fcpa in india 2014: compliance strategies for india's...
TRANSCRIPT
FCPA in India 2014: Compliance Strategies for India's Unique Cultural and Governmental Intricacies
Today’s faculty features:
1pm Eastern | 12pm Central | 11am Mountain | 10am Pacific
The audio portion of the conference may be accessed via the telephone or by using your computer's speakers. Please refer to the instructions emailed to registrants for additional information. If you have any questions, please contact Customer Service at 1-800-926-7926 ext. 10.
WEDNESDAY, MAY 21, 2014
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A
Jay Holtmeier, Partner, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr, New York
Elizabeth D. Keating, Global Compliance Counsel - Investigations, Johnson Controls, Milwaukee, Wis.
Michael Stavridis, Partner, Ernst & Young, Chicago
Tips for Optimal Quality
Sound Quality If you are listening via your computer speakers, please note that the quality of your sound will vary depending on the speed and quality of your internet connection. If the sound quality is not satisfactory, you may listen via the phone: dial 1-888-601-3873 and enter your PIN when prompted. Otherwise, please send us a chat or e-mail [email protected] immediately so we can address the problem. If you dialed in and have any difficulties during the call, press *0 for assistance. Viewing Quality To maximize your screen, press the F11 key on your keyboard. To exit full screen, press the F11 key again.
FOR LIVE EVENT ONLY
Continuing Education Credits
For CLE purposes, please let us know how many people are listening at your location by completing each of the following steps:
• In the chat box, type (1) your company name and (2) the number of attendees at your location
• Click the word balloon button to send
FOR LIVE EVENT ONLY
FCPA Compliance in India: Compliance Strategies Given India’s Unique Cultural and Governmental
Intricacies
Strafford Publications Teleconference May 21, 2014
Jay Holtmeier Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP Elizabeth D. Keating Johnson Controls, Inc. Michael Stavridis Ernst & Young LLP
OVERALL FCPA ENFORCEMENT TRENDS
– Activity peaked in 2010, but still very active
– Government has noted “substantial pipeline of new matters”
DOJ and SEC Enforcement Actions 2005-20013
5
OVERALL FCPA ENFORCEMENT TRENDS
Large FCPA Penalties Continue; Recent Settlements: – Total, S.A. ($398M), 2013 – Alcoa ($384M), 2014 – Weatherford ($153M), 2013 – HP ($108M), 2014
Prosecution of Individuals Is Continued Priority Third-Party Risks (e.g., sales agents, intermediaries, consultants) Travel and Entertainment in High-Risk Markets Industry-Specific Risks (e.g., probe of banks’ Asian hiring
practices) New Tools at the SEC – Deferred Prosecution Agreements and
Non-Prosecution Agreements Shift Away from Compliance Monitors; Increased Use of
Alternatives SEC’s “Neither Admit nor Deny” Policy
6
Enforcement by Indian Authorities
Lokpal Act of 2013 created a new agency to investigate and prosecute civil servants accused of corruption.
Recent Supreme Court ruling expands power of Comptroller & Auditor General to audit transactions with government.
Parliament recently passed a whistleblower protection bill.
High profile investigations reported publicly: – Bribery in helicopter procurement led to India’s
suspension of $750M contract with AgustaWestland and criminal charges against former Indian Air Force Chief.
– India’s Defense Ministry has suspended all contracts with Rolls-Royce pending inquiry of bribery allegations by India’s Central Bureau of Investigation.
7
FCPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS RELATED TO INDIA
Diageo (2011) – Payments by Distributors to Secure Business and Ease Regulatory Burden – Diageo is one of the world’s largest producers of alcoholic
beverages, such as Johnnie Walker. – SEC settlement papers alleged that from 2003 to mid-2009,
Diageo’s Indian subsidiary’s promoters and distributors made hundreds of illicit payments to government officials responsible for purchasing or authorizing the sale of its beverages in India.
• Payments made by distributors to employees of government-owned liquor stores to increase purchases of Diageo beverages.
• Payments made by distributors to regional and state officials to secure label registrations for products.
– For this and other conduct, Diageo settled SEC books and records and internal controls charges for $16M. 8
FCPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS RELATED TO INDIA Baker Hughes (2001) – Payments by Agent to Ease
Regulatory Burden – Baker Hughes’ former subsidiary Western Geophysical (WG)
provided geophysical exploration services. – In order to provide these services in the Bay of Canby, India,
WG needed authorization from the Director General of Shipping to use a foreign-flagged vessel.
– According to the SEC’s papers, WG’s agent told a WG manager that permits could be issued for $15k. WG manager told the agent to “take care of it.”
– WG later authorized a $15k reimbursement for the agent without adequate inquiry to ensure that the payment did not violate the FCPA.
– WG accounting staff improperly described the payment as “Shipping Permit.”
– SEC issued cease and desist order.
9
FCPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS RELATED TO INDIA
Oracle (2012) – Side Funds Maintained by Distributors – Oracle is a California-based computer technology company. – Oracle’s Indian subsidiary sells its products through
distributors that retain the margin between the amount paid by the customer and the amount paid to the subsidiary.
– According to the government, the subsidiary structured transactions to create extra margins for distributors in certain instances, essentially creating off-the-books side funds.
– Subsidiary employees then directed distributors to make payments from the side funds to sham entities.
– No allegation of bribery. – Oracle settled SEC books and records and internal controls
charges for $2 million.
10
FCPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS RELATED TO INDIA
Dow Chemical (2007) – Payments Through Side Funds and Petty Cash to Ease Regulatory Burden – Dow’s Indian majority-owned, fifth-tier subsidiary DE-Nocil
manufactures pesticides and other products. – SEC alleged that DE-Nocil structured transactions such that
off-the-books funds were held by the company’s contractors. As directed by DE-Nocil, the contractors disbursed funds directly to DE- Nocil or to a third party that would bribe a Central Insecticides Board official.
– Bribes resulted in expedited regulatory registration for DE–Nocil’s products.
– DE-Nocil also used petty cash to make improper payments to other officials, such as state inspectors.
– Dow settled SEC books and records and internal controls charges and agreed to pay a $325K civil penalty. 11
FCPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS RELATED TO INDIA Pride Int’l (2010) – Payments to Judicial Officer through
Third-Party Bank Account – Pride International is an oil and gas services company. – Government settlement papers alleged that managers at
Pride’s French subsidiary (including the legal director) authorized payment of $500K to a judge of the Indian Customs, Excise, and Gold Appellate Tribunal to secure a favorable determination in a customs duties and penalties dispute.
– Payments were made through a third-party company’s bank accounts in Dubai.
– The estimated value of the favorable decision was $10M. – Pride’s French subsidiary pleaded guilty; Pride International
entered into a DPA with DOJ. • For this and other conduct, Pride entities paid DOJ/SEC
$56.2M.
12
FCPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS RELATED TO INDIA
Westinghouse Air Brake Technologies (2008) – Payments to Secure Business and Ease Regulatory Burden – WABTEC manufactures brake subsystems for locomotives,
freight cars, and passenger transit vehicles. – Government’s papers state that WABTEC’s Indian
subsidiary’s employees and agents made payments to Indian Railway Board and other government officials to:
• Obtain business during the IRB tender process; • Schedule pre-shipping product inspections; • Have certificates of product delivery issued; and • Curb tax audits.
– To generate cash for these payments, the subsidiary engaged third-party “marketing agents” to create false invoices. When the subsidiary paid the invoices, the “marketing agents” returned the cash to the subsidiary.
– Payment of $677K to DOJ/SEC.
13
FCPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS RELATED TO INDIA
Textron, Inc. (2007) – Payment to Secure Business with a Commercial Customer – Textron is a conglomerate in the aircraft, defense,
manufacturing, and financial industries. – According to the government’s papers, a subsidiary paid
approximately $52K to an employee of a non-government customer to secure business in India.
– The payment was described as a “commission” in the subsidiary’s records.
– Identified by an internal investigation in response to allegations of kickbacks related to the UN’s Oil for Food Program.
– For this and other conduct, Textron entered into a NPA with DOJ and agreed to pay a total of $4.7M to DOJ/SEC.
14
FCPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS RELATED TO INDIA
Electronic Data Systems (2007) – Payments to Secure Business – EDS is one of the world’s largest technology companies. – SEC’s papers allege that between 2001 and 2003, EDS’
Indian subsidiary had difficulty performing its contractual obligations for two Indian government-owned clients.
– The subsidiary’s president authorized payments and gifts of over $720K to employees of the Indian government-owned clients.
– The payments resulted in the subsidiary retaining the business of the two clients.
– For this and other conduct, EDS settled with the SEC for $491K. The subsidiary’s president also settled with the SEC and paid a $70K penalty.
15
FCPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS RELATED TO INDIA
Indictment
Six Foreign Nationals (2013) – USAO in N.D. Ill. alleged that six foreign nationals engaged in
international racketeering conspiracy involving bribes of Indian government officials in exchange for titanium mining licenses and approvals.
– Defendants allegedly authorized bribes exceeding $18.5M. – Conspiracy included sale of titanium products to unnamed
“Company A” headquartered in Chicago. – Defendants include two Ukrainians, a Hungarian, a Sri
Lankan, and two Indians (one of whom is a US Green Card holder and the other is an Indian MP).
16
FCPA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS RELATED TO INDIA
Control Components, Inc. (2009) – Payments to Secure Business – CCI designs and manufactures valves used in the power, oil
and gas, and nuclear industries. – CCI made payments of at least $4.9M from 2003 – 2007 to
employees of private companies and state-owned companies in several countries, including in India to the Maharashtra State Electricity Board.
– For this and other conduct, CCI pleaded guilty to criminal anti-bribery and Travel Act charges and paid an $18.2M fine.
17
PUBLICLY REPORTED FCPA INVESTIGATIONS IN INDIA
Rolls Royce – DOJ is investigating Rolls Royce for bribes in connection with
contracts in Indonesia, China, and India. The UK SFO and India’s CBI are also investigating the allegations.
Anheuser-Busch InBev
– Both DOJ and SEC are investigating the brewing company in connection with its Indian joint venture, InBev Indian Int’l Private Ltd.
Wal-Mart
– Continuing global FCPA investigation, including of Wal-Mart’s Indian join venture with Bharti Enterprises. In late 2013, the companies announced the breakup of the joint venture.
18
OTHER PUBLICLY REPORTED DEVELOPMENTS Yara International
– In January 2014, Norwegian authorities fined the fertilizer company $48M for bribing officials in India and Libya and making corrupt payments to a supplier in Russia. Yara allegedly agreed to pay $3M in bribes to the relative of an Indian government official in connection with a joint venture with an Indian government controlled entity. Norwegian Authorities also indicted four Yara executives.
Cryptometrics Agent
– In August 2013, Nazir Karigar, a former agent of Cryptometrics, became the first individual to be convicted of violating Canada’s Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act. Authorities alleged that Karigar offered to bribe Indian officials to rig the bidding process for Air India contracts.
Bunge
– In June 2013, five executives of the Indian unit of the American food company Bunge resigned amid an internal audit related to the subsidiary’s purchase of land in Kandla, India.
19
CONTACTS WITH GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS IN INDIA
Public procurement/contracting with government agencies Customs clearance/importation of goods Immigration processes Real estate (both purchasing and leasing land) Tax administration (excise and sales taxes, audits) Obtaining certificates, registrations, permits, and licenses
(approval from multiple officials often required to obtain one permit/license)
Gifts and entertainment (especially during religious festival, Diwali)
Scheduling/passing inspections (fire, environmental, building) Government officials solicit donations for charitable/religious
organizations Interactions with police/judiciary Third parties with ties to government departments/officials
(consultants, agents, distributors, interns, and trainees) 20
Navigating Corruption Risks in India
May 21, 2014
Elizabeth Keating Global Compliance Counsel – Investigations
Integrity
Johnson Controls Confidential
Corruption Risk Profile - India
Transparency International – Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) 2013 NGO which ranks countries based on how corrupt their public sector is
perceived to be. India scored 36 on a scale of 0 – 100. (100 = very clean; 0= highly corrupt). India ranked 94th out of 177 countries. (Denmark and New Zealand ranked #1;
Somalia ranked 177th). Same ranking and score for India as in 2012. India sandwiched between
Djibouti, Colombia and Philippines, Suriname.
TI Global Corruption Barometer 74% of those surveyed in India believed that corruption in their country had
worsened. Political parties, police, public officials, judiciary were all perceived to be affected
by corruption. 44% believed that their government’s actions to fight corruption were ineffective.
22
Johnson Controls Confidential
Corruption Risk Profile - India
TI Bribe Payers Index 84% of Indian companies believe bribes or facilitation payments are
being paid to do business 30% of Indian companies reported paying bribes to government
officials to expedite government services 54% of individuals surveyed reported paying a bribe to obtain
government services World Bank Survey 2013 - India Ease of Doing Business – 132 out of 185 (1=best) Starting a Business – 173 Dealing with Construction Permits – 182 Getting Electricity – 105 Paying Taxes – 152 Enforcing Contracts – 184 No significant improvement from 2012 rankings
23
Johnson Controls Confidential
Corruption Risk Profile - India
Corruption pervasive at every level of government Bribes accepted as common practice Paying bribes for the most basic services is routine While petty bribery continues unabated – serious
corruption has flourished and reached unprecedented proportions
Lack of enforcement of anti-corruption regulation Anti-corruption legislation (Jan Lokpal) remains stalled
in Parliament Over regulation of businesses and industries creates
“opportunities” for corruption Vestige of License Raj
24
Johnson Controls Confidential
India – Winds of Change?
Grassroot anti-corruption campaigns still engaged – if ineffective: Hunger strike by Kisan “Anna” Hazare – anti-corruption campaigner “I Paid A Bribe” Initiative posts citizens reports of corruption online “I paid a bribe” reports outnumber “I met an honest officer” 5th Pillar – Zero Rupees Anti-Corruption Campaign Zero denomination notes handed to government officials who ask for
bribes However, growing awareness with rising pubic support Several investigations concerning private and public corruption being
reported in the media Rise in whistleblower complaint. Tremendous increase in online social groups which highlight corruption Corporations giving more focus to internal audits and investigations to
identify fraud and corruption
25
Johnson Controls Confidential
Risks in Dealing with India Bureaucracy
Challenges Presented by Regulatory and Business Environment Excessive bureaucracy and regulation Procedures are complicated and not transparent Several layers of approvals required to obtain licenses/permits Practice of using “agents” to interface with government agencies
Civil servants grossly underpaid Accepted practice of “tips” or facilitation payments to civil servants in
order to obtain routine government services Seen as an accepted method of augmenting meager civil servant
salaries Prevention of Corruption Act Prohibits public servants from accepting bribe Prohibits giving of bribes to public servants No exception for facilitation payments Inconsistent enforcement
27
Johnson Controls Confidential
Interaction with India’s Bureaucracy
Majority of corruption occurs at the lower levels of government More than half of the reported bribe demands were for less than
$100 84% of the reported bribe demands were for $5000 or less 13% of the bribe demands originated from the Customs office 9% of the demands came from the national offices of Taxation Most bribes involved use of “agents” or “consultants” to conceal
the true nature of the payments Payments recorded as third party payments with general
descriptions Often routine government services, eg., utility services, involve
demand for a bribe
28
Johnson Controls Confidential
Interaction with India’s Bureaucracy
Government Touch Points: Taxing Authorities Variety of taxing regimes provide “opportunities” for bribery Income taxes – tax on profits earned by business Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) – tax deducted from certain vendors.
Monthly returns and payments to the exchequer Service taxes – central indirect tax on services rendered by company.
Monthly filings and payments to central treasury Octroi Tax – intra-country “customs” tax levied on products which are
transported into municipal jurisdictions, e.g., Mumbai and Pune. Octroi tax recently eliminated in many major cities. Replaced by Local Body Tax (LBT). Eliminates need for drivers to
stop at toll booths Not yet eliminated in Mumbai.
29
Johnson Controls Confidential
Interaction with India’s Bureaucracy
Government Touch Points: Taxing Authorities Value Added Tax (VAT) – state tax on sale of certain goods Works Contract Tax – part of VAT Tax law and applicable to specific
portion of contract Central Sales Tax – tax on sale of goods from one state to another Central Excise – tax on manufactured goods Service Tax – tax on services provided to customer Use of Consultants to prepare and file tax reports Lack of transparency in invoice description of services provided by
consultants Opportunity for improper payments particularly in connection with tax
appeals and tax audits
30
Johnson Controls Confidential
Interaction with India’s Bureaucracy
Government Touch Points: Licenses, Permits and Inspections Licensing and permitting regulations are duplicated by national, state
and local agencies Many licenses and permits require several visits to government offices Frequent requests for bribes from government employees to render
routine government services Refusal to pay will often result in prolonged application process Many company employees do not distinguish between facilitation
payments and payments made to impact outcome of inspection report Government employees will often require that you make payment to a
“trusted” third party who will, in turn, funnel the money to the government employee “Government liaison” services offered by certain vendors Vendors will even provide a schedule of rates for amount of facilitation
payments required by the various agencies
31
Johnson Controls Confidential
Interaction with India’s Bureaucracy
Government Touch Points: Licenses, Permits and Inspections: Electrical Safety inspections Mechanical Equipment inspections Labor Department inspections Lift/Elevator Licenses and inspections Pollution Control Board inspections and Consents to Establish/Operate Factory License Renewals Fire Safety inspections Police inspections – labor issues and workplace accidents Health Department inspections Diesel storage inspections High Rise Building inspections Sanitation Department plumbing inspections Energy Meter Testing reports
32
Johnson Controls Confidential
Interaction with India’s Bureaucracy
Government Touch Points: Licenses, Permits and Inspections: Environmental licenses CEIG Licenses for electrical systems Fire licenses Explosive licenses Commercial use clearances Air Consent (Operation & Establishment) Occupation certificate from local authority Annual Operations renewal Structural certificate for floor load density Water Consent Hazardous Waste Handling and Disposal Consent to Establish and Consent to Operate
33
Johnson Controls Confidential
Navigating the Risks
Vendor/Supplier Management and Due Diligence Vendor Maintenance File accuracy Correctly categorize vendor as high or low risk, i.e., are there
any government facing services being provided? Due diligence of High Risk Vendors Undertake appropriate level of due diligence on all high risk vendors
who interface with government agencies Often these vendors will not be found using standard desktop tools Consider in-person meetings with high risk vendors for DD Centralized procurement function for vendor selection process Provides transparency over selection process Establish DNU/DNP list for any vendors who have been found
to use unethical business practices
34
Johnson Controls Confidential
Navigating the Risks
Contract Review Evaluate all contracts to ensure that the scope of services does
not provide inappropriate payments to government employees, e.g., “Liaison services” “Outsourcing bribery” Do not undertake any government facing services on behalf of
customers not specifically provided for by contract Supplier Anti-Bribery/Anti-Corruption certification Communicate expectations to vendors re ethics and anti-
bribery/anti-corruption training for all high risk vendors Training to include discussion of India Prevention of Corruption Act Copy of Code of Conduct
35
Johnson Controls Confidential
Navigating the Risks
Financial Controls Establish monitoring process to ensure vendor transactions are for
legitimate services Red flag/warning sign training for AP function Stringent controls around employee advances and petty cash Evaluate use of “miscellaneous vendor codes” Red Flag training for all finance personnel
Government Interfacing Activities Establish “Compliance Task Force” to handle all licensing, permitting
and inspection requirements Only “Task Force’ will interface with government agencies Administers, manages and enforces all statutory compliance activities
Communication to Customers Need to communicate to customers that the refusal to make improper
payments may slow the process of obtaining government approvals necessary to operate
36
Johnson Controls Confidential
Navigating the Risks
Monitor all Licensing/Permitting Activities Review all licenses and permits necessary to conduct business
Monitoring and Auditing Regular and periodic forensic reviews of business practices and
control environment
37
Johnson Controls Confidential
Navigating the Risks – Monitoring/Auditing
RED FLAGS Rumors regarding unethical or suspicious conduct by an
employee, marketing representative, consultant or other business partner, or a government official
Unnecessary third-parties or multiple intermediaries Requests for payments to a third-party rather than the
consultant Requests for payments in a third country Business in a country with bribery problems Requests for payment in cash Requests for unusually large commissions or other
payments, or payments that appear excessive for the service rendered
38
Johnson Controls Confidential
39
Navigating the Risks – Monitoring/Auditing
RED FLAGS Non-government organizations, lobbying costs, public
relations expenditure, political contributions etc. Requests for reimbursement of expenses that are poorly
documented Incomplete or inaccurate information in required disclosures Refusal to certify compliance Government end-users Government touch points such as customs, taxes, licenses,
etc. Previous issues, incidents
39
41
Perceived as most corrupt sectors
Infrastructure and real estate
Metals and mining
“According to 73% of the respondents from PE
firms, a company operating in a sector that is
perceived as highly corrupt, may lose ground
when it comes to a fair valuation of its business,
as it bargains hard and factors in the cost of
corruption in the sector during a transaction.”
Aerospace and defense
Power and utilities
42
Production
Sourcing
Logistics
Customs CHA
Police
Labour law officials
FDA
Municipal dept.
Octroi
Excise
W&M
Labour law
Shops & Establishment
Fire department
Sales tax Income
tax Service tax
Road permits
Companies Act
Electricity board
Pollution Control Board
DGFT
Local + imports
Imports
Lift license
Tax compliance
Manufacturing
Indian company
Government interaction at a glance
43
Step 1 Step 2
Step 3 Step 4
Step 5 Conversion of land and change of land use
Pre-approval NOCs and clearance from agencies
Plan sanction Occupancy certificate
Some of the permits required
Conversion of land use Sanction of development plan NOC from electricity board
NOC from fire service department NOC from Airport Authority of India NOC from Ministry of Environment and Forest Clearance
57
172
40 Number of approvals a builder needs to construct a property
Number of documents a builder has to produce
Number of departments of central and state governments and municipal corporations a builder engages
Source: Binoy Prabhakar , “DLF-Vadra story: Why real estate in India has become synonymous with bribes & black money,” The Economic Times, 15 October 2012, via Dow Jones Factiva, © 2012 The Times of India Group
Example of licenses and permits challenges
44
Common scenarios Rationalization
► ‘We are not paying it ourselves, it is the vendors problem’
► ‘We can conceal it in the books of accounts’ ► ‘We cannot afford to wait and lose business’ ► ‘How will anyone know’ ► ‘It is vendor’s responsibility to get things done’
Hurry to setup the
facility
Ethical dilemma:
cost of losing business vs. compliance
Turning blind eye to
violations, non-
compliance
Pressure to meet targets
Use of third party
consultants
Generating cash through
employee advance or petty cash
Bribery and corruption scenario
45
Proactive
Sample FCPA compliance program framework
Reactive
Proactive
Setting the Proper Tone
Code of Ethics
FCPA Prevention Policies
FCPA Risk Assessment
FCPA Controls Monitoring
FCPA Awareness Training
Response Plan
Conduct FCPA Risk Assessment
FCPA Monitoring
Program assessment
Implementation review
Substantive review
Results drive monitoring
46
FCPA compliance program Risk assessment criteria
Government end-users;
sales intermediaries/
direct sales
High risk geographic
markets
Significant movement of
goods/ imports/ exports/
certifications Government touch points –
VAT/ taxes/ licenses/ etc.
Travel, entertainment
and gifts, customer travel,
petty cash
47
How to monitor for corruption risks?
► What kind of testing should be conducted? ► Controls testing versus substantive testing ► Controls alone may not prevent irregularities; control testing alone may not
detect irregularities ► The DOJ/SEC guidance to the FCPA states that a compliance program that is
“followed in practice will inevitably uncover compliance weaknesses and require enhancements” and that programs that employ a “check-the-box” approach may be inefficient and, more importantly, ineffective”
► “DOJ and SEC evaluate whether companies regularly review and improve their compliance programs and not allow them to become stale.”
► The UK MOJ guidance to the UK Bribery Bill requires organizations to “monitor the ethical quality of transactions”.
48
How to monitor for corruption risks? continued ► How to choose a sampling methodology? Where and how are potential
problem payments recorded? ► Understand the business? Where are the customers? Where are the
government touch points? ► Choose accounts that could have risk – Commissions, permits, licenses,
consultants, freight forwarding, customs clearance, etc. as well as major Government or SOE contracts/projects
► Choose T&E reports from individuals who direct or touch the risk Who manages imports/exports? Who entertains our big Government clients?
► Controls over cash?
49
How to monitor for corruption risks? continued
► How can we leverage technology to find higher risk transactions? ► Advanced analytics ► Key word searches on text fields in GL or T&E systems
► Who should conduct these audits?
► Experience (how many of the auditors have ever seen a bribe?) ► Local expertise (how many have ever seen a bribe in India?) ► Training
► Who should be interviewed?
► Employees ► Vendors?
50
Higher risk ledger accounts and expenses
► Obtain listing of major customers and identify potentially high risk customer contracts
► From the chart of accounts and trial balance, select higher risk accounts for testing, examples would include: ► Travel and Lodging ► Gifts and entertainment ► Marketing and consulting fees ► Customs and duties; freight forwarding charges ► Visas, permits and licenses ► Audit and tax consulting fees; legal fees ► Sales commissions ► Donations, charities, sponsorships, community/social responsibility payments,
political contributions ► Security ► Facilitation payments (if any) ► Client travel and production facility visits ► Capital expenditure; facilities
52
‘follow up charges’
‘redemption charges’
‘renewal charges’
‘consultancy charges’
‘securing consent’
‘for government liaisoning’
‘for obtaining license’
Some potential red flag narration in vouchers
for miscellaneous work’
‘for facilitating permits’
‘for clearances’
‘for obtaining approvals’
‘for government entertainment’
‘gifts for government officials’
‘meals with government officials’
‘for processing’
‘other charges’
‘documentation charges’
‘to expedite approval’
‘environment consultancy charges’
‘for getting NOC’
‘retainership for statutory compliance’
‘incidental expenses’
‘examination charges’
53
Example of higher risk transaction selections
GL Account DocumentNo Reference Doc. Date Amount Curr. Textxxxxxx 1900004156 ADV. ADJUST. 20.03.201x 12,000.00 INR SECL Entertainment Charges-Feb-Mar-1xxxxxxx 1900004800 ADV. ADJUST. 08.12.201x 10,000.00 INR Entertain. Exp.-to SECL BSP Staff Dt 13.8.1xxxxxxx 1900005296 BILL-99/2013-14 01.08.201x 10,000.00 INR Charge for Representation,hearing VAT/CST 4QE31.03.11xxxxxx 100013020 PROVISION DEC12 31.12.201x 3,500.00 INR Prof.Fees of Sales Tax Consultant xxxxxx 1900005430 - 02.12.201x 100,000.00 INR Advertisement to MGMI for Workshop
56
Thank You
Jay Holtmeier Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP (212) 295-6413 [email protected] Elizabeth D. Keating Johnson Controls, Inc. (414) 426-9506 [email protected] Michael Stavridis Ernst & Young LLP (312) 879-2048 [email protected]