Business gifts (anti-bribery law, EU)

01The gesture and its intended meaning

Offering a business gift is, across much of the world, a ritual of respect and of maintaining the relationship. In Europe and the United States the act remains lawful, but it has been taken over by the law - and contrary to a very widespread belief, none of the major anti-bribery statutes sets a figure above which a gift would become illegal: not French law no. 2016-1691 of 9 December 2016 (known as Sapin II), not the UK Bribery Act 2010, not the American FCPA of 1977. What these texts punish is the improper quid pro quo: the advantage offered or received in order to obtain an act, an abstention or a decision. The monetary caps that executives encounter (30, 50 or 150 euros depending on the company) are internal corporate policies, not the law. In France, article 17 of Sapin II requires companies with at least 500 employees and revenue above 100 million euros to run an anti-bribery programme in eight measures, including a code of conduct incorporated into the internal rules - that is where gift and hospitality policies live. The French Anti-Corruption Agency (AFA), in its practical guide devoted to gift policies and in its recommendations published in the Official Journal on 12 January 2021, likewise sets no amount: it leaves each organisation free to choose between a monetary threshold and qualitative descriptors ("symbolic", "reasonable", "modest") supported by illustrations, and reasons on three criteria - the purpose, the value and the frequency of the gift or hospitality.

02Where it goes wrong: geography of the misunderstanding

The misunderstanding runs both ways. A partner from a culture where the business gift is an expected ritual (China, Japan, the Gulf) offers an expensive present to a European or American counterpart, who reads it as an attempt to exert influence, refuses it or discloses it to compliance; the blunt refusal, in turn, can humiliate the giver, for whom the object expressed respect, not the purchase of a decision. Conversely, the Western executive trained in anti-bribery programmes arrives empty-handed where the absence of a gift reads as coldness. Three qualifications keep this from becoming a caricature. First, the UK Bribery Act, often presented as the strictest text (no exception for facilitation payments, private-sector bribery covered, the section 7 offence of failure to prevent bribery with its adequate procedures defence), does not prohibit hospitality: the guidance of the British Ministry of Justice (2011) expressly states that hospitality which is reasonable, proportionate and offered in good faith is a normal part of business life. Second, the FCPA reaches only the bribery of foreign public officials: since 1988 it has had an exception for facilitation payments (routine administrative acts) and a defence for reasonable and good-faith promotional or demonstration expenses - saying that it "prohibits even small gifts" is false. Third, the so-called gift cultures have criminal red lines of their own: the conviction of GSK in China (2014) was a brutal reminder that the cultural argument protects no one.

03Historical origins

The FCPA (Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, 1977), passed in the wake of Watergate and of the revelations about the slush funds of American multinationals (the Lockheed scandal), is the first national statute punishing the bribery of foreign public officials. The OECD convention signed in Paris on 17 December 1997 (in force on 15 February 1999) turned that standard into an international one. The UK Bribery Act received royal assent on 8 April 2010 and came into force on 1 July 2011. France legislated under pressure: the OECD working group on bribery repeatedly found its framework inadequate - no French company definitively convicted of bribing foreign public officials - while its flagship firms settled at great cost with American prosecutors (Alstom pleaded guilty on 22 December 2014 and paid 772 million dollars). Sapin II (2016) is the answer: a mandatory compliance programme, the creation of the AFA, and a French version of the deferred prosecution agreement (CJIP). Corporate gift policies descend from this recent history - they do not codify an old etiquette, they manage a criminal risk.

04Documented cases

Three cases structure the field. Siemens: on 15 December 2008 the group agreed to pay roughly 1.6 billion dollars in total - 450 million to the Department of Justice, 350 million to the SEC (then the heaviest FCPA sanction in history) and 395 million euros to the Munich prosecutor's office - for a worldwide system of concealed payments (Venezuela, China, Israel, Bangladesh, Nigeria, Argentina, Russia). GSK: on 19 September 2014 the Changsha Intermediate People's Court (Hunan) fined the laboratory's Chinese subsidiary 3 billion yuan (about 490 million dollars) for a system of bribery of doctors and hospitals funded through more than 700 travel agencies - trips, conferences and benefits offered to prescribers; the former country head Mark Reilly received a suspended sentence and was deported. Airbus: on 31 January 2020 the CJIP concluded with the French National Financial Prosecutor's Office was approved - 2.083 billion euros for France, about 3.6 billion in total together with the British SFO and the American DOJ - for bribery through consultants and intermediaries between 2004 and 2016; it was the first coordinated PNF-SFO-DOJ resolution, and a demonstration that "hospitality" offered to decision-makers falls within the scope of investigations.

05Practical recommendations

Before any cross-border exchange of gifts, read both internal policies involved - your own and that of the partner's organisation: it is almost always the corporate policy, not the law, that sets the amounts. Never cash or cash equivalents (gift cards), never during a tender or an ongoing negotiation, maximum caution if the counterpart is a public official (tolerance is close to zero everywhere). Document: a gift recorded in a register is almost never a problem; a concealed gift almost always is. To refuse without humiliating: invoke your corporate policy ("my code forbids it, and it applies to everyone") rather than a judgement on the gesture, and offer to share the present with the team or to hand it over to the organisation. To give within a gift culture: stay with the carefully chosen symbolic object (something from your region, a book, a local speciality) handed over with the local forms - it is the thought that conveys respect, not the price. In case of doubt, the question to ask is the AFA's three criteria - purpose, value, frequency - and the simple test: would this gift be awkward if it became public?

Geography of misunderstanding

Historical origins

Encadrement récent : FCPA américain (1977, sillage Watergate/Lockheed), convention OCDE du 17 décembre 1997 (en vigueur 15 février 1999), UK Bribery Act 2010 (en vigueur 1er juillet 2011), loi française Sapin II du 9 décembre 2016 (art. 17 : programme obligatoire au-delà de 500 salariés et 100 M EUR de CA), guide et recommandations AFA (JO 12 janvier 2021). Aucun de ces textes ne fixe de seuil chiffré pour les cadeaux : les plafonds sont des politiques internes d'entreprise.

Documented incidents

• 2008 — Le 15 décembre 2008, Siemens accepte de payer environ 1,6 milliard de dollars au total : 450 millions d'amende pénale au DOJ et 350 millions à la SEC (plus lourde sanction FCPA de l'époque), plus 395 millions d'euros au parquet de Munich, pour un système mondial de paiements occultes à des agents publics (Venezuela, Chine, Israël, Bangladesh, Nigeria, Argentine, Russie). (DOJ, communiqué n° 08-crm-1105, 15 décembre 2008 ; SEC, communiqué 2008-294 ; NPR, 16 décembre 2008.)
• 2014 — Le 19 septembre 2014, la filiale chinoise de GlaxoSmithKline est condamnée à 3 milliards de yuans d'amende (environ 490 millions de dollars) pour corruption de médecins, d'hôpitaux et d'associations médicales via plus de 700 agences de voyages et sociétés de conseil — voyages, conférences et avantages aux prescripteurs. L'ex-directeur pays Mark Reilly est condamné à trois ans avec sursis puis expulsé. La plus lourde amende alors prononcée en Chine contre une entreprise étrangère : les « cultures du cadeau » ont aussi leurs lignes rouges pénales. (CNN Money, 19 septembre 2014 ; CBC News ; GSK, Form 6-K (SEC), 2014.)
• 2020 — Le 31 janvier 2020 est validée la convention judiciaire d'intérêt public conclue entre Airbus et le Parquet national financier : 2,083 milliards d'euros pour la France, environ 3,6 milliards au total avec les accords parallèles SFO et DOJ, pour des faits de corruption d'agents publics étrangers et de corruption privée via consultants et intermédiaires (2004-2016). Première résolution coordonnée PNF-SFO-DOJ et illustration du dispositif né de Sapin II. (Communiqué du PNF, 30-31 janvier 2020 ; Dalloz Actualité, février 2020.)

Practical recommendations

Neutral alternatives

• Invitation professionnelle raisonnable et transparente (repas de travail) plutôt qu'objet coûteux
• Cadeau partagé à l'équipe plutôt qu'à la personne
• Don à une œuvre au nom du partenaire, si les politiques des deux parties le permettent

Sources · 7