On February 10, 2025, President Donald J. Trump signed an Executive Order titled “Pausing Foreign Corrupt Practices Act Enforcement to Further American Economic and National Security.” This action suspended the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) initiation of new investigations and prosecutions under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) for 180 days, with the option of an extension. It marked a deliberate shift in how the United States approaches foreign anti-corruption enforcement.

This summary examines the policy change, the rationale behind it, and what it signals for corporations, enforcement agencies, and the global compliance environment.

1. The Executive Pause: A Mandated Hold on FCPA Actions

The Executive Order temporarily halted new DOJ-led FCPA investigations and prosecutions. The Attorney General was directed to suspend new enforcement actions and review all existing cases to ensure they align with broader American foreign policy and economic interests. Following this review, new enforcement guidelines will be issued to reflect updated priorities.

While the Attorney General retains discretion to authorize exceptions on a case-by-case basis, the intent is to shift from blanket enforcement toward a more targeted and strategic approach.

2. Rationale for the Pause: Rethinking the Scope of Enforcement

The administration justified the pause by pointing to concerns over expansive and inconsistent enforcement of the FCPA, which they argued had placed U.S. businesses at a competitive disadvantage internationally. Critics of the current regime noted that enforcement actions often targeted conduct common in international business and that lacked clarity or consistency.

Supporters of the pause argue that this reset allows the U.S. to refocus enforcement on cases that genuinely implicate national security or strategic economic interests, while ensuring American companies are not unfairly burdened in global markets.

3. FCPA Remains the Law

The FCPA has not been repealed. It remains a binding statute, and its provisions against bribery and improper accounting continue to apply. The Executive Order alters enforcement priorities but does not eliminate legal obligations.

With the statute of limitations typically running five years, conduct during the pause remains subject to future investigation. As such, businesses should maintain their compliance programs and internal controls.

4. Role of the Attorney General: Review and Reform

The Attorney General has been tasked with:

• Pausing all new DOJ FCPA enforcement actions unless individually authorized.
• Reviewing ongoing investigations for alignment with national interest.
• Issuing updated guidance that reflects foreign policy prerogatives and economic competitiveness.

Additionally, the Attorney General may recommend remedial action regarding prior enforcement efforts if found inconsistent with the new approach.

5. SEC Enforcement Continues

The Executive Order applies only to criminal enforcement by the DOJ. Civil enforcement by the SEC remains unaffected. The SEC retains full authority to pursue violations related to accounting and internal controls, especially among publicly traded companies.

6. A Strategic Pause, Not a Shield

The enforcement pause should not be misread as immunity. Future administrations may resume more aggressive enforcement, and the statute of limitations means that present conduct can still carry future consequences. Companies should continue documenting compliance activities and be prepared for possible regulatory changes.

7. International Enforcement Dynamics

With the DOJ stepping back temporarily, foreign enforcement bodies may increase their activity. European authorities in particular have robust anti-bribery regimes and may pursue cases unilaterally or in coordination with one another.

This shift could redistribute rather than reduce global enforcement activity. Companies operating internationally should remain attuned to non-U.S. regulatory expectations.

8. The Continued Importance of Compliance

Strong compliance programs remain essential. While the policy shift introduces a different enforcement emphasis, it does not reduce the risks posed by missteps in high-risk jurisdictions. Ethical practices, internal reporting channels, and effective oversight remain key safeguards.

Bottom line: the pause in FCPA enforcement represents a recalibration of U.S. enforcement policy, not an abandonment of anti-corruption principles. It aims to align enforcement with broader economic and geopolitical strategies while maintaining the rule of law.

For businesses, this is a moment to reassess and refine compliance frameworks, not to relax them. The direction may have shifted, but the underlying terrain remains complex. Navigating it thoughtfully remains the surest path forward.