Department of Justice Announces Enforcement Priorities and Measures to Ease Burdens on Corporations Facing Government Investigations

The U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”)’s white collar enforcement strategy under the new Administration is coming into greater focus with an announcement of enforcement priorities and new measures to ease the burden on corporations arising from government investigations, including amendments to the corporate self-disclosure and monitorship policies. The enforcement priorities align with the Administration’s focus on immigration and inbound national security threats, and also signal that it will prioritize fraud, money laundering, and corruption matters that pose a particular threat to U.S. interests. Consistent with these priorities, the DOJ expanded its existing whistleblower program to areas of enforcement priority, such as immigration and economic sanctions.

Matthew R. Galeotti, head of the DOJ’s Criminal Division, announced these developments in a Memorandum entitled “Focus, Fairness, and Efficiency in the Fight Against White-Collar Crime.” (“the Memorandum”). In parallel, DOJ issued amended self-disclosure, whistleblower and monitorship policies.

Enforcement Priorities

The Memorandum identifies ten enforcement priorities for the DOJ’s Criminal Division that align with the enforcement priorities announced in February 2025 following the issuance of Executive Order 14147. (See prior OMM alert: DOJ Announces Dramatic Shift in Enforcement Priorities and Resources, Potentially Reshaping White-Collar Enforcement Landscape.)

Most notable areas of focus include:

Fraud. The Memorandum prioritizes many types of fraud, such as healthcare fraud, federal program and procurement fraud, and financial fraud that victimizes individual U.S. investors.

Harms to U.S. Economy. Consistent with the Trump Administration’s trade priorities, including its strategy of significant tariff increases, (see DOJ Announces Dramatic Shift in Enforcement Priorities and Resources, Potentially Reshaping White-Collar Enforcement Landscape), DOJ affirmed its intention to prioritize the prosecution of customs fraud and tariff evasion.

National Security. Many of the enumerated priorities are designed to address national security threats arising from drug trafficking of narcotics and fentanyl, with a focus on cartels, and crimes adjacent to trafficking, such as money laundering, sanctions evasion, terrorism, and crimes involving digital assets.

Bribery. Consistent with the Trump Administration’s announced shift in strategy regarding the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, (see President Trump Issues Executive Order Pausing Enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act), the Memorandum prioritized combatting corruption involving acts of foreign officials and schemes that harm U.S. competitiveness and U.S. national security.

Broadening of Whistleblower Program

In March 2024, the Biden Administration launched a whistleblower pilot program designed to incentivize individuals to disclose significant corporate or financial misconduct (see Department of Justice Announces New Whistleblower Reward Program). DOJ has amended the policy to expand the scope of areas eligible for whistleblower protection that align with its enforcement priorities, including immigration, government contracting, sanctions, terrorism, and assistance to cartels.

Measures to Reduce Investigative Burdens on Corporations

A central theme of the Memorandum is a concern that government investigations of corporations have become too burdensome, lengthy, and overbroad, and that it is critical to American prosperity to provide transparent policies that acknowledge law-abiding companies and companies that are willing to learn from their mistakes. It addresses these goals with a number of procedural changes. In addition to directing prosecutors to minimize the length of investigations and to make swift charging decisions, the Memorandum announces changes to DOJ’s self-disclosure policy and its practices for use of monitors.

Self-Disclosure Policy Amendments

The Corporate Enforcement and Voluntary Self-Disclosure Policy issued in 2022 under the Biden Administration set forth circumstances under which DOJ would seek a declination for entities that self-disclosed.

Under the new policy, the core requirements for a declination have not changed: a company must still voluntarily self-disclose, cooperate, remediate the conduct, and cannot have aggravating circumstances. The new DOJ policy makes a number of material changes designed to provide more favorable outcome certainty for companies that self-disclose, however. First, where the prior policy only gave a presumption of declination where the core criteria are met, the new policy states that a company “will” receive a declination upon meeting the established criteria. Second, the policy provides prosecutors greater discretion to recommend declinations in the presence of aggravating circumstances. Third the policy is more forgiving to corporations that cooperate, but do not meet all the criteria for a declination by establishing a “near miss” category, which allows for significant penalty mitigation or a non-prosecution agreement where the company comes close, but fails to meet all the criteria for a voluntary self-disclosure.

Diminished Use of Monitorships

Consistent with the theme of reducing unwarranted burdens on well-intentioned corporations, the Memorandum directs prosecutors to consider compliance monitors only when clearly necessary, and even then, ensure the monitor’s mandate is narrowly tailored to achieve their goals with the least interference with the business as possible.

The new policy provides more concrete guardrails to manage expense through required hourly rate caps and detailed and updated budgets. It also provides for greater government oversight, such as through required bi-annual meetings. The selection criteria ensure that the company’s choice is giving primary consideration. In keeping with the Administration’s policies related to diversity, it removes the criteria favoring diverse candidates.

Implications

The Memorandum provides the clearest indication of the current Administration’s enforcement priorities and approach to corporate investigations, and many of the measures will be welcome news to the corporate community.

The changes to the voluntary self-disclosure policy provide more definitive pathways to declinations and reduced fines. Likewise, the changes in monitorship practices reduce a corporation’s risk of lengthy and expensive engagement on compliance issues post-settlement, with more certainty of closure. The Memorandum’s stated goal of providing greater outcome transparency will facilitate the challenging decisions that corporate management facing potential liability must undertake.

One potential consequence of the national security-focused enforcement priorities that may emerge is a greater focus on non-U.S. corporations and actors. Many of the enforcement priorities align with the Trump Administration’s “America First” tagline. Notably, while the Memorandum does not explicitly target particular countries it does emphasize concerns with “hostile nation-states.” In two areas—complex money laundering and abuses by Variable Interest Entities (known as “VIEs”)—the Memorandum also signals a concern with Chinese actors.

O’Melveny attorneys would be pleased to discuss these developments in greater detail, including how these enforcement priorities and DOJ process changes may impact particular companies or circumstances.

This memorandum is a summary for general information and discussion only and may be considered an advertisement for certain purposes. It is not a full analysis of the matters presented, may not be relied upon as legal advice, and does not purport to represent the views of our clients or the Firm. Greta L. Nightingale, an O’Melveny partner licensed to practice law in the District of Columbia; Jim Bowman, an O’Melveny partner licensed to practice law in California; Mark A. Racanelli, an O’Melveny partner licensed to practice law in New York; Sharon M. Bunzel, an O’Melveny partner licensed to practice law in California; David N. Kelley, an O’Melveny partner licensed to practice law in Connecticut and New York; Sid Mody, an O’Melveny partner licensed to practice law in Texas; David J. Ribner, an O’Melveny partner licensed to practice law in the District of Columbia and New York; Reema Shah, an O’Melveny partner licensed to practice law in New York; AnnaLou Tirol, an O’Melveny partner licensed to practice law in California and the District of Columbia; and Shruti Kannan, an O’Melveny associate licensed to practice law in the District of Columbia and New York, contributed to the content of this newsletter. The views expressed in this newsletter are the views of the authors except as otherwise noted.

© 2025 O’Melveny & Myers LLP. All Rights Reserved. Portions of this communication may contain attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Please direct all inquiries regarding New York’s Rules of Professional Conduct to O’Melveny & Myers LLP, 1301 Avenue of the Americas, Suite 1700, New York, NY, 10019, T: +1 212 326 2000.