March 23, 2023

Volume XIII, Number 82


March 22, 2023

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

March 21, 2023

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

March 20, 2023

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

DOJ Updates Corporate Criminal Enforcement Policy to Incentivize “Extraordinary Cooperation” with Prosecutors

The Department of Justice (DOJ) recently introduced the first significant revisions since 2017 to policies affecting all corporate matters handled by the DOJ’s Criminal Division. These policies aim to incentivize companies to self-report misconduct and cooperate with DOJ in exchange for (1) a presumption of declination to bringing criminal charges against wrongdoers and/or (2) significant discounts on fines.

These revisions stem from policy proposals developed by the DOJ’s Corporate Crime Advisory Group under the leadership of Deputy Attorney General (DAG) Lisa Monaco, which Beveridge & Diamond analyzed in September 2022.

    Key Takeaways

    • The revised policy provides for a presumption of declination if a company satisfies three factors after discovering misconduct: (1) immediate self-reporting upon discovery of misconduct; (2) “extraordinary cooperation” with DOJ’s investigation; and (3) demonstrating effective compliance monitoring and accounting controls at the time the misconduct was discovered.

    • Non-recidivist companies that satisfy the above-listed requirements may qualify for a declination despite aggravating factors (e.g., egregious crime, corporate executive involvement) that previously would give rise to criminal prosecution.

    • For non-recidivist companies, when DOJ determines that prosecution is necessary, companies that avail themselves of the policies may receive fine reductions of at least 50% and as much as 75%. Such steep reductions in fines will require “exceptional cooperation” and “extraordinary remediation.”

    • For recidivist companies, prosecutors may still decline to bring criminal charges or require a guilty plea if there is timely self-reporting, full cooperation with DOJ, and prompt remediation.

    • DOJ signaled this is not the last corporate criminal enforcement guidance to be issued. The Corporate Crime Advisory Group is also considering policy revisions or new guidance regarding compensation structures, using personal devices for corporate affairs, and encrypted messaging.


    • April 2016: DOJ’s Criminal Division created a pilot program targeting violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) that provided potential benefits for self-reporting misconduct, cooperating with DOJ, and timely remediating any wrongdoing.

    • November 2017: DOJ expanded the FCPA Pilot Program to become the FCPA Corporate Enforcement Policy (CEP) and incorporated the CEP into the DOJ’s Justice Manual.

    • October 2021: DAG Monaco announced the formation of the Corporate Crime Advisory Group and charged the Advisory Group to develop revisions to corporate criminal enforcement policies.

    • December 2022: DOJ consulted with several groups, including the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and other federal agencies, executive compensation experts, and defense attorneys, to design revisions to the Corporate Enforcement Policy.

    • January 17, 2023: Assistant Attorney General Kenneth Polite Jr. previewed significant revisions to the Corporate Enforcement Policy during a speech at Georgetown University. “We are going to be closely examining how companies discipline bad actors and reward the good ones,” said AAG Polite.

    Updated policy increases incentives to companies that “Come forward, cooperate, and remediate.”

    The revised CEP seeks to dovetail the interests of companies concerned with compliance, including with respect to environmental laws. This development comes as companies face increasing scrutiny from government agencies, private stakeholders, and the public marketplace. DOJ expects its revised policy will benefit companies that seriously undertake good corporate citizenship efforts. The policy favors “extraordinary measures before, during, and after a Criminal Division investigation,” in AAG Polite’s words, though he never defined “extraordinary.”

    Notably, the policy seeks to achieve cooperation with companies despite the presence of aggravating factors that would otherwise render self-reporting untenable. “The revised CEP presents another path for companies facing such a choice,” said AAG Polite. He summarized the policy: “Come forward, cooperate, and remediate.”

    Finally, AAG Polite signaled that DOJ is willing to negotiate fine reductions for companies that do not timely self-report misconduct but cooperate and remediate. DOJ will recommend a reduction of up to 50% in a fine if a company satisfies the aforementioned “extraordinary” measures.

    Prosecutors can use discretion to reward companies for policies and compliance measures that discourage misconduct.

    On December 16, 2022, Attorney General (AG) Merrick Garland issued a memorandum for all federal prosecutors setting forth his updated general policies for charging, pleas, and sentencing. Although not directly connected to the Corporate Crime Advisory Group’s policies regarding self-reporting, cooperation, and remediation, the memo shows concurrent developments in the DOJ’s “reasoned exercise of prosecutorial discretion.” The memo underscores that DOJ follows principles on whether to pursue criminal prosecution “if the prosecution would not serve a substantial federal interest or the person is subject to adequate alternatives to federal prosecution.” In AG Garland’s memo and AAG Polite’s speech, DOJ demonstrates a desire to limit its use of prosecutorial resources and power in circumstances where voluntary self-reporting and remediation are appropriate.


    Amid rising enforcement and increased public attention against corporate misconduct, companies should evaluate their self-governance mechanisms, including independent monitoring and accounting controls. Companies should also familiarize themselves with the emerging corporate criminal enforcement policies that favor self-reporting, cooperation with investigators, and timely remediation.

    © 2023 Beveridge & Diamond PC National Law Review, Volume XIII, Number 25

    About this Author

    Alyse I. Constantinide Environmental Litigation Attorney Beveridge & Diamond Law Firm Washington, DC

    Alyse uses her experience as a federal prosecutor to assist clients with compliance, enforcement, internal investigations, and white collar matters.

    As a former Assistant U.S. Attorney, Alyse offers firm clients strategic counsel on high-stakes enforcement and compliance matters, particularly in complex or large-scale white-collar litigation and internal investigations.  Her strong background in criminal investigation, prosecution, and litigation complements the firm’s robust environmental and natural resource regulatory practices.

    Highlights of her career include:...

    Evynn M. Overton Environmental Litigation Attorney Beveridge & Diamond Baltimore, MD

    Evynn represents clients in complex civil and criminal environmental litigation, working closely with technical experts to build strong technical defenses and address other client needs.

    She excels at working collaboratively and efficiently, and in translating complex technical and legal issues into understandable terms.

    Evynn manages sensitive internal investigations, implements strategies for providing fast-paced and cost-efficient responses to subpoenas and discovery requests, assists in the development and implementation of corporate compliance plans, and negotiates...

    Allyn L. Stern Environmental Attorney Beveridge & Diamond Seattle, WA
    Of Counsel

    Allyn brings over 30 years of insider understanding of government operations.

    Her experience as former Region 10 Counsel at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) informs her deep policy, regulatory, and enforcement knowledge. Allyn draws on her breadth and depth of expertise to help clients comply with an array of environmental statutes and regulations applicable to their businesses, including Clean Water Act (CWA) and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) permit approvals, risk management under the Clean Air Act 112(r), civil and criminal enforcement, Superfund cleanup...

    John B. O'Meara Seattle Environmental Attorney Beveridge Diamond

    John B. O'Meara is an Associate at Beveridge & Diamond's Seattle office. A member of the firm's CERCLA practice, John offers courtroom experience in complex environmental tort cases.

    His practice focuses on complex litigation, class actions, and mass torts.

    Before joining Beveridge & Diamond, John gained experience defending first- and third-party disputes from inception through trial, including: first-chair arbitration and mediation experience, arguing dispositive motions in court, advising clients on...