Record $44 Million Settlement for FCPA Violations
Client Alert | 2 min read | 04.27.07
The Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) announced yesterday that Baker Hughes, Inc. and its wholly owned subsidiary, Baker Hughes Services International Inc. (BHSI), agreed to pay a record $44 million in fines, penalties and disgorgement to settle criminal charges and a related civil complaint. The allegations include violations of the anti-bribery and books and records and internal control provisions of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA).
BHSI admitted to making $4.1 million in illegal payments to a “consulting firm” in exchange for the award of a $219.9 million contract with Kazakhoil, Kazakshstan’s national oil company. At Kazakhoil’s demand, BHSI agreed, in exchange for the contract, to pay a “commission” to the “consulting firm” consisting of 2-3 percent of revenue earned on the project and future projects .
BHSI agreed, as part of a deferred prosecution agreement with the DOJ, to pay a criminal fine of $11 million, serve three years of organizational probation, and adopt a comprehensive anti-bribery compliance program. Baker Hughes further agreed to hire an independent compliance monitor for three years to oversee the establishment and maintenance of a “robust compliance program” and to report regularly to the DOJ. In the related SEC settlement, Baker Hughes agreed to pay $10 million in civil penalties and more than $24 million in disgorgement of profits. Baker Hughes already had been the subject of an SEC cease and desist order in 2001 based upon claims that it made payments to a KPMG affiliate in Indonesia knowing that some or all would be passed to an Indonesian tax official for the purpose of influencing him to reduce a tax assessment
In its announcement, the DOJ said that the resolution of the case reflected Baker Hughes’ voluntary cooperation, including self-reporting to the DOJ, conducting a thorough internal investigation, and taking “significant remedial steps.” The SEC also acknowledged Baker Hughes’ cooperation.
This case – and the record $44 million settlement – is the latest in a series of stark reminders that the DOJ and SEC are prioritizing FCPA enforcement efforts. Companies must be mindful of the significant civil and criminal exposure posed by the government’s multi-pronged approach to FCPA prosecutions. The Baker Hughes settlement reemphasizes the need for companies engaged in international business to exercise appropriate due diligence when retaining foreign intermediaries and to be vigilant in supervising their activities. In particular, companies must ensure that “consultants” serve a legitimate business function, that all payments are proportionate to the value received, and that all payments are accurately recorded on the company’s books.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.12.25
Eleventh Circuit Hears Argument on False Claims Act Qui Tam Constitutionality
On the morning of December 12, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit heard argument in United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC, et al., No. 24-13581 (11th Cir. 2025). This case concerns the constitutionality of the False Claims Act (FCA) qui tam provisions and a groundbreaking September 2024 opinion in which the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida held that the FCA’s qui tam provisions were unconstitutional under Article II. See United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Fla. Med. Assocs., LLC, 751 F. Supp. 3d 1293 (M.D. Fla. 2024). That decision, penned by District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, was the first success story for a legal theory that has been gaining steam ever since Justices Thomas, Barrett, and Kavanaugh indicated they would be willing to consider arguments about the constitutionality of the qui tam provisions in U.S. ex rel. Polansky v. Exec. Health Res., 599 U.S. 419 (2023). In her opinion, Judge Mizelle held (1) qui tam relators are officers of the U.S. who must be appointed under the Appointments Clause; and (2) historical practice treating qui tam and similar relators as less than “officers” for constitutional purposes was not enough to save the qui tam provisions from the fundamental Article II infirmity the court identified. That ruling was appealed and, after full briefing, including by the government and a bevy of amici, the litigants stepped up to the plate this morning for oral argument.
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.11.25
Director Squires Revamps the Workings of the U.S. Patent Office
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.10.25
Creativity You Can Use: CJEU Clarifies Copyright for Applied Art
Client Alert | 4 min read | 12.10.25
Federal Court Strikes Down Interior Order Suspending Wind Energy Development
