Uber files: Can Uber offload their past responibilities by claiming they are a new company?
<p>The recently released <a href="https://www.icij.org/investigations/uber-files/uber-global-rise-lobbying-violence-technology/" rel="noreferrer">Uber files</a> report how the company built a network of lobbyists in close contact with many high level government officials around the world. These relationships include suspects of high level corruption and helped the company establish a foothold in many countries around the world. When asked for a comment the current spokesperson declared:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>We have not and will not make excuses for past behaviour that is clearly not in line with our present values.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>She also declared:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>When we say Uber is a different company today, we mean it literally: 90 percent of current Uber employees joined after Dara [Khosrowshahi] became CEO</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Personally I noticed that even though many people changed the investors are still the same and the benefits the company got with this behaviour are still there.</p>
<p>Furthermore, they still have an <a href="https://medium.com/uber-under-the-hood/announcing-ubers-public-policy-advisory-board-f7e6758ba9bd" rel="noreferrer">advisory board</a> which pays handsome fees to many ex politicians.</p>
<p>But apart from that I would like t know if legally they can offload their past responsibilities in this way. Could they be investigated by the US authorities for possible bribery in foreign countries, or is it enough to change the high level management to avoid prosecution?</p>

<h2>A company is a legal person</h2>
<p>If this is the same company, then it can be prosecuted for its past activities just like a natural person can.</p>

international bribery