- Chief Compliance Officer and VP of Legal Affairs, Arrow Electronics
By 
Kyle Brasseur2023-05-01T16:22:00
Any compliance officer will tell you the best way to assess the risk of a certain matter is to think about it from a regulatory perspective.
“‘What would the Department of Justice think if we did this? Would this violate any laws or restrictions?’” If the answers to these questions aren’t clear, it’s often advised to err on the side of caution.
Seagate did not when it decided in 2020 to continue selling hard disk drives to Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei after the latter had certain export restrictions placed on it by the Commerce Department. The data storage company was fined $300 million—the largest stand-alone administrative penalty in the history of the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS)—for this miscalculation.
THIS IS MEMBERS-ONLY CONTENT. To continue reading, choose one of the options below.
News and analysis for the well-informed compliance or audit exec. Select an option and click continue.
Annual Membership $499 Value offer
Full price one year membership with auto-renewal.
Membership $599
One-year only, no auto-renewal.
A new strike force co-led by the Department of Justice and Commerce Department made an impact when charges against a former Apple engineer for theft and attempted theft of trade secrets were included as part of its first enforcement actions.
Seagate will pay the largest stand-alone administrative penalty in the history of the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Industry and Security for violating export control restrictions against Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei.
When making anti-regulatory decisions, a board is expressing its real risk appetite. This can be frustrating, even bewildering, for compliance professionals, especially when rules are clear and explicit in their expectations.
It’s been a long “integrity journey” for Ericsson, according to the company’s Head of Compliance Global Affairs Alison Howell. Since settling with the DOJ over FCPA violations in 2019, the company has gone through a "business critical transformation," resulting in the end of its compliance monitorship.
Whether you’re a multinational telecommunications company looking to certify your anti-corruption program post-settlement, or a biochemical company victimized by a “rogue” employee, seeing the light at the end of the enforcement tunnel isn’t always easy.
The biggest Compliance Fails of 2024 show the real-world consequences of noncompliance for the companies that faltered, but also for their customers and their employees.
