Foreign Corrupt Practices Act cases produce some of the largest corporate penalties in U.S. law, with single global settlements passing $3.9 billion, individual prison exposure of up to 20 years for accounting fraud, and civil disgorgement that often matches or exceeds the criminal fine. FCPA cases involving penalties and settlements are resolved almost entirely through negotiated agreements rather than trials, and the numbers below reflect the statutory ceilings, the multipliers prosecutors actually use, and the biggest deals on record. One important caveat first: on February 10, 2025, President Trump signed an executive order pausing new FCPA investigations and enforcement actions for 180 days, with the Attorney General authorized to extend the review another 180 days.1The White House. Pausing Foreign Corrupt Practices Act Enforcement to Further American Economic and National Security The statute remains law, and DOJ officials have previewed a narrower 2026 enforcement posture rather than a full retreat.
Criminal Penalties for Companies
The FCPA splits corporate exposure between its two prongs. For anti-bribery violations, the statute sets criminal fines at up to $2 million per violation.2Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 15 U.S. Code 78dd-2 – Prohibited Foreign Trade Practices by Domestic Concerns That cap looks small next to the settlement totals reported in the press, and it is. The real number comes from the Alternative Fines Act, which lets courts impose fines of up to twice the gross gain or twice the gross loss caused by the offense.3Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 U.S. Code 3571 – Sentence of Fine That is the mechanism that pushes corporate FCPA penalties into the hundreds of millions and billions.
Accounting violations carry heavier statutory ceilings. Companies face fines up to $25 million per violation of the books-and-records or internal controls provisions, and prosecutors reach that prong when a company is charged with willfully falsifying records.4GovInfo. 15 U.S. Code 78ff – Penalties The willfulness requirement matters. Sloppy record-keeping is treated differently from deliberately building shell companies to disguise bribe payments.
Civil Penalties and Disgorgement
The SEC runs a parallel civil track that often doubles the financial hit. The centerpiece is disgorgement: the company or individual has to surrender every dollar of profit earned through the corrupt activity, plus prejudgment interest. On top of that, the SEC imposes civil monetary penalties. In practice, the civil component of an FCPA resolution frequently equals or exceeds the criminal fine, which is why the totals announced in press releases dwarf what the criminal statute alone would produce.
Individual Penalties
Individuals face prison and personal fines, and the company cannot pay the fine for them. Anti-bribery convictions carry up to five years in prison per count.4GovInfo. 15 U.S. Code 78ff – Penalties The FCPA sets the individual fine at up to $100,000 per count, but prosecutors routinely rely on the general felony fine ceiling of $250,000 in 18 U.S.C. 3571, or the twice-the-gain-or-loss multiplier, whichever is greater.3Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 U.S. Code 3571 – Sentence of Fine
Willful accounting violations are far more serious for individuals. The maximum is 20 years in prison and fines up to $5 million.4GovInfo. 15 U.S. Code 78ff – Penalties On the civil side, the SEC pursues disgorgement of bonuses, commissions, and other compensation earned during the misconduct. A senior executive whose performance pay tracked the corrupt period should expect to give it back.
The FCPA specifically bars companies from paying fines imposed on their own officers, directors, or employees, whether directly or indirectly.2Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 15 U.S. Code 78dd-2 – Prohibited Foreign Trade Practices by Domestic Concerns The personal cost is meant to land personally.
Collateral Consequences
The fine is often not the worst part. Companies with FCPA convictions or resolutions can be suspended or debarred from federal government contracting. Debarment decisions are made independently by federal agencies based on whether the contractor is “presently responsible,” so a guilty plea does not trigger automatic debarment, but the factual admissions inside deferred and non-prosecution agreements give debarring officials plenty to work with. Debarment by one federal agency applies across the entire executive branch. For defense contractors and other companies whose business depends on federal customers, this consequence can outweigh the financial penalty itself.
How FCPA Cases Are Resolved
Corporate FCPA cases rarely go to trial. Three negotiated resolutions cover almost everything, and the choice among them affects both the price tag and the reputational damage.
Deferred Prosecution Agreements
Under a deferred prosecution agreement, the DOJ files criminal charges in court but agrees to postpone prosecution, typically for three to five years.5United States Department of Justice. Justice Manual 9-28.000 – Principles of Federal Prosecution of Business Organizations If the company pays its penalties, cooperates, and fixes its compliance program, the charges are dismissed at the end of the term. Breach the agreement and prosecutors can revive the case immediately.
Non-Prosecution Agreements
A non-prosecution agreement works similarly but no charges are filed in court at all. The company admits the facts, agrees to cooperate, and accepts conditions including financial penalties and compliance reforms. Because nothing is filed, the reputational hit is smaller. These agreements tend to go to companies that voluntarily disclosed the misconduct before the government found it.
Guilty Pleas
The most serious cases end in a formal guilty plea, which becomes a permanent conviction. This outcome typically follows especially pervasive misconduct, direct involvement by senior leadership, or a prior enforcement record. Beyond the fine, a conviction can trigger debarment or loss of professional licenses in regulated industries.
Compliance Monitors
Any of the three resolution types can come with an independent compliance monitor overseeing the company’s operations for a defined period. Whether DOJ requires one depends on how pervasive the misconduct was, whether senior management was involved, and how much the company has already invested in fixing its compliance program. If the company has already overhauled compliance by the time of resolution and can show the changes work, DOJ may skip a monitor. When one is required, the company proposes candidates and DOJ selects, with final approval from the Attorney General’s office.
The Largest FCPA Settlements on Record
The biggest FCPA resolutions are almost always coordinated across multiple countries, with the U.S. share being one piece of a larger global total.
Airbus SE — $3.9+ billion (2020). Airbus paid over $3.9 billion to resolve bribery charges brought by U.S., French, and U.K. authorities. Investigators found a scheme using third-party agents to bribe government officials and airline executives to win aircraft contracts. It is the largest global anti-corruption settlement on record.6United States Department of Justice. Airbus Agrees to Pay Over $3.9 Billion in Global Penalties to Resolve Foreign Bribery and ITAR Case
Goldman Sachs — $2.9 billion (2020). Goldman reached a $2.9 billion global settlement over its role in the 1MDB scandal, in which billions were diverted from a Malaysian sovereign wealth fund through bond offerings the firm underwrote. Goldman admitted to conspiring to violate the anti-bribery provisions.7United States Department of Justice. Goldman Sachs Resolves Foreign Bribery Case and Agrees to Pay Over $2.9 Billion Over $1 billion of that total went to the SEC’s separate civil charges.8U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. SEC Charges Goldman Sachs With FCPA Violations
Glencore — $1.1+ billion (2022). The commodities trader paid over $1.1 billion to resolve DOJ and CFTC investigations covering FCPA violations and a separate commodity price manipulation scheme. The criminal fine alone exceeded $428 million.
Ericsson — $1 billion (2019). Ericsson’s settlement resolved years of bribery through executives and consultants across multiple countries, with a criminal penalty over $520 million and roughly $540 million to the SEC in disgorgement and interest.9United States Department of Justice. Ericsson Agrees to Pay Over $1 Billion to Resolve FCPA Case
How Self-Disclosure Cuts the Number
The DOJ’s Corporate Enforcement Policy is the single biggest lever a company has on the final settlement figure. A company that voluntarily discloses the misconduct, cooperates fully, and remediates in a timely way receives a presumption of declination, meaning DOJ will generally decline to prosecute the company at all.10United States Department of Justice. Criminal Division Corporate Enforcement and Voluntary Self-Disclosure Policy Even when a criminal resolution is still warranted, the company can expect a reduction of at least 50 percent and up to 75 percent off the bottom of the sentencing guidelines fine range.
A 2024 amendment addresses the common situation where a whistleblower reports internally and simultaneously files with DOJ. The company can still qualify for voluntary disclosure credit as long as it self-reports to DOJ within 120 days of receiving the internal report.10United States Department of Justice. Criminal Division Corporate Enforcement and Voluntary Self-Disclosure Policy
Companies that fail to self-disclose, delay cooperation, or try to minimize the facts do not get those discounts. DOJ officials have repeatedly said they will pursue maximum penalties against companies and individuals that choose concealment over cooperation.11United States Department of Justice. Department of Justice Releases First-Ever Corporate Enforcement Policy for All Criminal Cases In evaluating the compliance side of that calculus, DOJ prosecutors ask three questions: whether the compliance program was well designed, whether it was adequately funded and empowered, and whether it actually worked in practice.12U.S. Department of Justice. Evaluation of Corporate Compliance Programs A binder on a shelf does not qualify.
What the 2025 Enforcement Pause Means for Exposure
The February 10, 2025 executive order directed the Attorney General to halt all new FCPA investigations and enforcement actions for 180 days while reviewing existing guidelines, and required a review of ongoing cases to take “appropriate action” to “restore proper bounds” on enforcement.1The White House. Pausing Foreign Corrupt Practices Act Enforcement to Further American Economic and National Security Data from Stanford’s FCPA Clearinghouse shows zero new enforcement actions or disclosed investigations in either the first or second quarter of 2025. Any new FCPA investigation or action must be specifically authorized by the Attorney General under whatever revised guidelines emerge from the review.
The statute itself has not changed. Congress enacted the FCPA, and only Congress can repeal it. The five-year federal criminal statute of limitations continues to run,13Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 U.S. Code 3282 – Offenses Not Capital conspiracy charges keep the clock running until the last act in furtherance, and DOJ can still ask courts to pause the clock while gathering foreign evidence. Civil exposure to the SEC and private whistleblower activity also continue.
By late 2025, DOJ officials were publicly previewing 2026 enforcement priorities that emphasize individual accountability, cases with a substantial U.S. nexus, and connections to narcotrafficking or transnational criminal organizations. Officials described the change as a pivot rather than a wholesale retreat, and matters involving low-value “customary business practices” or lacking meaningful U.S. ties may be left to foreign authorities. For companies weighing whether to self-disclose historical conduct, the practical calculation now includes the possibility that some matters DOJ would have taken before will be declined outright, while others fitting the new priorities will still draw the full weight of a penalty stack, disgorgement, and possibly debarment.