Since Donald Trump took office, his administration has initiated a significant shift in its enforcement policy regarding corruption, money laundering and financing of terrorism. This shift is centered on two developments : on the one hand, a review of policies on prosecuting violations of the Foreign Corruption Practices Act (“FCPA”) and a 180-day suspension of such prosecutions (I). On the other hand, the reorientation of federal enforcement policy towards the fight against organized crime. To this end, several cartels and criminal organizations have been designated as terrorist entities, while the Department of Justice has announced that it will focus its efforts on the fight against organized crime (II).
This evolving environment is a source of concern, and even legal uncertainty, for companies that remain subject to the FCPA and face increased risks of prosecution in countries where criminal organizations targeted by the US administration are active.
I. The shift in enforcement policy regarding FCPA violations does not, at this stage, call into question the US anti-corruption efforts
By executive order dated 10 February 2025, the Trump administration announced a 180-day suspension of FCPA enforcement actions, until July 2025, to review investigation and enforcement policies and guidelines.[1] This period may be extended by 180 days at the discretion of the U.S. Attorney General.[2]
During this period, no new investigations or prosecutions for FCPA violations will be initiated, unless otherwise instructed by the Attorney General, and ongoing investigations and prosecutions will be reviewed in accordance with the administration’s general policies.[3]
The new policies and guidelines will apply immediately to ongoing investigations and prosecutions as well as those initiated thereafter.[4] Remedial measures may be taken for investigations or prosecutions that were improperly initiated.[5]
These measures are justified by the desire to promote US economic interests, as the FCPA is considered to have weakened the competitiveness of US companies and national security.[6]
Despite the temporary suspension of FCPA-related prosecutions, the legal framework of this anti-corruption legislation remains fully in force. Commentators therefore recommend that companies, particularly foreign companies or those with ties to US entities, maintain their compliance efforts. The obligations imposed by the FCPA have not been changed, and the statute of limitations—set at five years, or extended to eight years in cases of international cooperation requests—remains applicable. This means that offenses committed today could be prosecuted at a later date, particularly by a future administration. In addition, the Securities and Exchange Commission retains the ability to bring proceedings within its jurisdiction, particularly against companies listed or issuing securities in the United States, although it has announced that it will follow the recommendations of the Department of Justice.[7] In short, the current suspension should not be interpreted as a permanent exemption and calls for caution and continuity in the implementation of compliance measures.
However, on 12 May 2025, the Department of Justice announced a revision to the Criminal Division Corporate Enforcement and Voluntary Self-Disclosure Policy (“CEP”). This revision provides for a reduced penalties imposed on companies for criminal misconduct or behavior when they self-report, provided that: the disclosure is voluntary, the company has actively and fully cooperated with the authorities, appropriate corrective measures have been taken, and there are no significant aggravating circumstances.[8] Similarly, companies that acknowledge a violation within 120 days of a report by a whistleblower – and before any contact by the Department of Justice – will be eligible for non-prosecution.[9]
This reorganization is part of a broader shift in US business crime policy. In a memorandum dated 5 February 2025, the Attorney General announced a shift in enforcement priorities toward international organized crime, including cartels. This document provides for a focus of investigations and prosecutions for FCPA violations on activities that facilitate organized crime and cartels, and greater freedom for federal prosecutors to prosecute violations of the FCPA or the Foreign Extortion Prevention Act (“FEPA”) related to organized crime.[10] Another memorandum issued on the same day confirms this priority given to the fight against organized crime, adding the fight against human trafficking as an additional priority.[11]
In a memorandum dated 12 May 2025, the head of the Criminal Division of the US Department of Justice confirmed the focus on strengthening and concentrating criminal law enforcement efforts in specific “high-impact” areas, particularly those related to organized crime.[12]
II. The tightening of the US law enforcement framework in the fight against transnational crime
In parallel with developments related to the FCPA, the Trump administration, by executive order dated 20 January 2025, requested the Secretary of State to recommend the designation of certain cartels or criminal organizations as terrorist organizations.[13] Pursuant to this order, the Secretary of State designated eight criminal organizations as Foreign Terrorist Organizations (“FTO”) and Specially Designated Global Terrorists (“SDGT”).[14]
This expansion of the fight against organized crime gives US authorities broader powers to prosecute individuals who provide material support to terrorist entities designated as FTOs – an offense punishable by 20 years’ imprisonment –[15] including those with limited connections to the United States, for example through the use of US dollars, or where a person over whom the US courts have jurisdiction is involved in the transaction. As such, a company may be held liable under the direct liability provision for participating in an act of international terrorism by providing material support to an FTO,[16] or under the accessory liability provision for knowingly providing substantial support to the perpetrators of an attack committed, planned or authorized by an FTO.[17] Civil proceedings may also be considered in cases where a company has provided material support to an organization designated as terrorist.
Furthermore, pursuant to Executive Order 13224 of 23 September 2001, the US sanctions regime applies to entities designated as SDGTs, which has the effect of freezing their assets and prohibiting any transactions involving those assets.[18] These measures also apply to persons providing assistance or support to these entities.[19]
Since that date, the US authorities have implemented this policy. On 1 May 2025, the Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”) imposed sanctions on two Mexican companies, Servicios Logísticos Ambientales and Grupo Jala Logística, as well as three individuals, for their involvement in drug trafficking and fuel theft operations linked to the Jalisco Nueva Generación Cartel (“CJNG”). The authorities revealed that these companies were transporting fuel and crude oil between Mexico and the United States on behalf of individuals affiliated with the cartel.[20] Sanctions were also imposed on criminal networks and money launderers working for the Sinaloa cartel.[21]
In this context, increased vigilance should be exercised with regard to indirect transactions that may involve international criminal organizations and cartels, particularly through third parties or in the case of security or protection operations. In this regard, it is advisable to apply the standards used to combat financing of terrorism more broadly to these high-risk operations. This includes, in particular: increased vigilance with regard to stakeholders (suppliers, customers, employees, business partners, etc.), gathering accurate information on security risks, implementing policies and training on extortion, and putting in place payment controls.
Furthermore, as explained above, the role of compliance and whistleblowers is strengthened under the new enforcement policies, as rapid self-disclosure can lead to the abandonment of proceedings. By strengthening this culture of compliance, companies are giving themselves the means to identify risky behavior at an earlier stage and thus benefit from the leniency measures provided for by the authorities.
The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”) has also identified a list of “red flags” to identify potential business relationships and transactions with FTOs in the hydrocarbon sector.[22] Among these indicators, it should be noted that particular vigilance should be exercised with regard to small oil and gas companies established in the United States and importers with a low online presence or imitating the websites of legitimate companies, certain suspicious transactions, such as the sale of crude oil at prices significantly below market value, large transactions involving crude oil or waste oil, particularly to or from companies located in Mexico or the United States that have little apparent connection to the industry or no online presence, to companies dealing in hazardous materials without prior registration with US authorities, to companies showing sudden and significant activity with a small number of trading partners, often shell companies linked to criminal networks, companies domiciled at residential addresses or found to be shell companies affiliated with Mexican entities. Finally, this report mentions certain companies located on the southwestern border of the United States that have links to individuals or companies associated with cartels, according to public sources, indictments, or OFAC designations.
