Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Boeing keeps setting new highs! When will it split? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neil H who wrote (2142)	3/2/1999 10:50:00 AM
From: campe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3764

With all the contracts airbus got in 1998 and to lose 200 million tells me they lowballed the bids to win the work and get their foot in the door. It doesn't seem like that was their only tactic to "get their foot in the door...read on... February 23, 1999 World-Wide U.S. Says Bribes Often Taint Bids for Foreign Contracts By GLENN R. SIMPSON Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL WASHINGTON -- The U.S. government received allegations that bribes were used to influence the outcome of 239 international contract competitions between May 1994 and April 1998. The data help explain the Clinton administration's aggressive push for new international agreements against corruption. A lot is at stake: The contracts totaled $108 billion. The findings were provided by several U.S. officials, who refused to confirm the source of the information. The Central Intelligence Agency has been collecting such data in recent years as it has adopted a more active role in economic affairs. Airbus Is Frequently Cited Most of the allegations were against corporations based in wealthy industrialized nations, and a handful of large multinationals were the subject of repeated allegations. The European consortium Airbus Industrie was frequently cited, according to the U.S. officials. Airbus has faced such accusations over the years "from various jealous parties," but doesn't engage in such practices, said spokeswoman Mary Anne Greczyn. "We operate on a daily basis with an entirely clear conscience." About half the allegedly tainted contracts involved military procurement. Other prominent sectors were aerospace, communications, infrastructure, energy and transportation. On the receiving end, policy makers tend to be more corrupt than lawmakers: About 70% of the alleged bribes were offered or paid to ministry or executive-branch officials. In the U.S., the 1977 Foreign Corrupt Practices Act prohibits bribery across borders. Bribes are usually effective: In competitions with known outcomes, the company that allegedly paid a bribe won the contract, according to the findings. There isn't always honor among bribe recipients, however: It's not uncommon for companies that pay bribes to lose out to competitors that pay more. About 75% of the cases involve allegations of bribe-paying by companies that are based in countries belonging to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, which Monday opened a conference on the role of corporations in transnational bribery. Until recently, most OECD countries hadn't any laws against such bribery. But last week, a major OECD bribery treaty that commits member countries to such laws took effect. Drive by Gore A second corruption conference, focusing on the role of judicial and law-enforcement officials, will open here Wednesday. That meeting is being organized by Vice President Al Gore, who is leading a drive to make international corruption a major agenda item in the Clinton administration's final two years. U.S. officials said they have been disappointed in the lack of progress that some countries, particularly France, have made on the treaty. They also criticized what they said were weak penalties in Japan's new antibribery law: as much as three years in jail and a $20,000 fine for individuals, and a maximum fine of $2 million for corporations. A spokesman for the Japanese government wasn't available for comment. France has neither ratified the treaty nor taken up implementing legislation, and it has declined to share drafts of its legislation with the U.S. Denis Matton, a spokesman for the French government, said the French parliament is expected to take up the treaty this spring. He said the legislation will include penalties of as much as $200,000 in fines and 10 years in jail. While France has recently outlawed taking tax deductions for bribes, the restriction won't take effect until the treaty is ratified. Even then, a U.S. official said, it won't cover contracts already in progress. France and Germany have been cited in internal U.S. government reports as the countries whose companies pay the most bribes. U.S. officials said they are pleased with the actions taken by Germany, which this month implemented a tough new antibribery law. "France is the biggie," Commerce Secretary William Daley said in an interview. But in recent weeks, the treaty has become increasingly controversial in France. "Through the French media, many French businessmen and some politicians are taking a hard line, indicating the entire antibribery campaign is a ploy by the U.S. government and U.S. companies to regain competitive advantage," said Seth Goldschlager, French co-director of the Coalition for Fair International Business Practices, a group of multinationals pushing for strong antibribery laws. Mr. Daley said the scandal over alleged bribes paid by Salt Lake City to win the 2002 Olympics, currently the subject of a major Justice Department inquiry, shows that "we're not just lecturing people." In a speech to the OECD conference, Mr. Daley called on four European holdouts -- France, Belgium, Italy and the Netherlands -- to ratify the treaty. ''They had promised to ratify it by the end of 1998,'' he noted. Copyright © 1999 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.