Name: 華府的胡蘿蔔與棍子：反壟斷吹哨者與 FCPA 時效延長！ (Carrots and Sticks in Washington: Antitrust Whistleblowers and an FCPA SOL Extension)
Uploaded: 2026-03-28T01:26:23.000Z
Duration: 15 min 52 s
Description: 【看影片學英語】數萬部 YouTube 影片，搭配英漢字典即點即查，輕鬆掌握單字發音與用法，長久累積看電影不必再看字幕。

Hello everyone, this is Tom Fox, back again with Matt Kelly for another episode of the award-winning Compliance Into the Weeds, me with a little bit deeper bass voice today.

大家好，我是Tom Fox，又和Matt Kelly一起回來了，帶來另一集的獲獎節目Compliance Into the Weeds，我今天聲音低沉了一點。

So Matt, I think we're going to look at two sides of the same coin, perhaps, or perhaps at looking at one problem in two different ways that I think is going to be fascinating for compliance professionals to consider.

所以Matt，我想我們要看的是同一枚硬幣的兩面，或者說，用兩種不同的方式來看待同一個問題，我認為這對合規專業人士來說會非常有趣。

So with that enigmatic opening, you want to set the stage?

那麼，以這樣一個神祕的開場，你想鋪陳一下嗎？

Sure, so these are two different news items that have both emerged from Washington within the last week or so, one from the Trump administration on antitrust enforcement, where basically one of the top antitrust enforcers in Washington is warning companies that you must take your antitrust compliance and self-disclosure seriously because he is rocking and rolling with whistleblower awards and heavy prosecution of individuals to pressure companies to get ahead of the whistleblower or somebody flipping on you risk.

當然，這是最近一週內從華盛頓傳出的兩則不同的新聞，一則是來自川普政府關於反壟斷執法的消息，基本上，華盛頓的一位頂級反壟斷官員警告企業，你們必須認真對待反壟斷合規和自我披露，因為他正在大力推動吹哨獎勵和對個人的嚴厲起訴，以迫使企業搶在吹哨者之前行動，或是面臨有人告發的風險。

And then issue number two actually comes from the Democratic side in the Senate, where just yesterday, on Monday, March 9, a bunch of leading Senate Democrats proposed the FCPA Reinforcement Act, which would extend the statute of limitations on FCPA violations from 5 years to 10, where their message was expressly that they want to give some future administration, presumably in Democratic hands, more time to be able to enforce against FCPA violations that might be happening right now, that they believe the Trump administration is not seriously enforcing,

然後第二件事其實來自參議院的民主黨這邊，就在昨天，也就是3月9日星期一，一群主要的參議院民主黨人提出了《FCPA強化法案》，將FCPA違規的追訴時效從5年延長到10年，他們的訊息很明確，就是希望給未來的政府，假設是民主黨執政，更多時間來追究現在可能發生的FCPA違規行為，他們認為川普政府並沒有認真執法，

and they do have some merit to that belief.

而且他們的這個想法確實有些道理。

But Tom, I would submit, when you think about it, both of these things, the antitrust statements coming out of the Trump administration, the FCPA reinforcement coming from Senate Democrats, they're both leaning on companies to, guys, take this compliance stuff seriously because if we have a chance to hold companies accountable, we will build the mechanisms to be able to.

但Tom，我認為，當你仔細想想，這兩件事，川普政府的反壟斷聲明，參議院民主黨提出的FCPA強化，它們都在敦促企業，各位，認真對待這些合規事務，因為如果我們有機會追究企業的責任，我們就會建立相應的機制。

When the push comes to shove, we can talk about it a bit.

真的到了關鍵時刻，我們可以稍微聊一下。

But really, for compliance officers, these are two messages about why your compliance efforts still matter, even today when a lot of cynics think that ethics and compliance went out of style with the Joe Biden administration.

但說真的，對於合規官員來說，這兩件事都在傳達一個訊息：即使現在很多人覺得道德和合規隨著拜登政府上臺就過時了，但你們的合規努力依然重要。

Matt, I'm going to put this question in the queue to maybe explore at the end,

Matt，我會把這個問題先放進待辦事項，也許到最後再一起探討，

but it struck me as listening to you that does the Jay Clayton SD&Y new declination policy perhaps even touch on that?

但聽你說的時候，我突然想到，Jay Clayton 的 SD&Y 新的免訴政策，會不會也觸及到這一點？

And I don't want an answer now, but I'm going to maybe explore that at the end.

我現在不需要答案，但之後也許會深入探討。

So why don't we go through each one of those in a little bit more detail?

那麼，我們就來一一詳細聊聊這些內容吧？

What did you see in there, new different or things that the corporate compliance officer needs to be cognizant, aware of,

你在裡面看到了什麼新的、不一樣的，或是企業合規官需要注意、意識到，

Sure, so this was a speech from one of the senior Justice Department officials by a man by the name of Daniel Gladd.

好的，這是一場由司法部一位名叫 Daniel Gladd 的資深官員發表的演講。

He is the acting deputy assistant attorney general.

Also, prior to this role, he was in charge of the Justice Department's procurement and bid rigging fraud strike task force, which has been around for a few years,

另外，在此職位之前，他曾負責司法部的採購和圍標詐騙打擊工作組，這個工作組已經成立好幾年了，

but he talked to an antitrust enforcement conference happening in Washington last week where he talked a lot about the new antitrust whistleblower awards program and a heavy emphasis when the department is prosecuting antitrust violations against individuals.

但他上週在華盛頓參加了一場反壟斷執法會議，會中他談了很多關於新的反壟斷吹哨者獎勵計畫，以及該部門在起訴針對個人的反壟斷違規行為時非常強調這一點。

The department is now really stepping up its push for prison time for these individuals.

該部門現在正大力推動對這些個人判處牢獄之災。

And basically he said that we know exactly what we're doing here, that by enticing whistleblowers to come to us, the Justice Department, or threatening to drop the hammer on offending individuals, then we, the Justice Department, are gaining more intel about antitrust enforce activities out there.

基本上，他說我們很清楚自己在做什麼，也就是透過鼓勵吹哨者來找上我們司法部，或者威脅要嚴懲違規個人，這樣我們司法部就能獲得更多關於外界反壟斷執法活動的情報。

So you companies participating in procurement fraud, bid rigging, cartels, you people who are doing this stuff, you know who you are.

所以你們這些參與採購詐騙、圍標、卡特爾的公司，你們這些做這些事情的人，你們知道自己是誰。

He is trying to play both sides against each other here by saying that if we get wind of all of your misconduct through a whistleblower or somebody who's flipping so they won't get sent to prison for years, that's going to leave you, the company, on the back foot.

他試圖讓雙方互相對抗，他說如果我們透過吹哨者或某個為了不被判刑而坦白的線人得知你們所有不當行為，那麼你們公司就會處於劣勢。

So you, company, really should pay much more attention to your anti-cartel and antitrust risks,

所以你們公司真的應該更加註意你們的反卡特爾和反壟斷風險，

and if you find one, come forward and talk about it and don't dawdle on this.

如果你們發現了，就主動站出來談談，不要猶豫。

如果我找得到的話，我可以在這裡挖出來。

Prosecutors have seen a surge in whistleblower submissions,

檢察官收到的吹哨者檢舉案暴增，

and there is another lane in the leniency race, insider versus company.

在寬恕條款的競賽中，還有另一條路徑，就是內部員工對抗公司。

So if you, company, are aware that you have an antitrust issue and you're trying to figure out, do we disclose it?

所以如果貴公司知道自己有反壟斷問題，正在思考是否要揭露？

Traditionally, there had been the dynamic that if you're involved in a cartel and you're the first one to report it, you get the big break at the resolution and all the other cartel people, cartel participants, are going to suffer a higher price.

傳統上，有這樣的模式：如果你參與了卡特爾，你是第一個舉報的，你就能在案件結案時獲得最大的寬恕，而其他卡特爾成員、參與者，則會付出更高的代價。

Now there's a third dimension to this that if the whistleblower who's looking for an award or an individual who wants to avoid prison time, if they want to get these things, they could beat you to the punch.

現在出現了第三種情況，如果吹哨者為了獎金，或是想避免牢獄之災的個人，想要達成這些目標，他們可能會搶先一步。

So he was expressly saying that the time you're the time that you have to decide what to do with this, that's going to become compressed.

所以他明確表示，你必須決定如何處理這件事的時間，將會變得更緊迫。

So you, company, better be on what you want to do here and understand how you'll respond when you do have a cartel matter that you're suddenly aware of.

所以你們公司最好清楚自己想怎麼做，並瞭解當突然意識到有卡特爾問題時，你們將如何應對。

Let's turn over to the FCPA potential amendment.

我們來看看《反海外貪腐法》的潛在修正案。

And what do you see the senators trying to do with this?

I believe it's led by Elizabeth Warren, but it may just be the Massachusetts focus of our podcast.

我相信是由 Elizabeth Warren 領銜，但這可能只是我們 podcast 的麻薩諸塞州焦點。

So Elizabeth Warren is one of the leading sponsors of this bill.

所以 Elizabeth Warren 是這項法案的主要提案人之一。

This was unveiled yesterday by pretty much the ranking minority Democrats on all the important Senate committees.

這項法案昨天由所有重要參議院委員會的排名少數黨民主黨人提出。

Elizabeth Warren, who is ranking member on the Banking Committee, there was Sheldon Whitehouse, who is from Rhode Island.

Elizabeth Warren，她是銀行委員會的排名委員，還有來自羅德島的 Sheldon Whitehouse。

There were Dick Durbin, who is ranking member of the Judiciary Committee.

還有司法委員會的排名委員 Dick Durbin。

And all of them basically are proposing, cosigning legislation to extend the statute of limitations on FCPA violations from 5 years to 10.

而且他們基本上都在提案、連署立法，將 FCPA 違規的追訴時效從 5 年延長到 10 年。

Clearly, this is not going to be adopted today in this congressional cycle.

顯然，這項法案不會在這個國會週期內被採納。

Whenever this does come to pass, then that extended statute of limitations would only last for 5 years, or I'm sorry, would only last for 8 years,

不管怎樣，一旦這項法案通過，延長的追訴時效只會持續 5 年，或者，抱歉，只會持續 8 年，

and then the statute of limitations would revert back to the usual 5-year period unless some future Congress decides to extend it to 10 years again.

然後追訴時效就會恢復到通常的 5 年，除非未來的國會決定再次延長到 10 年。

Let's see, because their presidents run for two terms of four terms each.

我們來看看，因為他們的總統任期是兩個四年任期。

This is clearly a political stunt, although it's a quite good one, in my opinion, where they are saying that if we have a Democratic Congress to pass this law and a Democratic president to sign it into law, since Republicans will not do either of these things, then that would give that new Democratic president 8 years of a longer statute of limitations to look back at violations happening right now.

這顯然是一個政治手段，雖然在我看來，這是一個相當不錯的手段，他們在說，如果我們有民主黨國會來通過這項法律，並且有民主黨總統簽署成為法律，因為共和黨人不會做這兩件事，那麼這將會給新的民主黨總統 8 年的時間，讓他們能夠回溯追查現在發生的違規行為。

And they're trying to make sure that any company that today thinks FCPA compliance is not a big deal because it's not like we're ever going to face enforcement risk or the clock is going to run out on it and we'll be fine, that's not what the Democrats want.

他們正試圖確保，任何今天認為 FCPA 合規不是大事的公司，因為我們不會面臨執法風險，或者時間到了我們就沒事了，這不是民主黨人想要的。

They're trying to create a mechanism where some future Democratic president would be able to bring enforcement actions for stuff you're doing today because you think FCPA enforcement is not a serious risk anymore.

他們正試圖建立一個機制，讓未來的某位民主黨總統能夠針對你現在的行為採取執法行動，因為你認為 FCPA 的執法不再是嚴重的風險。

Not while Republicans are in charge of Congress.

只要共和黨掌控國會，就不會。

Might get passed next year in Congress if Democrats take over,

如果明年民主黨贏得國會，這可能會通過，

but then it's just going to be vetoed by President Trump.

So like I said, this is just a cheap political stunt in campaign season,

所以就像我說的，這只是競選期間一個廉價的政治把戲，

but it's a really good cheap political stunt as those things go.

但以這些事情來說，這是一個非常好的廉價政治把戲。

And compliance officers could take this back to your board and your senior management and your first line of defense and say, look, there are scenarios where we could face vigorous enforcement again.

合規官員可以把這件事帶回給你們的董事會、高階管理層以及第一線的防線，然後說，看，確實有可能我們會再次面臨嚴厲的執法。

Let's not screw ourselves in that future by not taking anti-corruption compliance seriously today.

我們今天不認真看待反貪腐合規，未來就會害了自己。

That is a mistake, which I believe it is true.

這是一個錯誤，我相信這是真的。

That is a mistake, but that's what's going on.

這確實是個錯誤，但這就是現在的情況。

Matt, in listening to this part of our podcast, it also strikes me that when we talked about the SD&Y Southern District of New York declination program, I think we at least implicitly recognized this was a very big carrot.

Matt，聽了我們Podcast的這一段，我也有個感覺，當我們談到SD&Y（紐約南區）的不起訴計畫時，我覺得我們至少是隱含地承認這是一根很大的胡蘿蔔。

Now, I think you've just described two very big sticks.

現在，我覺得你剛剛描述了兩根非常大的棍子。

So maybe all of this is really moving in towards one direction.

所以也許這一切都在朝著同一個方向發展。

I'm going to maybe take it either a different way or a step further because I think all of this is making the compliance function and corporate compliance officers, the compliance function more valuable and compliance officers even more important now because even without robust DOJ enforcement, it's around the corner.

我可能會從不同的角度切入，或者更深入一點，因為我認為這一切都讓合規職能和企業合規官，讓合規職能變得更有價值，合規官也變得更重要了，因為即使沒有強力的司法部執法，它也近在眼前。

And whether that's an insider whistleblower, whether that's an extended statute of limitation, or the opportunity to receive literally a declination within 14 days of self-disclosure, those are both significant carrots and sticks and emphasize, to me at least, the need for a robust compliance program that would detect these matters or prevent them.

無論是內部吹哨者，還是延長的追訴時效，或是能在自我揭露後14天內獲得不起訴的機會，這些都是非常重要的胡蘿蔔和棍子，而且對我來說，至少強調了需要一個健全的合規計畫來偵測或預防這些事情。

And I was rather surprised when I came to the conclusion that a Trump administration speech on antitrust and Senate Democrats trying to grandstand on anti-corruption, they're pretty much driving toward the same end goal, which is that companies need to have a solid compliance function that, A, can detect a violation when it happens, and

而且我還蠻驚訝地得出結論，川普政府關於反壟斷的演講，以及參議院民主黨人試圖在反貪腐議題上作秀，他們基本上都在朝著同一個終極目標邁進，那就是企業需要有一個穩健的合規職能，A、能在違規發生時偵測到，以及

then B, they need a corporate culture where they know what they want to do with it when they do become aware of the violation.

然後B、他們需要有一種企業文化，讓他們知道在意識到違規時該怎麼做。

Let me pivot back to the antitrust speech from Mr.

讓我把話題轉回關於先生的反壟斷演講。

Gladd because I did dig up the language here and I think it's telling.

很高興我挖出了這些內容，我覺得很有啟發性。

Employees, former employees, consultants, market participants, all have a financial incentive to report early with original information.

員工、前員工、顧問、市場參與者，都有在早期提供原始資訊的財務動機。

For companies in counsel, slow internal deliberation is now riskier than it used to be.

對於公司法務來說，緩慢的內部討論現在比以前更有風險。

延遲可能會失去寬大處理的機會。

Then I'll jump forward a bit to a part that I think really strikes with compliance officers.

然後我會跳到一個我認為會讓法遵主管很有感的部份。

He goes on to say, for your corporate clients he was talking to outside counsel for your corporate clients, the best defense against whistleblower reports is to create a corporate culture where employees feel empowered to report concerns internally, where those reports are investigated promptly and thoroughly,

他接著說，對於你們的企業客戶，他當時是跟企業客戶的外部律師說，對抗吹哨者舉報的最佳防禦，就是建立一種企業文化，讓員工覺得有權力在內部舉報疑慮，這些舉報會被迅速且徹底地調查，

and where companies self-report to us when they discover criminal conduct.

以及當公司發現犯罪行為時，會主動向我們自首。

So he is basically saying that you need a certain capacity to find the events and the violations,

所以他基本上是在說，你需要有某種能力來找出事件和違規行為，

but more than that, you have to have a corporate culture where you're like, we know what we want to do with this and what we want to do is disclose.

但更重要的是，你必須建立一種企業文化，讓你們覺得「我們知道我們想怎麼做，而且我們想公開」。

Maybe you want to disclose because you have federal prosecutors like Jay Clayton in New York who are pretty much going to give out declinations like candy for a lot of crimes.

也許你想公開，因為有像紐約的 Jay Clayton 這樣的聯邦檢察官，他們會像發糖果一樣，對很多犯罪行為給予不起訴處分。

Or maybe you are just preparing for that because there are future scenarios that I do not think are far-fetched where Democrats are running Washington again and they are going to go, I think, hog wild on companies that especially were involved in corruption with the Trump administration.

或者你只是在為此做準備，因為我認為未來並非遙不可及的場景是，民主黨人再次執掌華盛頓，而且他們會對那些特別是與川普政府有腐敗關係的公司，大肆進行打擊。

And we have seen multiple examples of big businesses kicking large donations to the Trump family or they are in business with Trump's sons and the Trump organization and the businesses that those people are doing, which are clearly involved and have a lot of connections to government contracting.

我們已經看到許多大企業向川普家族捐贈大筆款項，或者他們與川普的兒子和川普組織有生意往來，而這些人所做的生意，顯然與政府合約有關聯，並且有許多連結。

There's a lot that stinks about what's going on in the Trump administration now.

川普政府現在的許多做法都讓人覺得很不對勁。

And are they going to be looking to enforce against those parties?

他們可以對唐納·川普進行執法嗎？