"and even providing excessive tax breaks. The greatest considerations for whether a giftconstitutes a bribe are whether it seeks to sway the public official’s opinion to favor the bribingcompany and whether the bribe was willful and intentional. Intent is essential in establishingliability.UNITED KINGDOM BRIBERY ACTThe first law dealing with bribery in the United Kingdom was passed in 1889. The law, calledthe Public Bodies Corrupt Practices Act, outlawed the bribery of any official working under thecapacity of a public body. The act was followed by the Prevention of Corruption Acts in 1906and 1916. However, as the United Kingdom became more globalized, these acts were regardedas unsuitable for complying with international anti-corruption agreements. Pressure increased toreform these laws. In 2008 a working party for the Organisation for Economic Co-operation andDevelopment (OECD) insisted on new regulation. In 2009 a bribery bill was introduced, andeventually became the Bribery Act of 2010. It took effect in 2011. While many herald theBribery Act as taking a strong stance against bribery and corruption, others believe the law mayactually be too harsh. Concern that items traditionally seen as gifts could now be perceived asbribes have prompted many companies to update their anti-corruption policies and codes ofconduct. The Bribery Act includes provisions against all forms of bribery. The Act states the twogeneral offenses as, first, the offering, promising, or giving of a bribe to any government official,and second, the acceptance or request for a bribe by any government official. The Bribery Actplaces liability on organizations for not detecting bribery in their operations and failing to adoptadequate procedures to detect bribes. This part of the Act is unusual because it is a “strictliability” offense, meaning the organization’s intent is irrelevant; if it BK-CHE-FERRELL_11E-150190-Case 18.indd 601Copyright 2017 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, orduplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may besuppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressedcontent does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves theright to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.602 Part 5: Casesfails to adequately detect bribery for whatever reason, even if it acted in good faith, it is liable.The Bribery Act extends to companies within the United Kingdom operating abroad and tocompanies present in the United Kingdom. In other words, any company with operations in theUnited Kingdom is subject to this law. While penalties vary, violating the Bribery Act can carrya maximum of 10 years in prison, unlimited fines, and the possibility of the confiscation ofproperty. While the FCPA and the Bribery Act are similar in many ways, there are significantdifferences between the two. The Bribery Act is generally believed to be more encompassingthan the FCPA. While the FCPA allows for facilitation payments, recognizing in some countriesthat it might be hard for businesses to get routine transactions done in a timely manner withoutthem, the Bribery Act leaves no room for these payments. After facing pressure from small- andmid-sized businesses, the U.K. government has agreed to review and potentially lessen therestrictions against facilitation payments. For now facilitation payments remain illegal under theAct, but there have been very few investigations into facilitation payments, which suggestspossible leniency in practice. Because of the new law, global organizations such as Hewlett- Packard began updating their codes of conduct to provide additional guidance on bribery.Additionally, while the FCPA is specifically concerned with bribing foreign or governmentofficials, the Bribery Act also makes it illegal to pay bribes to private and public officials orenterprises. This means a person who offers a bribe could be liable under the Bribery Act even ifthe bribe was not to a foreign official. Another difference is liability. Under the FCPA acompany only has strict liability for bribery as it relates to accounting provisions for publiccompanies. However, the Bribery Act applies strict liability to any commercial firm that does nothave “adequate controls” for preventing bribery. Some companies worry the Bribery Act will "