1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
nata0808 [166]
3 years ago
8

Which of the following is not part of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act? a. financial statement disclosure requirements b. requi

rement of internal monitoring in companies to prevent violations c. requirement of public disclosure of all bids in foreign countries d. requirement of monitoring contracts with foreign agents e. both a and d are not part of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act
Law
1 answer:
olga nikolaevna [1]3 years ago
5 0

Answer:

a. financial statement disclosure requirements

d. requirement of monitoring contracts with foreign agents

Explanation:

The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act was an act that was passed in 1977 and received two amendments in 1988 and 1998. The act aims to prohibit companies and their officers from influencing foreign officials with payments and rewards - bribery. The act also has a series of accounting requirements that are designed to ensure that shareholders have an accurate view of the company’s finances.

You might be interested in
Bad things happen to bad people good things happen to god people according to
AnnyKZ [126]

Answer:

disposition theory - zillmann

7 0
3 years ago
Write short note on prohibition​
zmey [24]

Answer:  Prohibition is a law or restriction that has been put in place to counteract something from happening. This is primarily legal in nature, and put into place by legislative power.

Explanation:

5 0
3 years ago
What market forces influence wages?
pashok25 [27]

Answer:The market forces that influence wages are the supply and demand for labor.

Explanation:

3 0
3 years ago
Challenges of separation of power
Scrat [10]
In several Supreme Court decisions this decade, the question of whether a constitutional attack on a statute should be considered “as applied” to the actual facts of the case before the Court or “on the face” of the statute has been a difficult preliminary issue for the Court. The issue has prompted abundant academic discussion. Recently, scholars have noted a preference within the Roberts Court for as-applied constitutional challenges. However, the cases cited as evidence for the Roberts Court’s preference for as-applied challenges all involve constitutional challenges which concede the legislative power to enact the provision but nevertheless argue for unconstitutionality because the statute intrudes upon rights or liberties protected by the Constitution. Of course, this is not the only type of constitutional challenge to a statute; some constitutional challenges attack the underlying power of the legislative branch to pass the statute in question. Modern scholarship, however, as well as the Supreme Court, has mostly ignored the difference between these two different types of constitutional challenges to statutes when discussing facial and as-applied constitutional challenges. In glossing over this difference, considerations which fundamentally affect whether a facial or as-applied challenge is appropriate have gone unnoticed. By clearly distinguishing between these two very different types of constitutional challenges, and the respective role of a federal court in adjudicating each of these challenges, a new perspective can be gained on the exceedingly difficult question of when a facial or as-applied challenge to a statute is appropriate. In this Article, I argue that federal courts are constitutionally compelled to consider the constitutionality of a statute on its face when the power of Congress to pass the law has been challenged. Under the separation of powers principles enunciated in I.N.S. v. Chadha and Clinton v. New York, federal courts are not free to ignore the “finely wrought” procedures described in the Constitution for the creation of federal law by “picking and choosing” constitutional applications from unconstitutional applications of the federal statute, at least when the statute has been challenged as exceeding Congress’s enumerated powers in the Constitution. The separation of powers principles of I.N.S. and Clinton, which preclude a “legislative veto” or an executive “line item veto,” should similarly preclude a “judicial application veto” of a law that has been challenged as exceeding Congress’s Constitutional authority.
6 0
3 years ago
1. Why is it difficult for a country to boost its net exports by increasing its tariffs?
MArishka [77]
Because the country needs to help the economy
6 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • HELP ASAP IM ON A TEST
    9·2 answers
  • The magnitude of a vector is a scalar. Explain this statement
    5·1 answer
  • Describe an alternative program(s) a person with a disability can apply for if they don’t qualify for SSDI.
    5·1 answer
  • Which type of corrections are alternatives that fall between probation and a prison sentence?
    8·1 answer
  • 1
    6·1 answer
  • To
    9·1 answer
  • Your likelihood of becoming an addict depends on race age and gender? Is it true or false
    13·2 answers
  • At the four-way stops sign, which has the right to go first?
    8·1 answer
  • If I am under 18 years of age am I prohibited from using my cellphone while driving
    9·1 answer
  • A/ an _____ is a fundamental prerequisite for setting the mechanism of lawmaking in motion. lawsuit impetus precedent controvers
    14·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!