On May 12, 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) announced a major overhaul of its corporate enforcement policy, aiming to incentivize companies to voluntarily self-disclose misconduct. Titled “Focus, Fairness, and Efficiency in the Fight Against White-Collar Crime,” the revised policy was introduced by DOJ Criminal Division Chief Matthew R. Galeotti and promises a “clear path to declination” for qualifying companies. This marks a strategic shift that could significantly alter how corporate entities approach disclosures, investigations, and compliance moving forward.

The policy outlines 10 priority areas that Galeotti identified as critical threats to U.S. interests. These include healthcare fraud, trade and customs violations, misuse of digital assets, and misconduct posing national security risks. Schemes such as Ponzi operations, tariff evasion, and fraud involving Variable Interest Entities (VIEs) are called out specifically for undermining market integrity and harming U.S. investors.

At the core of the revised Corporate Enforcement and Voluntary Self-Disclosure Policy (CEP) is a strengthened framework to promote corporate transparency. The new policy addresses longstanding concerns about balancing the incentives for disclosure with the need for fairness in enforcement. Under the updated approach, companies may avoid criminal resolutions entirely if they:

• Voluntarily self-disclose misconduct before it becomes public or is discovered by the government;
• Fully cooperate with DOJ investigations;
• Timely remediate the misconduct to prevent recurrence; and
• Have no aggravating factors, such as repeat offenses or involvement by senior leadership.

Galeotti urged companies to disclose early and openly, noting that “timing and transparency in disclosure will tilt the scales towards leniency.” Even in cases involving aggravating circumstances, the DOJ may still offer a declination. This will depend on the severity of those factors and the company’s cooperation and remediation efforts.

Companies that report misconduct in good faith—without knowing whether DOJ is already aware—can still receive substantial benefits, including:

• Shorter resolution periods, with agreements potentially lasting less than three years;
• Significant fine reductions, based on cooperation, remediation, and the strength of a company’s compliance program; and
• Reduced reliance on corporate monitors, with narrower criteria for when monitorships are imposed.

This reflects a meaningful departure from prior policies, which often conditioned benefits on stricter timelines or broader disclosures.

Another notable shift is the DOJ’s recalibrated approach to corporate monitorships. Described by Galeotti as “narrowed in scope to focus on practicality,” the updated policy introduces more discretion in imposing or terminating monitorships. Key considerations include the seriousness of the misconduct, the likelihood of recurrence, the robustness of a company’s compliance program, and alternative oversight mechanisms such as regulatory audits.

For companies currently under DOJ monitorships, the revised guidelines could offer relief. Depending on a review of risk and compliance strength, existing monitorships may be shortened or scaled back. Organizations should assess their compliance infrastructure and explore whether they meet the revised standards for a reduction or termination of oversight.

The DOJ’s updated policy signals a new era—one that emphasizes fairness and efficiency while continuing to aggressively pursue high-priority white-collar crimes. The message to corporate America is clear: proactive transparency and strong compliance are not only encouraged—they may be the key to avoiding criminal liability altogether.

For companies operating in enforcement-priority sectors, the takeaway is urgent. Strengthen your compliance programs, prepare for timely and honest disclosures, and act decisively in the face of potential misconduct. The incentives for doing so have never been greater.