The Act, adopted as part of the implementation of the OECD Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions, makes it an offence to give, offer, or agree to give or offer credit, remuneration, advantage or benefit, directly or indirectly, to any foreign public official or person acting for him or her in order to obtain or retain an advantage in the conduct of business. It carries a prison sentence of up to 14 years.

Previously, since 2013, there was an exception to this general prohibition - payments for "facilitation payments" were not recognized as a crime. Such payments, according to the law, are used to expedite or secure the performance by a foreign official of certain actions within their official duties, including:

• issuing permits, licenses, and other documents certifying a person's (organization's) right to conduct business;
• processing official documents such as visas and work permits;
• providing services normally provided to the public, such as mail collection and delivery, telecommunication services, electricity and water supply;
• providing services required on an as-needed basis, such as police protection, loading and unloading cargo, protecting perishables or goods from deterioration, or scheduling inspections related to the performance of contracts or the transit of goods.

Now, according to an official statement from International Affairs Canada, there is no longer an exception forgrease payments. The changes took effect on October 31, 2017; at the time this post was published, the country's official legislative portal had posted an October 25 version of the law that did not yet reflect the changes.

The very criminalization of payments to foreign officials for "facilitation payments" is in line with the OECD recommendations, as well as with the provisions of the current UK Bribery Act (Bribery ActHowever, as experts note, the changes introduced may lead to discrepancies with the provisions of the legislation of other countries, which establish prohibitions of unfair practices when interacting with foreign officials. For example, in the U.S., the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (Foreign Corrupt Practices Act) is in line with the OECD recommendations.Foreign Corrupt Practices Act- FCPA) still provides an exception for payments for "facilitation payments".

At the same time, it seems that the novelties of Canadian legislation will lead to increased control by the state over the actions taken by Canadian companies to minimize corruption risks when conducting their activities in foreign markets. Taking into account the discussed possibility of introducingDeferred Prosecution Agreements (DPAs) in the country, the role of measures taken by organizations to prevent corruption offenses, develop and implement compliance programs may significantly increase.