Jesus. Please no one take that as legal advice. Paying a bribe to get preferential treatment (even if that treatment is just to get the person to do their actual job) is a bribe none the less.
Paying an official to perform their job (perform a "routine governmental action") is a facilitating payment and is an exemption from the prohibitions of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.
The point with a facilitating payment is that you've done everything that's actually required by law to e.g. get a business license and the official is still giving you the run-around, you are allowed to pay them. It doesn't apply in cases that relate to paying decision makers for contracts, for example.
If you're thinking about doing this, you should absolutely consult a lawyer, but the post above is wrong on the general construction of the law.
Yeah, dude doesn't deserve getting downvoted as hard as he is. Neither the "You'll get killed by FCPA" nor the "FCPA lets you do this" comments are legal advice. But what you're saying is, in fact, true. It allows US companies to continue to be competitive in places where this stuff is expected.
It's an obvious exemption in FCPA that would be surprising to the majority of people, hence why I posted the gist of it. That earns you a "Jesus" by clueless people on HN these days.
That's interesting. In the UK these would also be considered bribes. From a quick search the US and Australia are the the only countries with this principle.
Maybe. From the multitude of FCPA training I’ve had to endure, you can pay to have processing expedited if there is an official policy for it. You cannot pay $1K to the head of the office because he hints that it will speed things up.
Technically, you’re not even protected if you hire a local agent to do all of this for you.