Washington, D.C. – August 22, 2025 – On May 12, 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) Criminal Division unveiled a new playbook for prosecuting white-collar and corporate crime, signaling a strategic shift in enforcement priorities under the Trump administration. Titled “Focus, Fairness, and Efficiency in the Fight Against White-Collar Crime,” the memorandum, issued by Criminal Division head Matthew R. Galeotti, outlines ten high-impact areas of focus, revises corporate enforcement policies, and expands whistleblower incentives. This new approach aims to balance robust prosecution of egregious white-collar crimes with minimizing burdens on American businesses, presenting both challenges and opportunities for companies navigating the evolving legal landscape.
Key Enforcement Priorities
The DOJ’s playbook identifies ten “high-impact” areas for investigation and prosecution, reflecting an “America First” agenda and alignment with administration priorities such as combating fraud, cartels, and national security threats:
- Waste, Fraud, and Abuse: Targeting healthcare fraud, federal program fraud, and procurement fraud that harm the public fisc.
- Trade and Customs Fraud: Focusing on tariff evasion and related violations to protect U.S. economic interests.
- Fraud via Chinese Variable Interest Entities (VIEs): Addressing schemes by Chinese-affiliated companies listed on U.S. exchanges that funnel investor funds into strategic industries in China.
- Investor and Consumer Fraud: Prosecuting Ponzi schemes, investment fraud, elder fraud, servicemember fraud, and fraud threatening consumer health and safety.
- Digital Asset Crimes: Prioritizing cases that victimize investors, further other criminal conduct, or involve willful violations facilitating significant crimes, particularly those tied to cartels, transnational criminal organizations (TCOs), terrorist groups, drug money laundering, or sanctions evasion.
- Bribery and Money Laundering: Targeting schemes, including foreign bribery, that harm U.S. business competitiveness, despite a February 10, 2025, executive order pausing Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) enforcement against U.S. companies.
- Corporate Violations of Federal Contracting: Focusing on non-healthcare-related procurement fraud.
- Sanctions Violations: Prosecuting corporate violations tied to cartels, TCOs, or narcotics trafficking.
- Material Support for Terrorism: Addressing corporate actions that facilitate terrorist activities.
- Market Manipulation: Targeting “ramp and dump” schemes and other fraudulent practices impacting U.S. markets.
These priorities signal a shift toward crimes with direct harm to U.S. citizens, businesses, and national security, with a notable emphasis on trade, digital assets, and foreign-linked misconduct.
Revised Corporate Enforcement and Voluntary Self-Disclosure Policy
The DOJ has updated its Corporate Enforcement and Voluntary Self-Disclosure Policy (CEP) to encourage companies to self-report misconduct and cooperate with investigations. Key changes include:
- Automatic Declinations: Companies that voluntarily self-disclose, fully cooperate, and remediate misconduct without aggravating factors will receive a public declination, requiring only disgorgement, forfeiture, or restitution. This marks a shift from a mere presumption of declination to a more certain outcome.
- Near-Miss Benefits: Even if a company does not meet declination criteria or has aggravating factors, self-disclosure can lead to a non-prosecution agreement (NPA), a 75% penalty reduction from the low end of sentencing guidelines, and no compliance monitor, with resolutions limited to three years.
- Streamlined Resolutions: Prosecutors are encouraged to consider alternatives to criminal prosecution, such as NPAs, deferred prosecution agreements (DPAs), or civil/administrative remedies, and to review existing agreements for early termination based on reduced risk profiles or robust compliance programs.
- Flowchart for Transparency: The revised CEP includes a flowchart outlining possible outcomes for self-disclosing companies, enhancing predictability for corporate counsel.
These revisions aim to provide clearer incentives for companies to self-report and cooperate, reducing the risk of prolonged investigations or harsh penalties while promoting fairness.
Expanded Whistleblower Program
The DOJ has expanded its Corporate Whistleblower Awards Pilot Program, launched in August 2024, to incentivize tips in new areas aligned with enforcement priorities. Whistleblowers can now qualify for awards if their tips lead to forfeiture in cases involving:
- International cartels or TCOs (including money laundering and narcotics violations).
- Corporate violations of federal immigration law.
- Material support for terrorism.
- Corporate sanctions offenses.
- Trade, tariff, and customs fraud.
- Corporate procurement fraud.
This expansion builds on existing priorities, such as bribery and financial institution crimes, and underscores the DOJ’s focus on leveraging whistleblowers to uncover misconduct in high-impact areas. Compliance officers are advised to strengthen internal reporting mechanisms to address potential whistleblower complaints before they reach the DOJ.
Reduced Use of Corporate Monitors
The DOJ has revised its guidance on corporate monitorships, signaling a return to a policy of restraint seen during the first Trump administration. Monitors will be imposed only when “heavy-handed intervention” is necessary, with narrowly tailored scopes to address recidivism risks. Prosecutors are directed to expedite investigations and charging decisions to minimize costs and disruptions for businesses. This shift aims to enhance efficiency while maintaining accountability.
Implications for Businesses
The DOJ’s new playbook presents both opportunities and challenges for companies:
- Proactive Compliance: Companies should calibrate compliance programs to address the DOJ’s high-impact areas, particularly trade fraud, digital asset violations, and foreign-linked misconduct. Robust internal controls and regular audits can mitigate risks.
- Self-Disclosure Incentives: The clarified CEP encourages companies to self-report misconduct early, offering significant benefits like declinations or reduced penalties. Legal counsel should weigh these incentives against other regulatory considerations, such as SEC disclosure programs.
- Whistleblower Risk: The expanded whistleblower program increases the likelihood of external reports, necessitating strong internal reporting channels to identify and remediate issues before they escalate.
- Reduced Oversight: The limited use of monitors and shorter resolution terms may lower compliance costs but require companies to demonstrate mature compliance programs to avoid scrutiny.
Broader Context and Criticisms
While the DOJ emphasizes continued white-collar enforcement, some analysts predict a temporary decline in prosecutions due to resource constraints and a shift toward administration priorities like immigration and cartel enforcement. A report from TRAC noted that white-collar cases may be deprioritized in 2025 as FBI resources are redirected, with agents reportedly tasked to devote one-third of their time to immigration enforcement.
Critics argue that the DOJ’s focus on “America First” priorities, such as trade fraud and foreign bribery, may narrow enforcement scope, potentially overlooking domestic corporate misconduct. Others see the streamlined approach as a pragmatic effort to balance enforcement with economic growth, rewarding companies that act responsibly.
Looking Ahead
Companies navigating this new playbook should consult experienced legal counsel to align compliance strategies with DOJ priorities. The emphasis on transparency, fairness, and efficiency offers a clearer path for cooperation but demands proactive measures to address risks in high-impact areas. As the DOJ continues to refine its approach, particularly with the FCPA enforcement pause set to conclude in August 2025, businesses must stay vigilant to adapt to evolving enforcement trends.
Sources: White & Case LLP, Holland & Knight, Foley & Lardner LLP, Carlton Fields, Alston & Bird, Gibson Dunn, Skadden, Foley Hoag, Vinson & Elkins LLP, Sidley Austin LLP, DLA Piper, WilmerHale, TRAC Reports, Woods Rogers