corruption, bribery, and actually other financial crimes, in particular Deferred Prosecution Agreements or DPAs with both European organization and non-European organization have become an increasingly important tool for European prosecutors to address financial crimes.
Margot Sève (12:21):
In France, for example, those DPAs are called CJIPs. The PNF signed six corruption-related CJIPs in 2023, [00:12:30] two in 2024, and two so far in 2025, knowing that CJIPs can also be signed by other prosecutors separate from the PNF. The SFO in the UK has secured 12 DPAs since they were introduced in 2014 by the Crime and Courts Act of 2013, and has indicated that more are to come. And lastly, while Switzerland currently doesn’t have a DPA mechanism in place, the Swiss Attorney General has commented that their introduction is being discussed with the Swiss Parliament and [00:13:00] representatives.
Vanessa McGoldrick (13:01):
I agree, Margot, DPAs are likely to be a key tool that the taskforce will use to improve the level of enforcement activity. The SFO has recently announced that it intends to make more robust use of the DPA tool to address corporate misconduct, and has set out how companies who self-report will be in a better position to obtain DPAs than those who do not.
Vanessa McGoldrick (13:23):
And the new SFO guidance on self-reporting and eligibility to be invited to negotiate a DPA [00:13:30] alongside its founding member status in the taskforce makes it clearer than ever that investigation and enforcement of global bribery and corruption cases remains a top law enforcement priority for them. And the SFO’s guidance also provides that non-cooperative conduct includes a corporate seeking to exploit differences between international law agencies or legal systems, another indication that authorities intend to work together.
Margot Sève (13:56):
Yeah. And much like the SFO, the PNF and the Swiss Attorney [00:14:00] General have also made statements making clear that international cooperation remains a central component of their enforcement policies and will continue to increase. In fact, the PNF’s 2024 annual report, so its latest report, highlights how the PNF has significantly intensified its international cooperation efforts in 2024.
Margot Sève (14:20):
So we can see that the three founding agencies of the taskforce are reiterating their commitment to anti-bribery enforcement at the same time that the US administration may [00:14:30] be stepping back from it, at least in some circumstances.
Andrew Good (14:35):
Yeah, I think it’s going to be really interesting to see how the US DOJ ultimately shakes out on these issues, but it’s certainly clear from everything we’ve heard today, companies should be continuing to carefully assess their current anti-corruption compliance programs. They should be checking their risk assessments, looking at their policies and procedures, taking a close look at their programs [00:15:00] around training to make sure that they meet international standards. Staying in front of these developments will really help companies to navigate regulatory challenges and to achieve more favorable resolutions if they actually are unfortunate and have issues arise.
Andrew Good (15:17):
And I think one of the key messages to drive out of the discussion today is that while the future of US FCPA enforcement is uncertain, the creation of the task force is a signal [00:15:30] that European authorities are going to continue to be involved in figuring out how to make multi-jurisdictional bribery and corruption cases.
Andrew Good (15:38):
Margot and Vanessa, thank you guys both for sharing your insights on the development of the taskforce.
Margot Sève (15:44):
Thanks, Andrew. It’s really an important development, so when it comes to strengthening international cooperation and tackling bribery and corruption. So thanks for organizing this.
Vanessa McGoldrick (15:53):
Thanks, both. Yes, we’re certainly going to be watching closely to see how the taskforce evolves and whether any other agencies join. It’s been really great [00:16:00] to talk to you both. Thanks for having me.
Andrew Good (16:01):
Well, thank you both again. To our listeners, thank you again for joining us and tuning in. Please look out for the next episode of the Ounce of Prevention podcast. Thank you.
Voiceover (16:14):
Thank you for joining us for today’s episode of an Ounce of Prevention. If you like what you’re hearing, be sure to subscribe in your favorite podcast app so you don’t miss any future conversations. Additional information about Skadden can be found at skadden.com.
Listen here or subscribe via Apple Podcasts, Spotify or anywhere else you listen to podcasts.
