The Department of Justice (DOJ) is narrowing its focus on Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) enforcement, prioritizing national security, U.S. competitiveness, and a crackdown on cartels. This is a critical development for U.S. companies operating internationally. While the FCPA remains in effect, DOJ’s enforcement priorities have been substantially redefined. Companies must now reassess their risk profiles and compliance programs in light of these changes, understanding that the focus has sharpened—not disappeared.
On June 9, 2025, DOJ released a memorandum establishing new guidelines for investigations and enforcement actions under the FCPA. This memo, authored by the Deputy Attorney General, signals a significant strategic shift in DOJ’s approach, effectively narrowing the scope of FCPA enforcement to align with specific national security and economic priorities articulated by the Trump Administration.
The new guidelines are a direct result of Executive Order 14209, “Pausing Foreign Corrupt Practices Act Enforcement to Further American Economic and National Security.” The Order mandated that DOJ cease initiating new FCPA cases for 180 days (unless the Attorney General granted an exception) and review all pending matters.
Its stated purpose was to ensure FCPA enforcement did not penalize American businesses for what the Trump Administration termed “routine business practices in other nations” and to realign enforcement with “Presidential foreign policy prerogatives.” The resulting memorandum is the culmination of that review, codifying a more targeted and nationally-focused enforcement philosophy.
The Four Pillars of FCPA Enforcement Under the Trump Administration
The new guidelines describe four core pillars that will guide federal prosecutors in their FCPA investigations and enforcement actions:
- Combating cartels and transnational criminal organizations (TCOs): The primary focus will be on foreign bribery that facilitates the criminal activities of cartels and TCOs. This includes corruption linked to money laundering networks or officials already compromised by these criminal enterprises.
- Protecting U.S. economic interests: Prosecutors will prioritize cases where alleged bribery has caused direct and identifiable economic harm to U.S. companies by depriving them of fair access to compete for business.
- Advancing national security: Enforcement will target corruption that threatens U.S. national security, particularly bribery involving strategic sectors such as critical minerals, deep-water ports, defense, and other key infrastructure.
- Focusing on “serious misconduct:” DOJ will narrow the scope of enforcement actions by moving away from actions based on de minimis or low-dollar payments, common business courtesies, or “routine business practices.” Instead, the focus will be on cases with strong evidence of corrupt intent, such as large bribes, sophisticated concealment efforts, and obstruction of justice.
Detailed Analysis of the New Guidelines
A deeper dive into the memorandum reveals how these new priorities will shape DOJ’s enforcement decisions. The memo outlines a non-exhaustive list of factors that prosecutors must now weigh when deciding whether to open, continue, or resolve an FCPA investigation.
Transnational Organized Crime
Reflecting a broader administration policy to pursue the “total elimination” of cartels and TCOs, DOJ has made this a cornerstone of its new FCPA strategy. The memo explicitly states that a “primary consideration” for pursuing an FCPA case is whether the alleged bribery is connected to the criminal operations of these organizations.
Linking anti-corruption efforts directly to the fight against transnational organized crime represents a significant pivot, particularly in the Western Hemisphere. Businesses operating in regions with a heavy presence of cartels or TCOs should be especially vigilant, as any connection between their operations and these groups will now attract heightened scrutiny.
Harm-Based Enforcement Triggers
The guidelines introduce a clear “harm-based” trigger for enforcement. Prosecutors are instructed to consider “whether the alleged misconduct deprived specific and identifiable U.S. entities of fair access to compete and/or resulted in economic injury to specific and identifiable American companies or individuals.”
This marks a departure from pursuing bribery cases solely on principle. Now, DOJ is more likely to act when a U.S. company can show it lost a specific contract or opportunity due to a competitor’s bribes. This also applies to enforcement of the Foreign Extortion Prevention Act (FEPA) since prosecutors will consider if a foreign official’s demand for a bribe harmed a specific U.S. entity.
National Security
The memo firmly roots FCPA enforcement in the protection of U.S. national security interests. Citing the 2017 National Security Strategy, it highlights the threat posed by corruption in strategic sectors.
FCPA enforcement will now focus on “the most urgent threats to U.S. national security resulting from the bribery of corrupt foreign officials involving key infrastructure or assets.” Companies in the defense, energy, technology, and critical minerals sectors should anticipate that any potential misconduct will be viewed through this national security lens.
Low-Dollar Courtesies
In a move that many businesses will welcome, the guidelines explicitly steer prosecutors away from cases involving “de minimis or low-dollar, generally accepted business courtesies.” The memo reminds prosecutors of the FCPA’s existing exception for “facilitating and expediting payments” and the affirmative defenses for reasonable and bona fide expenditures.
The new focus will be on conduct that demonstrates a clear intent to corrupt. The memo lists several indicia of such serious misconduct:
- Substantial bribe payments
- Proven and sophisticated efforts to conceal payments
- Fraudulent conduct (e.g., false books and records) in furtherance of the scheme
- Efforts to obstruct justice
Furthermore, prosecutors are directed to consider the likelihood that a foreign government is willing and able to prosecute the misconduct itself, suggesting DOJ may decline to act in cases where a credible foreign partner can take the lead.
Practical Implications and Recommendations for Businesses
DOJ’s new posture requires a strategic evaluation of corporate compliance efforts. While the prohibition against bribing foreign officials remains, the risk landscape has changed.
In response to this memo, companies should:
- Update risk assessments: Align your risk assessments with DOJ’s new priorities. This means placing greater emphasis on risks related to operations in countries with a strong TCO presence and in sectors deemed critical to U.S. national security.
- Document economic harm: Meticulously document evidence if your company believes it has lost business due to a competitor’s corrupt practices. The new guidelines create a clearer path to seek redress by reporting the conduct to DOJ.
- Maintain robust controls: Do not abandon existing anti-corruption controls, even though the focus has shifted away from minor payments. Instead, ensure your policies are clear, thresholds are reasonable, and approval processes are robust to prevent any payments that could be construed as substantial or having corrupt intent.
- Enhance third-party due diligence: Scrutinize agents, consultants, and partners for any potential links to criminal organizations or money laundering activities. The heightened focus on cartels and TCOs makes third-party due diligence more critical than ever.
This change is not a free pass for corruption. Rather, these guidelines refocus the enforcement lens. A strong, effective compliance program remains the best defense. The memo’s emphasis on individual accountability and considering collateral consequences throughout an investigation means companies with robust programs and a culture of compliance are better positioned to navigate any potential inquiry.
DOJ has ushered in a new era of FCPA enforcement—one that is more narrowly focused, strategically aligned with U.S. national interests, and less concerned with minor corporate conduct. Businesses that adapt their compliance strategies to this new reality will be best prepared to thrive in the international marketplace while minimizing their legal risk.
