Chapter 8 Self Quiz

. Why might it be unethical for a public official to accept a gift of a discounted trip to Paris from a company that his agency regulates?

A reasonable person would conclude that there had been a quid pro quo.

It is wrong to enjoy luxurious vacations.

No one could go on such a trip and not be permanently biased in favor of the giver.

A neutral observer could reasonably doubt that the official's treatment of all airlines is fair and without preference.

. A manager assessing the work performance of her spouse would be

an apparent conflict of interest.

a potential conflict of interest.

an actual conflict of interest.

not a conflict of interest.

. Why might rule utilitarians have difficulty justifying Schindler's embracing of a conflict of interest to save Jews?

Rule utilitarians justify policies according to consequences of general obedience, not consequences specific to situation.

It is not clear which moral rule is the most salient in this situation.

Extraordinary situations cannot be captured by rules.

None of the above

. A virtue ethicist might determine conflicts of interest are to be avoided by considering all the following virtues except

fidelity.

justice.

prudence.

generosity.

. The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) makes it unlawful for US citizens (and certain other groups of legal entities) to make payments to foreign officials to assist in obtaining or retaining business

if such payments are illegal in the country in which they are made.

if such payments are illegal in the country in which they are made, and they violate the NSPE Code of Ethics.

irrespective of whether such payments are illegal in the country in which they are made.

irrespective of whether such payments are illegal in the country in which they are made, but only if they violate the NSPE Code of Ethics.

. TeliaSonera claims that when it acquired a small Gibraltar-based company for the purpose of gaining access to telecom licenses in Uzbekistan, it did nothing wrong. What about the company might indicate corruption?

The company had no employees or assets or holdings other than it held the licenses to phone frequencies in Uzbekistan.

The company was owned by Gulnara Karimova, the daughter of Uzbekistan's ruler.

A US company that had declined business dealings with Karimova found its frequency jammed by the Uzbek government.

All of the above

. One of the acceptable "customs" in Country X is for consultants to give substantial gifts to public officials in connection with the awarding of public works contracts. Engineer A recognizes that the giving of such gifts may be a violation of US law, although they may not technically be a violation of the law in Country A.

Engineer A does not violate any US law by giving the gift, because country X is outside US jurisdiction.

The Foreign Corrupt Practices Acts is applicable to this case, but as long as the value of the gift is declared to the IRS it is legal to give the gift.

The Foreign Corrupt Practices Acts is applicable to this case: It would not be legal for Engineer A to give the gift.

The Foreign Corrupt Practices Acts is applicable to this case: it is legal for Engineer A to give the gift only if it is distributed via a non-US courier.

. What is the difference between bribery and extortion?

Extortion refers to payments made in exchange for something one is not entitled to; a bribe is a payment made to obtain something one is entitled to.

A bribe is a payment made in exchange for something one is not entitled to; extortion refers to payments made to obtain something one is entitled to.

While some types of bribes are legally permitted under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, extortion is always prohibited.

There is no difference between bribery and extortion.

. Oskar Schindler's behavior toward his client illustrates

that what often are taken to be universal rules may be subject to exceptions.

that duty always requires disclosing conflicts of interest.

the failure of utilitarian accounts.

the necessity of the FCPA.

. How can the TeliaSonera case canbe used to criticize the FCPA?

The jurisdiction is too large because the agent committing the crime need only have a minor connection to the United States.

It amounts to the United States imposing corruption laws on the world.

The fines paid are not paid to the true victims but to the United States.

All of the above

Quiz Content