经济学人下载:海外行贿 两部法律的故事

Business Bribery abroad A tale of two laws
商业 海外行贿 两部法律的故事

America's anti-corruption law deters foreign investment. Britain's is smarter
美国的反贪腐法让企业对海外投资望而却步，而英国的则更为明智

BRIBING foreign officials is wrong, but not everything governments do to prevent it is wise or proportional.
向外国官员行贿是不对的。但并非政府所做的所有防范行贿的措施都是明智或能产生对应成效的。

Firms are increasingly fed up with the way America's Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) is written (confusingly) and applied (vigorously).
企业对美国的《海外反腐法》(FCPA)的厌倦是与日俱增，不仅仅因为它的内容（让人困惑），还因为它的执行方式（过于激进）。

The law was passed in 1977, but recent years have seen a spike in enforcement, from five actions in 2004 to 74 in 2010.
该法案于1977年通过，然而最近几年执行次数增长迅速，从2004年的5次增长到2010年的74次。

Five of the ten biggest settlements ever were last year, including a $400m fine against BAE Systems, a British defence contractor, and a $365m fine against ENI, an Italian oil firm.
十大处罚中有五个发生于去年，其中包括对英国国防承包商BAE系统的处罚（达4亿美元）以及意大利石油公司ENI的处罚（达3.65亿美元）。

On August 31st the Wall Street Journal reported that the Department of Justice has been investigating Oracle, a database-software company, for a year. Unusually, Oracle has said nothing about the investigation. Ethisphere, a promoter of corporate responsibility, rated Oracle one of the world's most ethical companies in 2009. Mike Koehler, a law professor at Butler University in Indiana, writes that General Electric, HP, AstraZeneca and others have all been among Ethisphere's "World's Most Ethical" while settling FCPA prosecutions or under investigation.
八月31日《华尔街日报》报道称司法部调查一个数据库软件公司Oracle，已经一年了。反常的是，Oracle对这次调查只字不提。企业责任提倡人Ethisphere认为Oracle是2009年全球最有道德责任感的企业之一。印第安纳州Butler大学的某法律专家Mike Koehler写道，曾位列Ethisphere的"全球最具道德责任感企业"名单上的General Electric, HP, AstraZeneca等企业都被FCPA的指控过或者受到调查。

An FCPA action is an ordeal. Few firms dare risk going to court—only two cases against corporations have ever resulted in completed trials. The vast majority of cases are settled, which can take years. Listed companies must satisfy not only the Department of Justice, but also the Securities and Exchange Commission, which enforces the FCPA provisions requiring accurate records of all business dealings (to deter or detect illicit payments). Before the department and the commission will sign off on a settlement, the company must satisfy them that the rest of its operations are squeaky clean. Narrow investigations can mutate into broad ones that cost tens of millions of dollars.
被FCPA指控的话，后果很惨痛。很少企业敢冒险上法庭——企业被告的案例中只有两个结案了。很多案子要用上几年时间才能结案。上市公司不仅要达到司法部的要求，还要满足证券和交易委员会的要求，而这就使得FCPA要具备所有企业的交易记录（从而防止或者发现非法交易）。在司法部和该委员会做出最终决定之前，企业必须让他们相信公司的其它运作也是没有猫腻的。调查不充分会使案情变得更大，为此将付出成千亿美元。

And bosses can be sent to prison for up to 20 years if their companies fall foul of the FCPA. In theory, they could be jailed because a staff member at a foreign subsidiary bribed an official without their knowledge. In some cases, the law insists that directors ought to know about dodgy goings-on, even if they do not.
如果企业违反了FCPA的规定其老板的最高可被判刑20年。理论上，即使是在他们不知情的情况下，如果其驻外员工向官员行贿的话，他们也可被判入狱。某些情况下，法律坚持认为管理者应该知道这些小动作——即使有时候他们确实不知情。

This is a hefty deterrent to doing business in poor countries, some studies have found. Andy Spalding, a law professor at the Chicago-Kent College of Law, likens the way the FCPA is enforced to "de facto sanctions" on countries where corruption is rife. A study by KPMG, a consultancy, found that a third of British and a quarter of American companies would simply steer clear of corruption-prone countries to avoid the risk of being prosecuted. Firms from less fussy places, such as China, will happily fill the gap.
有研究发现，这成了企业进驻穷国的极大障碍。芝加哥肯特法学院的一名法律专家Andy Spalding将FCPA的做法类比为贪腐盛行的国家的"事实判决"。某顾问公司KPMG做了一份研究表明，三分之一的英国公司和四分之一的美国公司会简单地选择不去那些贪腐盛行的国家做生意，从而避免被起诉。而处于要求不那么严格的国家（比如中国）的企业则很乐意填补这个空白。

The US Chamber of Commerce, a business lobby, says the FCPA also deters foreign mergers and acquisitions. A firm inherits the sins of a company it buys, even if it has done reasonable due diligence, the chamber says. To avoid this risk, it must conduct the equivalent of a "vast internal investigation", says the chamber. Many firms find it simpler to stay at home.
商业游说团——美国商会——认为FCPA将外资并购企业也吓跑了，它认为即使一个企业已经做了法律尽职调查，但还是要承担它所并购的企业的罪行。为了避免这种危险，该企业必须进行一次"大范围的内部调查"，该商会说道。于是很多企业觉得留在国内发展要简单得多。

A new British anti-bribery law, passed in 2010, appears to have been better crafted. The Bribery Act is broad and tough. It covers bribery within Britain as well as abroad. In contrast to the FCPA, it makes no exception for small "facilitation payments" to speed up routine business such as customs checks or visas.
英国2010年通过的反贿赂法似乎更胜一筹。该《贿赂法》涉及范围更广，刑法也更重：其处罚对象既包括国内也包括国外。相较FCPA，它连"便利支付"——能加速一些类似海关检查或者签证等日常业务的支付方式——也不放过。

But it is fair, too. Unlike the FCPA, it has a "compliance defence" that allows a company to avoid the harshest penalties if the wrongdoer is a junior employee and the firm otherwise has a strict anti-bribery policy which is clear to all employees and effectively administered. One rogue employee can't easily cause a crippling probe into an otherwise blameless company.
然而它也是公平的。与FCPA不同的是，它允许"遵守式合规性保护"，也就是说，如果涉事员工是未成年人或者该企业有严格的反贿赂规定，并且让所有员工都知晓这项规定从而使其得到有效执行，那么该企业可以避开最严酷的惩罚。一个按规矩做事的企业不会如此轻易地让一两位明知故犯的员工给毁了。

America's Department of Justice sees no need for such safeguards. And since few cases go to trial, judges have given little guidance as to what the FCPA's bewildering text actually means. So, for now, it means whatever an aggressive prosecutor says it does.
而美国司法部认为这样的防范是多余的。由于很少案子受到审讯，法官也没有对FCPA那些令人迷惑的条款做出太多指示。因此，就目前为止，这些条款的含义，全凭胆大的起诉人如何作出解读。