Contributors

This article recaps Department of Justice guidance since the Trump Administration took office in January. These are topics we’ve addressed in previous articles and alerts, and are presented here in summarized form. 

Upon taking office in January 2025, President Donald Trump and Attorney General Pam Bondi indicated a pro-business shift in its white collar enforcement priorities. A May 2025 Department of Justice memo stated, “[O]verbroad and unchecked corporate and white-collar enforcement burdens U.S. businesses and harms U.S. interests,” and “[n]ot all corporate misconduct warrants federal criminal prosecution”. The memo also called for an increased investigative pace of investigations to reduce the burdens such inquiries place on businesses.

But a pro-business shift doesn’t mean the Administration or the DOJ doesn’t have enforcement priorities—and businesses need to be aware of these. 

Some of these are familiar, such as health care fraud, securities fraud, and market manipulation. But other enforcement priority areas are new, including trade fraud, complex money laundering involving illegal drugs, and national security threats to financial institutions. The DOJ has already made good on these priorities with a national health care fraud takedown in June 2025—its largest ever with 324 defendants charged for almost $15 billion in fraud.

A More Expansive Approach to Voluntary Self-Disclosure

The Trump Administration’s DOJ has sweetened the pot for voluntary self-disclosure. Now, if a company comes forward voluntarily and self-discloses, fully cooperates, makes timely and appropriate remediation, and has no aggravating circumstances, there “is a clear path to declination.” 

Under the Biden Administration, the policy was that companies would get a “presumption” of a declination, meaning prosecutors retained discretion on the outcome. Now, that declination is promised assuming all factors are met. 

Even companies that have aggravating circumstances may still qualify for declination.  The DOJ says it will consider “the severity of those aggravating circumstances and the company’s cooperation and remediation.” So companies may still qualify for meaningful benefits when self-disclosing in good faith. Such benefits may include as a non-prosecution agreement, a 75 percent reduction in criminal fines, and no requirement to appoint a monitor—even if the disclosure is not considered timely or comes after the DOJ has already discovered the misconduct without the company’s awareness.

Monitorships Now Limited

In addition, monitorships of sanctioned companies will be limited to those cases where deemed necessary by the DOJ. These include “when a company cannot be expected to implement an effective compliance program or prevent recurrence of the underlying misconduct without such heavy-handed intervention.” 

Monitor selection standards are revised to clarify “the factors that prosecutors must consider when determining whether a monitor is appropriate and how those factors should be applied,” as well as require that monitorships be “narrowly tailor[ed]…to address the risk of recurrence of the underlying criminal conduct and to reduce unnecessary costs.” 

Such factors prosecutors may consider include: 

  • The nature and seriousness of the conduct, as well as and the risk of recurrence; 
  • Other available regulatory oversight; 
  • The effectiveness of the company’s compliance program at resolution; and 
  • The maturity of the company’s internal controls, including the company’s ability to test its compliance program as well as make improvements.

One surprise is that DOJ left the corporate whistleblower program intact and identified additional areas of focus that align with the Administration’s key initiatives. The DOJ’s Antitrust Division has since announced its own whistleblower program for antitrust crimes. 

DOJ False Claims Act Priorities

Another potential enforcement area that may be on the rise is the False Claims Act. This is a civil statute and provides liability for companies submitting payment to the government that is either false, deliberately ignorant, or made with reckless disregard. It can provide for treble damages and has provisions for whistleblower rewards. The DOJ’s Civil Division has stated it intends to use the statute for civil rights violations.

 Companies also should look for an uptick in False Claims Act investigations in the international trade area including, customs fraud and tariff evasion.

Key Takeaways

  • The Trump Administration and DOJ have indicated a pro-business shift in white-collar enforcement, aimed at reducing excessive burdens on U.S. businesses while still prioritizing key enforcement areas. 
  • While traditional enforcement priorities such as health care fraud, securities fraud, and market manipulation remain, new focus areas include trade fraud, complex money laundering, and national security threats to financial institutions. 
  • The DOJ has demonstrated its enforcement priorities with significant actions, such as the largest-ever health care fraud takedown in June 2025, involving 324 defendants and $15 billion in fraud. 
  • The DOJ has expanded benefits for voluntary self-disclosure, offering companies a clearer path to declination and potentially significant reductions in criminal penalties, even for those with aggravating circumstances. 
  • Monitorships are now more limited and narrowly tailored to address specific misconduct risks, and DOJ whistleblower programs remain intact, with new initiatives introduced to combat antitrust and other violations.