Your current location is:{Current column} >>Text
Boeing agrees to pay over $200M and pleads guilty to breaching prior agreements.
{Current column}2People have watched
IntroductionAccording to a court document on Wednesday, Boeing has pled guilty and agreed to pay at least $243.6 ...
According to a court document on Global Forex DealersWednesday, Boeing has pled guilty and agreed to pay at least $243.6 million after violating a 2021 agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice, facing charges of criminal fraud conspiracy.
The Department of Justice stated that Boeing allowed work with potential risks within its factory and failed to ensure the accuracy and completeness of key aircraft records, thus violating the 2021 deferred prosecution agreement.
On July 7, Boeing agreed to admit to charges of conspiring to deceive the Federal Aviation Administration after the government alleged Boeing made intentional false statements regarding critical software on the 737 MAX.
Boeing confirmed on Wednesday that it had submitted a detailed plea agreement to the Department of Justice. The company stated, "We will continue to transparently cooperate with regulators and take significant actions to further enhance Boeing's safety, quality, and compliance programs."
In May, the Department of Justice stated that Boeing had violated its obligations under the agreement, which shielded it from criminal prosecution over false statements regarding key software features involved in the fatal 2018 and 2019 737 MAX crashes that claimed 346 lives.
This finding was made after an Alaska Airlines 737 MAX experienced an in-flight panel rupture in January, exposing ongoing safety and quality issues at Boeing, just two days before the 2021 agreement's protection from previous fatal crash prosecutions was set to expire.
Risk Warning and DisclaimerThe market carries risks, and investment should be cautious. This article does not constitute personal investment advice and has not taken into account individual users' specific investment goals, financial situations, or needs. Users should consider whether any opinions, viewpoints, or conclusions in this article are suitable for their particular circumstances. Investing based on this is at one's own responsibility.
Tags:
Related articles
SQLQD has demanded me a $950 “security verification charge”
{Current column}This fee was never mentioned during registration or anywhere in their terms. Despite completing full ...
Read moreTradetrackcap is telling me I’ve violated trading rules. Can they really keep my money?
{Current column}I started with Tradetrackcap and made a decent profit, but when I tried to withdraw my funds, they s ...
Read moreI’m stuck with 24StockOptions. They won’t let me withdraw unless I pay more fees.
{Current column}I was doing well with 24StockOptions, making some profits, but when I tried to withdraw, they told m ...
Read more
Popular Articles
- Firstgaininvestments unexpectedly introduced a $2,200 “withdrawal clearance surcharge”
- [Breaking News] Macro Bullion
- Personal Analysis of Gold:
- Has anyone had issues with ZercotTrades? my account was frozen
- TrustVest Capital required me a $2,000 “risk management surcharge”
- KODDPA claims I need to pay a $2,100 "release authorization fee" to withdraw my funds.
Latest articles
-
Canada’s trade deficit rose in September to CAD 1.26 billion, driven by declining exports.
-
Is Prymax Assets a scam? I haven’t received any of my withdrawals.
-
I’ve been stuck with HorizonCapitalMarket for weeks now. How do I get my investment back?
-
In early trading, the three major central banks discuss rates. Short
-
Germany’s exports and output fell; Trump’s re
-
Great Golden Brilliant: A Deep Dive into a New Scam Using Old Tricks