A six-month pause in DOJ enforcement, followed by narrower charging priorities, ongoing SEC activity and FEPA-driven solicitation exposure, is reshaping how corruption risk is assessed across the region.
The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) entered new territory in February 2025, when the White House suspended Department of Justice (DOJ) enforcement for six months. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) remained active. In June, the DOJ issued the Blanche Guidelines, narrowing priorities to cases with direct US interests, including harm to American companies, exposure in strategic sectors such as energy and infrastructure, or links to organised crime. Smaller cases were closed or deprioritised, leaving a reduced pipeline. Alongside these shifts, the Foreign Extortion Prevention Act (FEPA), adopted in 2023, adds a distinct trigger: solicitation by foreign officials becomes a federal offence, increasing the importance of recording, escalating and responding properly to any solicitation.
A changing enforcement landscape
The February 2025 pause did not remove corruption exposure. It altered the enforcement posture, with a temporary suspension of DOJ activity occurring alongside continued SEC engagement. The June 2025 Blanche Guidelines then narrowed DOJ priorities towards cases framed around direct US interests, including harm to American companies, strategic-sector exposure and organised crime links, while smaller matters were closed or deprioritised.
The practical implication is not a lower risk environment but a more selective one, in which enforcement attention is concentrated and the pipeline is reduced without disappearing. Latin America, given the combination of state-linked counterparties, strategic sectors and procurement exposure, provides repeated test cases for how that selectivity is applied.
Latin America as a testing ground
The first post-pause test came in Mexico. In August 2025, two businessmen resident in Texas were indicted for paying cash and luxury goods to officials at Pemex, Mexico’s state oil company, to secure contracts worth about USD 2.5 million. Court filings in late September confirmed prosecutors would not pursue earlier cartel allegations at trial, but will proceed on the bribery charges.
Brazil remains central. In July, Seatrium, a Singaporean shipbuilding group, signed a leniency agreement with Brazilian authorities over legacy Petrobras contracts. A month later, Keppel filed a claim worth more than USD 53 million in arbitration against Seatrium to recover costs. In parallel, the Comptroller General and Attorney General continued consultations to reform Brazil’s framework for leniency agreements, signalling a more assertive domestic enforcement regime.
Political shockwaves and third-country pressure
Argentina illustrates how corruption cases can trigger political and market volatility. In August, an investigation into alleged kickbacks in medicine procurement reached President Javier Milei’s inner circle, including his chief of staff and sister. Raids and testimony provoked protests and sent markets down, showing how investigations can translate into immediate reputational and financial pressure.
Older scandals still resonate. In April, a Peruvian court sentenced former president Ollanta Humala and his wife Nadine Heredia to 15 years for laundering funds from Odebrecht. In Costa Rica, the Constitutional Court requested permission to prosecute President Rodrigo Chaves for corruption, but on 23 September Congress declined to lift his immunity, freezing the case until he leaves office.
Enforcement is not confined to the region. In August, Swiss regulators fined J. Safra Sarasin for anti-money-laundering failures tied to Petrobras-linked corruption and required a settlement with the Brazilian state oil firm.
Implications for business
The picture that emerges is a more fragmented exposure landscape. Selective DOJ priorities operate alongside ongoing SEC activity, more active local prosecutors, and occasional action by third-country regulators. Across Latin America, repeated case studies span energy, procurement and finance, with outcomes shaped not only by the underlying transaction but by how organisations respond under pressure.
The interaction of the FCPA and FEPA also shifts what becomes operationally material. Companies must record and escalate any request for improper payments, not only to reduce risk where possible, but also to create evidence that solicitation was resisted and handled appropriately.
Where impacts will be felt most
- State-owned enterprises as sensitive counterparties
Procurement and contracting around entities such as Pemex and Petrobras remain focal points for enforcement and reputational exposure. - Strategic sectors and public contracting environments
Energy and infrastructure sit within the DOJ’s narrowed priorities, reinforcing exposure where a US nexus is present. - High-risk procurement pressure points
Medicine procurement is explicitly highlighted as a context where allegations can trigger political and market consequences. - Cross-border financial flows
Private banks and cross-border pathways can create liability even when the misconduct dates back years. - Solicitation handling under FEPA
Recording, escalating and responding properly to solicitation becomes a central control requirement.
Strategic reading for business
For multinationals, the current landscape requires recalibration. A reduced DOJ pipeline does not remove exposure; it concentrates it under narrower priorities, while parallel enforcement dynamics remain active across jurisdictions. The result is a risk environment in which corruption-related matters can migrate quickly from compliance issues into disputes, political pressure and market impact.
Within that environment, FEPA elevates solicitation handling as a governance question. Companies must record and escalate requests for improper payments, both as a preventive measure and as a means of establishing a defensible record that solicitation was resisted.
Conclusion
The FCPA no longer functions as a single predictable standard. Companies now face selective US enforcement, ongoing SEC activity, more assertive local prosecutors and occasional third-country action, with Latin America providing repeated case studies across energy, procurement and finance. The result is not less risk but more fragmented exposure across uneven jurisdictions.
Wayport Advisors supports corporates in navigating corruption risks under fragmented enforcement, assessing third-party integrity, reinforcing compliance protocols and aligning opportunity with resilience across Latin America.
Wayport Advisors is an Intelligence and Investigations Firm headquartered in Spain with international coverage across Europe, Latin America, North America, Middle East, Africa and Asia.
Global reach, local insight.
