Arkansas Democrat-Gazette

Bribery case in stalemate for Walmart

Insistence on misconduct admission said to be snag

- TOM SCHOENBERG BLOOMBERG NEWS

Walmart set aside nearly $300 million last fall for a possible resolution with the U.S. government over internatio­nal bribery allegation­s, a sign that an end to the yearslong investigat­ion was imminent.

But eight months later, the sides are deadlocked, three people familiar with the matter said. It’s not about the money: One source of tension is prosecutor­s’ insistence that Walmart, the world’s largest retailer, admit to certain misconduct as part of any deal, one of the people said.

The standoff leaves unfinished one of the biggest foreign-corruption investigat­ions of a U.S. company in history, a case that put a spotlight on the obscure Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. For six years, U.S. authoritie­s have investigat­ed whether Walmart bribed government officials in countries including Mexico, India and China over the course of a decade to fast-track store openings.

Walmart’s apparent resistance to a mea culpa isn’t the only obstacle to a deal. There’s also a delay with the Securities and Exchange Commission part of the case. The two sides have yet to exchange critical documents to finalize the deal, another person said. It’s unclear what’s causing the delay, the person said.

Complicati­ng matters, staff members at the investigat­ing agencies have turned over in the first 18 months of President Donald Trump’s administra­tion, leaving the Justice Department prosecutor overseeing the case in a holding pattern. And until recently, the Justice Department unit running the investigat­ion has been without a Senate-confirmed overseer who could help break any impasse.

At the same time, Walmart hired the Justice Department’s No. 3 official, Rachel Brand, as executive vice president. As associate attorney general, Brand wasn’t involved in the Walmart investigat­ion and had no oversight of the unit preparing the case. Walmart said Brand was complying with federal rules regarding contact with the Justice Department. Since Brand wasn’t overseeing the matter, she probably has few restrictio­ns, according to former prosecutor­s.

“We are continuing discussion­s with the government agencies as we work to reach a resolution,” Walmart said in a written statement.

The Justice Department and SEC declined to comment.

A recent grand jury battle in Virginia offers a glimpse at the pressure the government tried to put on Walmart. The company wasn’t identified in the proceeding­s, a common practice in the grand jury process, but two people familiar with the matter confirmed that the company was Walmart.

Prosecutor­s issued a subpoena in November 2016 to compel grand jury testimony from a former general counsel of a Walmart subsidiary who had been previously interviewe­d by investigat­ors four years earlier. But after Walmart objected, a federal appeals court in June sided with the company, concluding that forcing the lawyer to testify against his former employer would violate an earlier agreement between the parties.

The ruling could make it harder for the Justice Department to prosecute future corporate fraud and corruption cases where such agreements are used to gather evidence, according to former federal prosecutor­s who reviewed the June 27 decision.

But the ruling and the recent addition of Brian Benczkowsk­i, who was confirmed in July to lead the Justice Department’s criminal division, which is responsibl­e for foreign-corruption cases, could help move negotiatio­ns forward.

Walmart disclosed possible violations in Mexico to the Justice Department and SEC in November 2011. The following year, The New York Times outlined details of allegation­s that the retailer paid some $24 million to Mexican officials to win quick zoning changes, sidestep licenses and environmen­tal permits and deflect opposition to opening stores, turning Walmart into that country’s largest privatesec­tor employer.

The Walmart case posed challenges for investigat­ors. Much of the conduct uncovered in Mexico, for example, couldn’t be used as evidence because it was too old, according to the people familiar with the matter. So the government sought to build stronger cases in other countries. In Brazil and India, investigat­ors found more recent examples of what they believed were improper payments, yet struggled to find examples of misconduct in China, the people said.

Walmart has spent about $900 million on legal fees and other costs stemming from the investigat­ion, including a global overhaul of its internal compliance systems, the company has said.

 ?? AP/MARK SCHIEFELBE­IN ?? A fresh-produce sale is advertised at a Beijing Walmart. A U.S. investigat­ion into whether Walmart bribed foreign officials has gone on for six years.
AP/MARK SCHIEFELBE­IN A fresh-produce sale is advertised at a Beijing Walmart. A U.S. investigat­ion into whether Walmart bribed foreign officials has gone on for six years.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States