New DOJ Enforcement Policies: Overview and Content
On May 12, 2025, the US Department of Justice (DOJ) announced a comprehensive change of course in the criminal prosecution of white-collar and corporate crime. The Criminal Division, which is responsible for criminal enforcement matters, published four key guidelines containing a new “White-Collar Enforcement Plan” and revised guidelines on voluntary self-disclosure, the whistleblower program, and the appointment of compliance monitors. In his speech at a conference on combating money laundering and financial crime, Matthew R. Galeotti, who was appointed head of the Criminal Division in March 2025, said that the Criminal Division was opening a new chapter in the enforcement of white-collar and corporate criminal law. The new approach is intended to focus criminal prosecution in the area of white-collar crime on the key threats to the United States.
Key Points of the New DOJ Policy
The new DOJ policy focuses on combating the most serious economic crimes, more transparent and expanded benefits for companies choosing to self-report, more incentives for whistleblowers, a more restrictive appointment of external compliance monitors, as well as the acceleration of investigations and criminal proceedings against companies and the limitation of corporate penalties. Prosecution will be guided by three pillars: focus, fairness, and efficiency.
The New White-Collar Enforcement Plan
The goal of the new White-Collar Enforcement Plan is to combat the most significant risks to the United States and protect US interests. The plan contains the following key elements:
▪️Focus on serious economic crimes
Investigations and prosecutions will focus on serious economic crimes. These include, in particular, the following offenses:
- Fraud and abuse of government programs
- Trade and customs fraud
- Capital market and investor fraud
- Crimes that pose a threat to national security (e.g., sanctions violations and attacks on the US financial system)
- Support to terrorist organizations
- Money laundering, particularly in connection with drug trafficking
- Violations of the Controlled Substances Act and the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA)
- Bribery and related money laundering impacting US interests
- Violations related to digital assets
Noteworthy is the explicit inclusion of bribery offenses, even though the US government suspended enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) for 180 days in February 2025. The DOJ is thus signaling that bribery will continue to be prosecuted if US interests are affected.
▪️Prioritization of criminal prosecution
Efforts to seize and recover assets related to the aforementioned crimes are to be intensified in order to compensate victims of these crimes. In addition, investigations and criminal prosecution are to focus on perpetrators in senior positions, cases involving demonstrable loss, and cases involving obstruction of justice.
Not every instance of corporate misconduct will lead to criminal prosecution. Instead, priority will be given to the prosecution of individuals and to civil and administrative measures. When deciding whether to prosecute a company, the DOJ will take particular account of voluntary self-disclosures, cooperation, and remedial measures taken by the company.
▪️Review and limitation of corporate compliance obligations
Corporate agreements (e.g., Deferred Prosecution Agreements or Non-Prosecution Agreements) will be reviewed regularly and may be terminated early if the company has not committed any further violations over a longer period of time, the company-specific risk has decreased significantly, comprehensive and sustainable improvements have been implemented in the compliance system, and the company self-reported the misconduct. Future compliance obligations should generally not extend beyond three years. When determining the duration of the term, the severity of the misconduct, the extent of cooperation and the remedial measures taken, as well as the effectiveness of the compliance program at the time of the corporate agreement, should be taken into account.
▪️Acceleration of proceedings
In order to reduce the burden on companies, investigations should be accelerated and proceedings concluded expeditiously.
Extended Benefits for Self-Disclosures
Companies that choose to self-report violations early and voluntarily, cooperate fully, and take effective remedial measures can expect clearly defined benefits, such as shorter terms for corporate compliance obligations or more lenient sanctions. Even in aggravating circumstances, more lenient sanctions are possible if the company cooperated fully and took effective remedial measures.
Notably, companies can now benefit from the incentives even if a whistleblower reports the violation first – provided that the company informs the DOJ within 120 days of the internal report and meets the other requirements for voluntary disclosure.
Expansion of the Whistleblower Award Pilot Program
The guidelines for the whistleblower program now explicitly include references to the following offenses:
- Violations related to transnational criminal organizations, including money laundering and drug trafficking
- Violations of immigration law
- Terrorism financing
- Sanctions violations
- Trade and customs fraud
- Procurement fraud
Restriction of Compliance Monitorships
External compliance monitors should only be appointed in exceptional cases where this is necessary in view of the seriousness of the misconduct and the risk of repetition, and where other supervisory measures are insufficient. In this way, the DOJ aims to reduce the burden on companies.
Conclusion
With its new enforcement policies, the DOJ is focusing on a more targeted, transparent, and efficient fight against white-collar crime.
The DOJ policy emphasizes the protection of US interests and at the same time seeks to avoid unnecessary burdens on companies and not hinder innovation. Companies can now gain greater advantages from self-disclosure and cooperation efforts. The new guidelines will initially only apply to the Criminal Division but could set a precedent for other DOJ departments.
The DOJ policy thus appears to represent a dual strategy pursued by the current administration under President Trump: On the one hand, the protection of US interests is to be strengthened through a clear focus on specific relevant areas of crime, while on the other hand, enforcement powers are being structurally realigned – with greater efficiency, fairness, and predictability for companies. The aim is to make criminal prosecution and sentencing clearer, more predictable, and more proportionate, and to avoid excessive intervention.
However, it remains unclear whether this approach and these promises will also apply to non-US companies or whether a familiar pattern will continue, whereby foreign companies are significantly more likely to face harsh sanctions and comprehensive monitoring for violations than their US counterparts. Against that background, companies should review their compliance and reporting processes and – if necessary – adjust them, in order to effectively take advantage of the new opportunities and mitigate risks.