FCPA Guidelines Revised, Enforcement Resumes: What Compliance Teams Must Know

The recent settlement between Comunicaciones Celulares S.A. (Comcel), a Guatemalan subsidiary of Millicom International Cellular S.A., and the US DOJ again spotlights the enduring importance of anti-bribery and anti-corruption (ABAC) compliance programs. As the second major case under the revised FCPA enforcement guidelines, this resolution is a clear signal that even amid decreased enforcement activity, regulators remain focused on rooting out serious misconduct, and that now is not the time for compliance teams to ease their vigilance.​

Overview and Context

On November 10, 2025, Comcel entered a two-year Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA) with the DOJ to resolve allegations of improper payments to Guatemalan officials. The conduct occurred prior to Millicom’s full operational control of Comcel, during its time as a joint venture. The agreement includes a $60 million criminal fine and forfeiture of $58.2 million, totaling $118.2 million. Millicom cooperated fully, voluntarily disclosed the conduct in 2015, and implemented thorough remedial measures before and after acquiring Comcel entirely in 2021.​

The DOJ did not require a corporate monitor, reflecting the strength of Millicom’s global compliance program, and awarded a notably high penalty discount. The shortened agreement term and leniency further reflect recognition of effective remediation and proactive compliance.​

FCPA Enforcement: Revised Priorities, Real Risks

This settlement stands as the second major corporate DPA since the revised FCPA guidelines took effect in mid-2025, following an executive order that temporarily slowed investigation pace. While routine, lower-level enforcement actions have become less frequent, DOJ resources now concentrate on egregious violations directly impacting US interests or global criminal activity. Statutory FCPA obligations and regulator expectations remain unchanged, regardless of changing FCPA enforcement priorities.​

The enforcement action confirms that even as the government may “pause” or redirect strategic focus, significant cases will still prompt scrutiny, investigation, and severe financial penalties.​

Compliance and ABAC: Non-Negotiable Foundations

For compliance professionals, the Comcel case is a stark reminder that robust ABAC frameworks are essential, regardless of policy shifts. It’s important to stay the course in maintaining foundational ethics and compliance initiatives, including:

• Documentation and controls are vital, especially for subsidiaries in high-risk markets and joint ventures, where parent companies may lack operational oversight.​

• Leadership engagement at the board and executive level is key to both proactive and reactive compliance success.​

• Third-party risk management, including due diligence, continual monitoring, and transparent reporting, is critical to guarding against indirect exposure.​

• Adaptability to evolving priorities ensures programs remain effective when enforcement resumes or new risks emerge.​

• Global regulatory awareness. While U.S. actions may slow, but cross-border risks are accelerating, with UK, French, and Brazilian authorities prioritizing anti-corruption enforcement.​

Proactive remediation, robust compliance infrastructure, and transparent engagement with regulators remain the most effective levers to mitigate potential penalties.​

Action Items for Compliance Teams

The Comcel enforcement action reinforces the following best practices, particularly for those leveraging a long-term best practice approach towards ABAC compliance:

• Don’t interpret slower US enforcement as an opportunity to relax ABAC programs or controls; regulations and risks persist.​

• Maintain rigorous documentation detailing both program structure and day-to-day controls, especially around financial authorizations and government interactions.​

• Invest in regular compliance training and third-party assessment. These preventive measures both reduce risk and yield tangible benefits if enforcement does occur.​

• Encourage contact and transparency with regulators, including voluntary disclosures if issues are identified. The DOJ’s substantial penalty discount in Millicom’s case provides a clear roadmap for successful remediation.​

• Track developments in international enforcement and integrate global best practices and benchmarks.​

Conclusion

The Millicom/Comcel case demonstrates that FCPA enforcement, though slower, remains forceful and consequential when regulators identify significant violations. For compliance teams operating in this landscape, a “stay the course” strategy is essential: diligence, transparency, documentation, and global awareness are the keys to both legal defense and operational resilience. Temporary shifts in priorities must never equate to relaxing core controls; if anything, they are opportunities to reinforce frameworks and demonstrate sustained ethical leadership.​

Compliance professionals should benchmark against cases like Comcel, leverage connected compliance solutions, and recognize that long-term trust and risk management always begin with unwavering attention to anti-bribery and anti-corruption safeguards.​

Unsure where to go from here with your compliance program? Schedule a call with one of our experts.