Categories
Compliance Tip of the Day

Compliance Tip of the Day – Measuring Compliance Training Effectiveness

Welcome to “Compliance Tip of the Day,” the podcast where we bring you daily insights and practical advice on navigating the ever-evolving landscape of compliance and regulatory requirements. Whether you’re a seasoned compliance professional or just starting your journey, we aim to provide bite-sized, actionable tips to help you stay on top of your compliance game. Join us as we explore the latest industry trends, share best practices, and demystify complex compliance issues to keep your organization on the right side of the law. Tune in daily for your dose of compliance wisdom, and let’s make compliance a little less daunting, one tip at a time.

How do we meet the DOJ mandate for effective training?

For more on this topic, check out The Compliance Handbook, a Guide to Operationalizing Your Compliance Program, 6th Edition, which LexisNexis recently released. It is available here.

Categories
Great Women in Compliance

Great Women in Compliance – Compliance is the Floor, Ethics is the Ceiling with Ellen Hunt

In this week’s special episode of Great Women in Compliance, Hemma interviews Ellen Hunt, an ethics and compliance professional and recent recipient of the Compliance Week Lifetime Achievement in Compliance Award. Ellen shares her journey from law to compliance, emphasizing the importance of organizational justice, psychological safety, and ethical decision-making. Listeners will gain insights into Ellen’s approach to fostering a values-driven culture, her experiences and advice on ensuring transparency, the role of conflict in cultivating psychological safety, and her commitment to nurturing the compliance community.

Highlights include: 

  • Ellen Hunt’s Career Journey and Recent Lifetime Achievement Award
  • Organizational Justice and Compliance
  • The Evolution of Ethics and Compliance
  • The Role of Psychological Safety
  • Ellen’s Legacy in Elevating a Compliance Community

Biography:

Ellen is a lawyer, ethics & compliance professional, audit executive, and chief privacy officer. Before joining Spark Compliance Consulting, A Diligent Brand, Ellen was the Vice President, Compliance Program Operations and Chief Privacy Officer for LifePoint Health, Senior Vice President ~Chief Ethics & Compliance Officer, and Chief Audit Executive for AARP.

Ellen was named “Mentor of the Year” by Compliance Week in 2021 and the 2019 Not-For-Profit Compliance Officer of the Year by Women In Compliance. She received the Trust Across America Top Thought Leaders Lifetime Achievement Award in 2019 and was named a Top Mind by Compliance Week in 2016. Most recently, in April 2025, she was awarded a Lifetime Award for Compliance by Compliance Week.

She taught at the Fordham University School of Law, Program for Corporate Ethics and Compliance. She is an adjunct professor at Loyola University Chicago School of Law, teaching Business Ethics in the 21st Century and co-teaching the Compliance and Culture courses. Ellen serves on the Advisory Boards for the Notre Dame Deloitte Center for Ethical Leadership, Compliance Week, and the Quorum Initiative. She is the co-founder of The Seven Elements Book Club, a book club devoted to ethics and compliance authors, and winner of the 2022 award for “Best New Idea” by the Great Women in Compliance podcast.

Categories
Blog

The Updated CEP: Is Real Credit Finally Here?

Matthew R. Galeotti, Head of the Criminal Division at the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), recently delivered a speech at SIFMA’s Anti-Money Laundering and Financial Crimes Conference. Contemporaneously, the DOJ issued a Memo (the Galeotti Memo) entitled Focus, Fairness, and Efficiency in the Fight Against White-Collar Crime. I have explored both in previous blog posts. Today, I want to review the Corporate Enforcement and Voluntary Self-Disclosure Policy (CEP) updates. It provides a roadmap for how companies can earn leniency when they self-report wrongdoing. And in an increasingly unforgiving regulatory landscape, that roadmap is worth its weight in gold.

Under the CEP, a company that voluntarily self-discloses, fully cooperates, and timely remediates can qualify for a declination of prosecution, provided there are no aggravating circumstances. This is the reaffirmation of a multi-year DOJ effort to garner more self-disclosures. It gives compliance professionals something real to bring to the C-suite: if we invest in robust compliance and proactively address issues, we can avoid criminal prosecution altogether.

What if aggravating factors exist, such as senior-level involvement or prior misconduct? If the company cooperates and remediates in good faith, the policy still provides for reduced penalties, non-prosecution agreements, and shorter resolution terms. In other words, the DOJ offers a “near miss” safety net for companies that fall short of full eligibility but act responsibly.

The takeaway is clear: Compliance is not just a cost center but a value driver. The CEP recognizes that companies should be rewarded for coming forward, cooperating, and fixing problems. That means compliance professionals must build systems that detect misconduct early, encourage internal reporting, and enable swift action. When a crisis hits, your response will not just shape your company’s future; it may be the difference between a decline and a prosecution.

Voluntary Self-Disclosure

The DOJ’s Criminal Division strongly encourages companies to voluntarily self-disclose potential misconduct as early as possible, even before completing an internal investigation. To qualify under the CEP, a disclosure must meet several key criteria: it must be made to the Criminal Division (or in good faith to another DOJ component involved in the resolution), concern previously unknown misconduct, not be required by any existing legal obligation, and occur before any imminent threat of disclosure or government investigation arises. Additionally, the disclosure must be made within a “reasonably prompt” timeframe, with the company bearing the burden of proving timeliness.

The DOJ proposes a limited exception for the new Corporate Whistleblower Awards Pilot Program. Suppose a whistleblower reports misconduct internally and to the DOJ. In that case, a company may still qualify for the presumption of declination, but only if it self-discloses to the DOJ within 120 days of the internal report and meets all other voluntary disclosure conditions.

This guidance underscores the urgency and importance of real-time reporting mechanisms, strong internal controls, and rapid compliance response protocols. Timely self-disclosure is not just encouraged; it is now a strategic imperative in mitigating enforcement risk.

What is Full Cooperation?

To earn full cooperation credit under the CEP, a company must go beyond the general requirements of the Principles of Federal Prosecution of Business Organizations (Justice Manual 9-28.000) and meet six key obligations:

  1. Disclosure of All Relevant Facts: A company must share all non-privileged, relevant facts it knows, including facts about individuals responsible for the misconduct, regardless of their rank, whether internal or external to the company.
  2. Timely and Specific Information Sharing: This includes facts obtained through any internal investigation, updates during that investigation, and specific attributions of facts to sources. The company must also clearly identify all involved parties.
  3. Proactive Cooperation: Companies must voluntarily disclose relevant facts, even if prosecutors do not specifically request them. They are also expected to alert the DOJ to any avenues of obtaining evidence not in the company’s possession but known to them.
  4. Preservation and Disclosure of Documents: Relevant documents, including overseas ones, must be preserved, collected, and produced. Companies must detail such documents’ origin, custodians, and locations; facilitate third-party productions; and provide necessary translations. The company must prove the restriction if foreign law prevents disclosure and suggest viable alternatives.
  5. De-confliction: Companies must avoid actions that might interfere with DOJ investigations. If requested, they must delay certain investigative steps, such as employee interviews, for a narrowly tailored period to protect DOJ priorities.
  6. Availability of Individuals for Interviews: Subject to constitutional protections, companies must make current and former employees (including those overseas) available for DOJ interviews and facilitate third-party interviews where possible.

These standards ensure that cooperation is meaningful, timely, and valuable to the DOJ’s efforts, rewarding companies that truly support investigations with favorable outcomes under the CEP.

Timely and Appropriate Remediation

Under the CEP, timely and appropriate remediation is a non-negotiable component of earning cooperation credit and potentially avoiding prosecution. And for compliance professionals, it is a clarion call to action. First, the company must conduct a root cause analysis, a genuine examination of what went wrong, why, and how to prevent it from happening again. It’s not about blaming a few bad apples but addressing systemic issues that allowed the misconduct to take root. Did a cultural blind spot develop in a high-risk market? Was there a breakdown in oversight or a failure to escalate red flags? The DOJ expects thoughtful answers and corrective action.

Second, the company must demonstrate an effective compliance and ethics program tailored to its risk profile, business model, and resources. That means more than having policies on the books. DOJ evaluators are looking at leadership’s commitment, compliance’s access to the board, compensation tied to ethical performance, and real-time testing of program effectiveness. Box-checking won’t cut it.

Third, accountability is key. Companies must appropriately discipline wrongdoers, including those who failed in their supervisory duties, and ensure they retain and safeguard business records, including communications on personal devices and ephemeral apps.

Finally, remediation includes showing that the company understands the seriousness of the misconduct and is proactively reducing future risk. This is about culture, not cosmetics.

In short, remediation is proof of your values in action. It is the difference between performative compliance and real commitment. Suppose you’re building a credible compliance program in today’s enforcement environment. In that case, remediation must be embedded in your DNA because the DOJ is watching, and your organization’s future may depend on how you respond.

Providing Cooperation Credit

Finally, there is the cooperation credit. Hopefully, we have finally moved past the Kenneth Polite formulation of super, double-secret, undefined “we know it when we see it” cooperation. Cooperation credit here will be earned through demonstrable, high-quality, timely actions. Cooperation is assessed on a sliding scale based on how extensively and effectively a company supports the government’s investigation. Once a company meets the minimum threshold for cooperation, prosecutors evaluate factors such as scope, quantity, quality, timing, and the overall impact of the cooperation provided.

Importantly, cooperation credit starts at zero and increases only with meaningful contributions, and there is no presumption of full credit. The DOJ now distinguishes between cooperation levels by varying the starting point within the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines fine range, and the percentage of fine reduction awarded. Companies that delay cooperation may significantly reduce their potential credit.

Waiver of attorney-client privilege or work product protections is not required to receive cooperation credit. If a company claims its financial condition limits its ability to cooperate, it must provide supporting documentation. The DOJ will carefully evaluate any such claims. Ultimately, the message is clear: to earn meaningful credit, cooperation must be real, proactive, and sustained. But at least it is now defined and not “We know it when we see it.”

Resources:

CRM White Collar Enforcement Plan

Revised CEP

CRM Monitor Memo

Categories
Innovation in Compliance

Staying the Course in Compliance: Insights from Kristy Grant-Hart

Innovation comes in many areas, and compliance professionals must be ready for and embrace it. Join Tom Fox, the Voice of Compliance, as he visits with top innovative minds, thinkers, and creators in the award-winning Innovation in Compliance podcast. Today, we begin a 3-part podcast series sponsored by Diligent with Clint Palermo, Kristy Grant-Hart, and Stephanie Font. In Part 3, Tom is joined by Kristy Grant-Hart, Vice President and Head of Compliance Advisory Services at Spark Compliance Consulting, a Diligent brand, about the state of compliance in the wake of recent changes to FCPA enforcement.

They discuss the importance of staying consistent with compliance programs, the role of regulatory bodies worldwide, and the practical implications of modern slavery and trade sanctions. Kristy emphasizes the need for a strategic focus on forward-looking risks and the benefits of combining Diligent’s software capabilities with expertise in compliance services. They also underscore the importance of maintaining psychological safety and a speak-up culture within organizations.

Key highlights:

  • The Importance of Consistency in Compliance
  • The Power of Combining Compliance Services with Technology
  • Strategic Focus for Compliance Officers

Resources:

Kristy Grant-Hart on LinkedIn

Spark Compliance

Visit Diligent Website

Tom Fox

Instagram

Facebook

YouTube

Twitter

LinkedIn

Categories
Compliance Tip of the Day

Compliance Tip of the Day – Compliance Training Frequency

Welcome to “Compliance Tip of the Day,” the podcast where we bring you daily insights and practical advice on navigating the ever-evolving landscape of compliance and regulatory requirements. Whether you’re a seasoned compliance professional or just starting your journey, we aim to provide bite-sized, actionable tips to help you stay on top of your compliance game. Join us as we explore the latest industry trends, share best practices, and demystify complex compliance issues to keep your organization on the right side of the law. Tune in daily for your dose of compliance wisdom, and let’s make compliance a little less daunting, one tip at a time.

Does compliance training always have to be conducted annually?

For more on this topic, check out The Compliance Handbook, a Guide to Operationalizing Your Compliance Program, 6th Edition, which LexisNexis recently released. It is available here.

Categories
SBR - Authors' Podcast

SBR-Author’s Podcast: The Unseen Life of an Undercover Agent: A Conversation with Charlie Spillers

Welcome to the SBR-Authors Podcast! In this podcast series, Host Tom Fox visits with authors in the compliance arena and beyond. Today, Tom is joined by Charlie Spillers, a former federal prosecutor, undercover agent, and author.

Spillers discusses his unique and extensive career, including his 10 years working undercover and his significant contributions in Iraq as a legal advisor during the trial of Saddam Hussein. He shares anecdotes about his life undercover, the impact of stress on his health, and the challenges law enforcement agents face. Additionally, Spillers talks about the lessons he learned from his experiences and offers advice for aspiring professionals in law enforcement. He also touches on his writings and future book projects. This episode is filled with compelling stories, insights into the world of undercover operations, and reflections on global justice.

Key highlights:

  • Writing the Book: Unique Undercover Experiences
  • Impact of Undercover Work on Prosecution
  • Challenges and Ethics in Undercover Operations
  • Personal Toll of Undercover Work
  • Global Stage: Working in Iraq
  • The Importance of Saddam Hussein’s Trial

Resources:

Charlie Spillers  on LinkedIn

Undercover Agent on Amazon.com

Tom Fox

Instagram

Facebook

YouTube

Twitter

LinkedIn

Categories
Everything Compliance - Shout Outs and Rants

Everything Compliance – Shout Outs and Rants: Episode 154

Welcome to this edition of Everything Compliance, Shout-Outs, and Rants. This episode features Matt Kelly, Jonathan Marks, Karen Woody, Tom Fox, and Karen Moore.

  1. Karen Moore shouts out to her nephew, who graduates from Georgetown Law School this week, and to the NFL superfan for allegedly causing Shedeur Sanders to drop to the 5th round before being drafted in the recent NFL Draft.
  2. Matt Kelly rants about the GOP’s attempt to ban states from regulating AI.
  3. Jonathan Marks rants about MLB caving to President Trump and allowing those who bet on baseball back into the fold.
  4. Karen Woody shouts out to the Washington & Lee Law School graduating class of 2025.
  5. Tom Fox shouts out to the Disney TV series Andor.

The members of Everything Compliance are:

Tom Fox, the Voice of Compliance, is the host, producer, and sometimes panelist of Everything Compliance. He can be reached at tfox@tfoxlaw.com. The award-winning Everything Compliance is part of the Compliance Podcast Network.

Categories
Daily Compliance News

Daily Compliance News: May 20, 2025, The What Could Go Wrong Edition

Welcome to the Daily Compliance News. Each day, Tom Fox, the Voice of Compliance, brings you compliance-related stories to start your day. Sit back, enjoy a cup of morning coffee, and listen in to the Daily Compliance News—all from the Compliance Podcast Network. Each day, we consider four stories from the business world: compliance, ethics, risk management, leadership, or general interest for the compliance professional.

Top stories include:

  • Drugmaker to buy genetic data company. (WSJ)
  • Defense boom corruption hits NATO. (dw.com)
  • Disparate impact change tees up compliance risk. (Bloomberg Law)
  • State AGs fill the AI regulatory role.  (Reuters)
Categories
Upping Your Game

Upping Your Game: Episode 3 – Embedded Compliance: From Gatekeeper to Business Enabler

In February, the Trump Administration suspended investigations under and enforcement of the FCPA. Many compliance professionals have since wondered what this will mean for corporate compliance programs. Hui Chen challenged compliance professionals with “it’s time to up your game.”

This podcast series, sponsored by Ethico and co-hosted with Ethico co-CEO Nick Gallo, hopes to meet Hui Chen’s challenge for compliance professionals. We will discuss how compliance professionals can ‘Up Their Game’ using currently existing Generative AI (GenAI) tools to dramatically improve compliance programs. As compliance professionals, it is critical to recognize that this moment is not merely about incremental improvements but elevating our profession to a new level of effectiveness, efficiency, and organizational value.

In today’s ‘Upping Your Game’ episode, Nick and Tom discuss the Holy Grail of Compliance. Embedding Compliance. We dive into the concept of embedded compliance, where compliance is integrated into everyday business operations using advanced technologies like AI. They discuss how embedding compliance can drive quality and efficiency, drawing parallels from manufacturing safety norms. The conversation includes a detailed examination of how AI can help compliance professionals by providing real-time insights and streamlining processes, thereby highlighting the importance of viewing compliance not as an isolated task but as an integral part of business operations. Use cases and practical examples, such as those from the private equity sector and companies like Uber, further illustrate the potential of this approach to enhance business performance and ROI. The episode concludes with a compelling argument for positioning compliance as a blueprint for better business, emphasizing the need for constant advocacy and application of innovative technologies.

Key highlights:

  • Strategic and Operational Benefits
  • The Compliance Professional’s Role in Embedded Compliance
  • Lessons Learned
  • Practical Takeaways

Resources:

Upping Your Game- How Compliance and Risk Management Move to 2030 and Beyond on Amazon.com

Nick Gallo on LinkedIn

Ethico

Ethico Workshop on EV Workshop: Calculate, Track & Articulate Return on Integrity (ROI). For registration and Information, click here.

Tom Fox

Instagram

Facebook

YouTube

Twitter

LinkedIn

Categories
Blog

DOJ’s White-Collar Enforcement Plan: Galeotti Memo on Focus, Fairness, and Efficiency

Matthew R. Galeotti, Head of the Criminal Division at the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), recently delivered a speech at SIFMA’s Anti-Money Laundering and Financial Crimes Conference. Contemporaneously, the DOJ issued a Memo (the Memo) entitled Focus, Fairness, and Efficiency in the Fight Against White-Collar Crime. Today, I want to explore the key insights and crucial issues for compliance professionals in the Memo.

The Memo marks a turning point in the enforcement landscape, emphasizing a trio of principles: focus, fairness, and efficiency. For compliance professionals, these adjustments represent more than mere policy shifts; they outline clear and practical pathways that demand immediate attention and strategic integration into compliance frameworks.

Focus, Fairness, and Efficiency

The Memo states that the DOJ’s core mission is delivering justice, upholding the rule of law, safeguarding the public, and championing victims’ rights. Within the Criminal Division, this mission translates into proactive efforts aimed at dismantling dangerous criminal entities, such as cartels and transnational criminal organizations (TCOs), disrupting human trafficking networks, combating fentanyl and other illicit drug flows, and prosecuting violent offenders and child predators. This is a way of saying that this Administration’s enforcement priorities have changed.

White-collar crime is identified as a critical threat that significantly impacts American citizens and the national economy. Uncontrolled fraud within government programs and markets harms taxpayers, weakens public resources, and undermines national security by facilitating illicit financial activities, including money laundering and sanctions evasion. However, the DOJ believes that overly aggressive enforcement practices can inadvertently damage legitimate businesses, stifle innovation, and punish legitimate risk-taking.

To navigate this complexity, the DOJ’s Criminal Division emphasizes what it characterizes as a balanced enforcement approach grounded in three key principles: focus, fairness, and efficiency. “Focus” entails directing investigative resources towards crimes of greatest national impact, avoiding unnecessary distractions. “Fairness” involves prosecuting individual offenders primarily, ensuring corporate entities are penalized appropriately without excessive burden for isolated misconduct. “Efficiency” calls for streamlined investigations and appropriate, narrowly tailored interventions. Through these guiding tenets, the Criminal Division seeks to effectively tackle serious crimes, protect public interests, and support the vitality and innovation of American enterprise.

Harms Caused by White Collar Crime

White-collar crime presents a significant threat to American society, economy, and national security. Dishonest actors frequently exploit taxpayer-funded government programs through rampant healthcare, procurement, and defense spending fraud, diverting essential resources for vulnerable populations. These abuses weaken government efficacy and impose unjust financial burdens on taxpayers. Additionally, complex investment schemes, including Ponzi operations and elder fraud, target individual investors, stripping them of their financial security and eroding market trust.

Exploiting monetary systems, particularly through digital asset fraud, hampers economic innovation and growth. In contrast, trade and customs fraud, including tariff evasion, negatively impact domestic competitiveness and undermine administration efforts to bolster job creation and investments within the U.S. Financial institutions and shadow banks facilitate serious international crime, including sanctions evasion and money laundering, thus directly supporting transnational criminal enterprises and increasing threats to national security. Specifically, Chinese-affiliated companies (Variable Interest Entities—VIEs) listed on U.S. exchanges have been highlighted for their potential to commit fraud and manipulate markets, putting American investors at significant financial risk.

Sophisticated money laundering schemes further facilitate cross-border crime, allowing criminal organizations to conceal illicit funds and sustain criminal enterprises, including drug trafficking operations that introduce harmful substances like fentanyl to American shores. Furthermore, foreign terrorist groups depend significantly on financial networks and corporate complicity to fund and execute terror activities against U.S. citizens domestically and abroad. Therefore, businesses and financial institutions aiding such organizations severely compromise American lives and national security. Addressing these severe issues, the Criminal Division is intensifying efforts to prosecute these offenses vigorously, prioritizing cases that uphold American economic and national security interests.

Prioritization and Policy Changes

The Criminal Division has updated its enforcement priorities and policies, targeting specific high-impact white-collar crime areas crucial to safeguarding U.S. interests. Priority enforcement categories include fraud against government programs such as healthcare, procurement fraud harming public resources, and trade and customs fraud, like tariff evasion. The Criminal Division will actively prosecute complex financial crimes, including securities fraud, market manipulations, elder fraud, and schemes targeting individual investors and consumers. Additional focus areas encompass activities threatening national security, such as sanctions violations by financial institutions, material support by corporations to foreign terrorist organizations, complex money laundering operations, and violations related to illegal drug manufacturing and distribution.

Furthermore, bribery and associated money laundering activities that harm U.S. competitiveness or security are prioritized, alongside digital asset-related crimes victimizing investors or facilitating significant criminal activities. Prosecutors will prioritize identifying and seizing crime-related assets to reinforce these efforts, emphasizing accountability for senior-level perpetrators or those obstructing justice. Enhancements to the Corporate Whistleblower Awards Pilot Program also underscore this refined approach, adding incentives for reporting violations involving international criminal organizations, terrorism support, immigration breaches, sanctions offenses, and trade fraud. These targeted measures aim to enhance investigative effectiveness, promote fairness, and streamline DOJ’s enforcement efforts.

Fairness in Prosecutions

The Criminal Division’s Corporate Enforcement and Voluntary Self-Disclosure Policy (CEP) has emphasized transparency, cooperation, and remediation, significantly enhancing efforts to hold individual offenders accountable while rewarding responsible corporate citizens. Recognizing that individual actors, whether executives, officers, or employees, often commit white-collar crimes at the expense of investors, employees, and consumers, the Criminal Division focuses intensely on prosecuting these specific wrongdoers. Notably, federal prosecution isn’t always necessary for corporate misconduct; alternative remedies like civil or administrative actions may better address less severe infractions, provided the companies demonstrate sincere cooperation and effective remediation.

Prosecutors evaluate multiple factors when determining corporate charges, including timely self-disclosure, cooperation level, and the comprehensiveness of remedial actions. Recent updates to the CEP further simplify its guidelines, making pathways for potential declinations and fine reductions clearer for corporations. These refinements offer maximal transparency, allowing corporations to make informed decisions about proactively addressing misconduct.

The Criminal Division also reviews existing corporate agreements, potentially shortening their terms based on compliance maturity, reduced risk profiles, and proactive self-reporting. Future corporate resolutions will typically cap terms at three years unless exceptional circumstances dictate otherwise. Regular assessments will determine whether agreements warrant early termination, enhancing fairness and practicality in corporate enforcement.

Efficiency Through Streamlined Investigations

The DOJ’s revised approach emphasizes efficiency and clarity in investigating and prosecuting white-collar crimes, recognizing that lengthy and intrusive federal investigations can unnecessarily burden innocent stakeholders and significantly disrupt normal business operations. Complex white-collar schemes often span borders and involve extensive evidence, causing investigations to stretch for years. However, the DOJ now mandates prosecutors to expedite these investigations, swiftly conclude inquiries, and promptly make charging decisions. This renewed urgency ensures that justice is served quickly, limiting collateral damage to uninvolved entities and reducing reputational harm.

Additionally, the DOJ addresses the use of independent compliance monitors, recognizing that monitorships should only be imposed when necessary, specifically when internal company mechanisms alone are insufficient to prevent misconduct recurrence. To further efficiency, monitorships must be narrowly tailored, carefully scoped to address the specific misconduct risks, and designed to minimize financial costs and operational disruptions for companies.

The Criminal Division has implemented a new monitor selection Memo clarifying the criteria prosecutors must consider when determining the necessity of a monitor and how to limit their mandates appropriately. Furthermore, the DOJ is actively reviewing existing monitorships to individually assess their ongoing necessity, ensuring alignment with the principles of efficiency and minimal interference. Compliance professionals should thus prioritize developing robust internal compliance programs, mitigating the need for external monitors, and preparing for swift, efficient cooperation with any DOJ inquiries.

The Galeotti Memo emphasized a renewed commitment to focus, fairness, and efficiency in white-collar crime enforcement. The Memo underscores the critical need to precisely target high-impact criminal activities, including healthcare fraud, securities manipulation, customs violations, and digital asset crimes. The DOJ aims to protect American interests by clearly defining enforcement priorities while minimizing unnecessary business disruptions.

The DOJ’s revised Corporate Enforcement and Voluntary Self-Disclosure Policy (CEP) reflects a balanced approach that prioritizes prosecuting individual wrongdoers over punishing entire corporations for isolated misconduct. Companies are encouraged toward transparency and proactive self-disclosure, incentivized through more straightforward guidelines, reduced penalties, and potentially shorter oversight durations.

Furthermore, the DOJ stresses the importance of streamlined, efficient investigations to conclude cases and promptly limit collateral damage to innocent parties. Independent compliance monitorships are now restricted to essential circumstances, narrowly tailored to specific compliance needs, minimizing cost and operational interference.

The DOJ’s strategic shifts represent a more cooperative and transparent enforcement regime, fostering improved corporate compliance, accountability, and integrity within American enterprises.

Join us tomorrow when we take a deep dive into the Revised CEP.