Overview

Pausing Foreign Corrupt Practices Act Enforcement

The executive order directed Attorney General Pam Bondi to review guidelines and policies governing FCPA investigations and enforcement actions and, specifically, to halt the initiation of any new FCPA investigations or enforcement actions so that the DOJ could conduct a comprehensive review of all existing actions to ensure they do not stretch beyond the "proper bounds" of FCPA enforcement and are consistent with "Presidential foreign policy prerogatives." The order had immediate effect, and the Attorney General had 180 to 360 days to adopt a new enforcement policy to "restore proper bounds on FCPA enforcement and preserve Presidential foreign policy prerogatives."

In sharp contrast to Trump's first term, during which enforcement activity stayed robust despite his previous criticism of the law, the second term saw an almost immediate pause in FCPA enforcement activity. On February 5, 2025, the day of her swearing in, Attorney General Pamela Bondi issued a memorandum instructing the DOJ to redirect its enforcement efforts from certain corporate crimes so that it could devote greater attention to the priorities outlined by the President, namely foreign bribery involving transnational criminal organizations and cartels.

In addition to pausing future DOJ FCPA matters for at least 180 days, the order stated that past and existing FCPA actions would be reviewed, and that future investigations and enforcement actions would be governed by the new guidance and require Attorney General approval. The Attorney General retained the authority to authorize new investigations during the review period. Several legal limits on the order's reach were also apparent from the outset. The FCPA, promulgated half a century ago, remains a valid law that can only be repealed by Congress. For publicly traded companies and non-U.S. companies with listed U.S. securities, the SEC also holds civil enforcement authority over the FCPA, and the order did not bind the SEC.

After a four-month pause, the Trump administration lifted its moratorium on FCPA enforcement through new guidelines issued in June 2025. On June 9, 2025, the DOJ published the Criminal Division's updated Guidelines for Investigations and Enforcement for the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, announcing an early end to the anticipated 180-day pause. During the pause, DOJ had in some cases withdrawn or declined to prosecute cases that were slated to proceed to trial; in others, DOJ made clear its intention to move forward, suggesting it was not entirely abandoning FCPA enforcement.

Significance and Impact

In the early months of Trump's second term, DOJ announced a sweeping recalibration of its FCPA enforcement strategy. Reflecting the administration's "America First" approach, DOJ memoranda, executive action, and public remarks indicated a shift away from traditional corporate anti-bribery enforcement toward an enforcement model that prioritizes U.S. interests. The new June 2025 guidelines gave that recalibration a durable institutional form.

The guidelines steer prosecutors toward cases that vindicate U.S. interests — corruption cases involving international drug cartels and transnational criminal organizations, harm to identifiable U.S. competitors, and matters implicating national security sectors such as the defense sector. The guidelines also emphasize DOJ's interest in pursuing matters showing strong indicia of corrupt intent rather than low-dollar matters involving common business courtesies.

At the SEC, which also has a significant role in FCPA enforcement, there were zero civil enforcement actions brought in all of 2025, and the unit responsible for FCPA enforcement was effectively disbanded with the departure of its leadership and its delisting as a specialized unit under Chairman Atkins. Together, the DOJ pause and the SEC's withdrawal represented a broadly diminished federal anti-corruption posture. Across measurable dimensions — enforcement actions, staffing, sanctions, institutional capacity, and international engagement — the United States drew down its anti-corruption posture.

Reactions and Debate

The President cited economic, foreign policy, and national security concerns when instructing the Attorney General to suspend FCPA enforcement, though questions remained about whether the move would achieve or undermine those objectives. The administration's rationale rested on the argument that American companies competing abroad faced a regulatory burden their foreign rivals did not. Supporters of the pause contended that aggressive FCPA enforcement had placed U.S. businesses at a disadvantage in markets where bribery of officials was common practice, and that the law had been applied in ways that stretched beyond its intended scope.

Critics pushed back sharply. The Trump administration defended the decision as part of a broad effort to reprioritize and streamline work at the Department of Justice, but for many who had worked in the U.S. government's anti-corruption system, it was an alarming way for the administration to commence. Anti-corruption advocates argued that weakening FCPA enforcement would undermine American credibility abroad and remove a powerful deterrent against bribery in markets where rule of law is fragile.

International partners also responded. Among the highest-profile international responses came on March 20, 2025, when the UK Serious Fraud Office, Swiss Office of the Attorney General, and French Parquet National Financier issued a joint statement signaling their commitment to continued anti-corruption enforcement regardless of the U.S. posture. Companies operating outside U.S. borders continued to face exposure under foreign anti-corruption laws, such as France's Sapin II Law and the UK Bribery Act, the latter of which imposes strict liability for failure to prevent bribery.

The pause also prompted domestic legal questions. California Attorney General Rob Bonta issued a press release and legal advisory on April 2, 2025, reminding businesses operating in California that violations of the FCPA remained actionable notwithstanding the federal pause. Most conduct chargeable under the FCPA would also constitute crimes under other laws, such as the broad U.S. wire fraud statute, that fell outside the executive order's scope.

Outlook

The FCPA and global anti-corruption landscape entered 2026 amid continued recalibration in U.S. enforcement priorities, a thinned but active federal enforcement apparatus, and increasingly assertive international counterparts filling perceived gaps left by shifting U.S. policy. DOJ has continued to bring a limited number of cases, but with a narrower focus. The three corporate FCPA enforcement actions in 2025 demonstrated that DOJ is still holding companies accountable for FCPA violations, even if they do not squarely fit within the department's new stated enforcement priorities.

The June 9, 2025 FCPA guidelines are the culmination of Attorney General Bondi's February 5 memo and the executive order. So far, the actions disclosed by DOJ do not look much different from cases of the past — a similarity that may reflect the fact that current actions stem from pre-guidelines investigations, or that DOJ officials are not interpreting the new guidelines as a radical departure from prior practice.

A year into the recalibration, the picture remains incomplete. On one hand, there are some indications of continued engagement with international anti-corruption frameworks and the FCPA remains in effect. But the structural changes — dissolved SEC enforcement units, reduced DOJ investigative bandwidth, and a guidelines framework that narrows the scope of covered conduct — have a lasting character that outlasts the initial pause. There is not yet enough information to fully assess the effects these policies will have on the private sector and on foreign countries. The essential question going forward is whether the new enforcement framework represents a durable reorientation of American anti-corruption policy or a temporary narrowing that might be reversed by a future administration or challenged by Congress.