Feeds

back to article HP pays to end kickback probe

HP is taking a two cents per share charge to end a Department of Justice investigation into bribery allegations. The company stressed that it was not admitting any wrongdoing, of course. The DOJ investigation began in 2007 and included Accenture and Sun. It centred on allegations that the three companies improperly charged for …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

HP pays to end kickback probe. Is this

Sort of kickback squared, perhaps?

0
0
WTF?

Er, hey, what?!?

We're going to... er... "pay off" (bribe?) the prosecutors... to... stop investigating us for... er... bribery?

6
0
Coat

Re: Er, hey, what?!?

Bugger, there goes this year's bonus as well ... (unless you're in management of course)

Signed, overworked HPer.

1
0
Grenade

So its not bribery

When you pay off the government?

0
0

Of course not!

When the government gets it then it's either taxation or donations depending how rich you are.

0
0
Silver badge

I've always wondered how that works...

Err, we might get convicted here...

*Money*

Wooo, innocent!

1
0
Thumb Down

And it's us plebs...

..that are forced to do annual 'ethics' training...

6
0

This doesn't mean we're guilty

When you pay to end an investigation and still try to claim innocence then you know someone's having a laugh.

0
0
Stop

Games Theory v Justice

The cost of cooperating with the investigation and defending against a court case has to be set against the cost of settling early. It is not a question of guilty or innocent, it is a balance of costs and probabilities. If we are acquited (insert probability) what do we get, if found guilty (1 minus previous probability) what would the punative fine be? Now stack up against the cost of the payoff. Take least cost option.

Of course the probabilities would be affected by what they know of the evidence available. that just affects the size of the swing between the choice of settling and going to court.

IMHO the gap between the punishment if found guilty and the cost of settling out of court distorts any conclusions about guilt or innocence.

Probably better to settle early as it keeps the money from going to the lawyers (on both sides).

0
0
Big Brother

It's OK, we have a training course for this.

Will this be included as a practical example in next year's mandatory Ethics "Training" Course for the workers?

I can't wait...

1
0
WTF?

Wondering about HP

IF it's part of that Intel kickback like Dell

0
0
Grenade

"part of that Intel kickback like Dell"

Unlikely. Dell is basically a pure Intel shop and that's the way Intel and Dell want(ed) it to stay. HP has a long history of AMD product in desktops, laptops, and servers.

"It is not a question of guilty or innocent,"

Says who? The people with the money? Oh, that's all right then. I guess that makes "the war on drugs" a bit specious though, 'cos there's a lot of money there, but maybe they too are neither guilty nor innocent, so we could just call the whole silly thing off and get Tesco to do the sourcing and distribution, and collect the tax. Right?

0
0
Thumb Down

Dura lex sed lex -

unless, of course, one is a wealthy corporation (a juridical construction, which, according to the US Supreme Court, inherently possesses all the rights that the US Constitution gives real persons), in which case one pays a minor fine and admits no guilt. Ain't capitalism grand ?...

Henri

0
1
This topic is closed for new posts.