On May 12, 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice’s Criminal Division unveiled an overhaul of its white-collar enforcement policies in a memo issued by Matthew Galeotti, head of the Criminal Division. The memo, titled “Focus, Fairness, and Efficiency in the Fight Against White-Collar Crime,” signals a shift in DOJ priorities by concentrating enforcement efforts on “high-impact areas” and promising an “equal and fair” application of criminal laws to corporations and their executives through a streamlined framework for corporate investigations.
The revised policies narrow DOJ’s white-collar enforcement to areas deemed critical to economic security, consumer safety, and national security. These include healthcare and procurement fraud; trade and customs fraud; financial fraud affecting investors, individuals, and markets (such as Ponzi schemes, investment fraud, elder fraud, and servicemember fraud); fraud threatening consumer health and safety; violations of the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and the Controlled Substances Act; fraud involving Chinese-affiliated variable interest entities (“VIEs”); complex money laundering operations; digital asset fraud; and corporate support for foreign terrorist organizations or cartels. Companies operating in these sectors should anticipate increased scrutiny, particularly where alleged misconduct impacts government programs, markets, or vulnerable populations.
Additionally, the memo expands the Corporate Whistleblower Awards Pilot Program. For the first time, whistleblowers may receive financial incentives for tips related to cartel financing, sanctions violations, procurement fraud, and corporate support for terrorism, provided those tips lead to asset forfeitures. This change highlights the need for companies to have responsive internal reporting systems and effective compliance frameworks that can identify and manage conduct issues before employees make external reports.
The memo reiterates DOJ’s emphasis on holding individuals — not just corporations —accountable, but also clarifies that not all corporate misconduct warrants criminal charges. Prosecutors must now explicitly consider a company’s self-disclosure, cooperation, and remediation efforts when deciding how to resolve corporate cases. The revised Corporate Enforcement and Voluntary Self-Disclosure Policy offers clearer, tangible benefits for cooperating companies, including potentially shorter resolution terms and case-by-case declinations. Terms of corporate resolutions will generally be capped at three years, and the DOJ will assess ongoing matters for possible early termination if substantial remediation has occurred.
Finally, the DOJ seeks to accelerate investigations. The memo instructs prosecutors to avoid prolonged inquiries that disrupt legitimate business operations and to limit the use of corporate monitors only to cases where compliance failures cannot be otherwise remedied. A new monitor selection policy requires prosecutors to tailor monitor reviews and mandates narrowly, focusing exclusively on risks of recurrence and minimizing unnecessary costs.
The Galeotti memo ushers in a more deliberate, impact-focused enforcement model. While this approach reduces exposure for companies operating in good faith, it significantly raises the stakes for those in high-risk sectors or those failing to promptly address compliance issues. Companies should proactively evaluate their compliance posture, enhance whistleblower protections, and establish protocols for voluntary self-disclosure and cooperation should issues arise.
Authors:
Gabriel Scannapieco, Partner
Email: gabe.scannapieco@agg.com
David Blank, Partner
Email: david.blank@agg.com
Aaron Danzig, Partner
Email: aaron.danzig@agg.com
Sara Lord, Partner
Email: sara.lord@agg.com