On May 12, 2025, the new head of the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Criminal Division, Matthew Galeotti, issued a memorandum outlining DOJ’s white-collar enforcement priorities (Galeotti Memo). The Galeotti Memo builds upon a series of Executive Orders from President Trump and memoranda from Attorney General Pam Bondi, which we wrote about here.
The Galeotti Memo identifies 10 “high-impact areas” in the white-collar space that the Criminal Division will prioritize. These priorities are heralded as having the “greatest impact” in protecting U.S. citizens, companies, and interests, notably (1) threats to the U.S. economy, American competitiveness, and national security; (2) enforcement targeting specific industries; and (3) the use of cryptocurrency and digital assets in furtherance of certain priority criminal offenses. While a number of the priorities echo the Administration’s “America First” objectives, including a focus on enforcement related to trade policy, transnational criminal organizations (TCOs), national security, and waste, fraud, and abuse in government programs, other priorities are consistent with traditional DOJ white-collar enforcement, including healthcare fraud, consumer and investor fraud, and bribery.
The Galeotti Memo also amends the Criminal Division’s Corporate Enforcement and Voluntary Self-Disclosure Policy (CEP) and expands DOJ’s existing Corporate Whistleblower Awards Pilot Program, described in further detail below.
Trump 2.0 White-Collar Priorities
Given the focus of the Trump Administration on trade policy, it is unsurprising that the listed priorities include a focus on trade and customs fraud, including tariff evasion. However, the criminal conduct described extends beyond seeking to avoid tariffs and other existing trade measures, to include conduct that “harms the competitiveness of U.S. businesses,” explicitly placing both bribery and associated money laundering under this umbrella. The Galeotti Memo highlights foreign corruption as a priority while citing President Trump’s previous Executive Order pausing enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), directly signaling that the pause is not permanent and will be lifted. This may indicate a shift in enforcement focus toward instances in which competitiveness of U.S. businesses might be harmed, or other U.S. national interests are undermined—such as when non-U.S. companies are suspected of paying bribes to the perceived detriment of U.S. companies, or where bribes are paid to officials in countries hostile to the Trump Administration.
In addition, the updated policy indicates that DOJ will prioritize the investigation and prosecution of companies providing material support to cartels, TCOs, foreign terrorist organizations (FTOs), and hostile nation-states. In particular, the Galeotti Memo warns “financial institutions” that, as “gatekeepers” for threats to U.S. markets and U.S. national security, sanctions violations and enabling transactional support for cartels, TCOs, FTOs, and hostile nation-states will draw scrutiny. As for digital asset financial services providers—cryptocurrency exchanges, tumblers, and mixers—DOJ’s “highest priority” will be those cases “impacting victims, involving cartels, TCOs, or [FTOs], or facilitating drug money laundering or sanctions evasion.” This is consistent with earlier Administration pronouncements indicating a turn away from regulating digital assets towards prosecuting incidents of misuse of digital assets to facilitate other criminal activity.
Though not specifically mentioned, government contractors and federal fund recipients, particularly in the national security space, should also be on notice; they could be targeted if they found themselves at the nexus of several overlapping targets: “waste, fraud, and abuse” in procurement; bribery; trade and customs fraud; etc. They should expect additional enforcement scrutiny (on top of the added civil litigation pressures of FTO designations, as we have written about here). DOJ will likely aggressively use the False Claims Act (FCA) to bring claims against contractors and grant recipients for up to three times the government’s damages plus a penalty. The FCA also has a qui tam provision that allows private citizens to file suits on behalf of the government as well as a powerful whistleblower provision, both of which may result in substantial awards of 15% to 30% of recovered funds. DOJ has not shied away from using the FCA as a tool in the early days of the Administration, including by filing a complaint against three U.S. health insurance companies earlier this month that alleged Medicare fraud and fraud conspiracy, reaching multi-million dollar settlements against government contractors for claims related to cybersecurity issues, as well as the announcement of a new Civil Rights Fraud Initiative seeking to use the FCA to bring claims against universities and other institutions for alleged “illegal” diversity, equity, and inclusion practices.
Revised Self-Reporting and Whistleblowing Policies
The Galeotti Memo describes revisions to both the Corporate Whistleblower Awards Pilot Program and the CEP. To the existing whistleblower program, DOJ has added new “Subject Areas” that reflect the Galeotti Memo’s 10 “high-impact areas.” A temporary amendment to the CEP also formalized a presumption of a declination for companies that self-report within 120 days of receiving a whistleblower report. Our previous analysis on the whistleblower program can be found here and here.
DOJ is also adopting more lenient declination guidelines under its updated CEP, described by Galeotti in a speech contemporaneous to the Memo as a “clear path to declination.” As described in a flowchart, DOJ believes the changes sweeten the incentives for voluntary self-disclosures (VSDs) by making declinations and non-prosecution agreements (NPAs) more readily available with more transparency around outcomes. Our previous consideration of this program can be found here.
The Galeotti Memo formalizes three outcomes: (1) a declination, with terms substantively identical to previous policy including timeliness of disclosure, timely and appropriate remediation, and “no aggravating circumstances”; (2) an NPA for a declination “near miss,” where a self-report did not qualify as a “voluntary self-disclosure” for missing one required factor, or modest aggravating factors were present; and (3) other cases.
The biggest change overall appears to be increased fine reductions, offering a reduction of 75% off of the low end of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines recommended fine range for “near misses” (the prior iteration of the CEP gave up to a 50% reduction for such cases). However, DOJ retains subjective latitude to determining outcomes—particularly, whether the VSD is “reasonably prompt,” an undefined phrase that creates some risk for companies considering self-disclosure.
Key Takeaways
- DOJ remains focused on traditional white-collar priorities. The Galeotti Memo highlights 10 enforcement priorities of the new administration, many of which have been long-standing areas of focus for DOJ. Notably, the Galeotti Memo makes clear that the Administration is still focused on bribery and money laundering, including the FCPA, particularly where such conduct may harm U.S. interests and threaten the competitiveness of U.S. businesses.
- Non-U.S. companies with a U.S. nexus should remain vigilant. DOJ has made clear that American competitiveness has become the nexus of its enforcement priorities. Non-U.S. companies with a U.S. nexus may face scrutiny and should remain vigilant against fraudulent practices and potential violations of U.S. laws.
- False Claims Act enforcement is likely on the rise. The Galeotti Memo states that investigating and prosecuting waste, fraud, and abuse is the first priority of the Criminal Division. Government contractors should be focused on making sure that they are in compliance with the terms of contracts and award grants, with a particular focus on priority areas for the Administration.
- Managing effective whistleblower programs is essential. The Galeotti Memo expanded the scope of the Biden DOJ Corporate Whistleblower Awards Pilot Program to cover new priorities of the Administration and notably did not adjust any of the technical requirements of the program. This may place additional pressure on companies to be aware of and effectively manage incoming internal whistleblower complaints given the 120-day clock, which runs from the date of the report for a company to obtain a presumptive declination.
- Minimal change to voluntary self-disclosure risk calculus. The policy changes for self-reporting that accompanied the Galeotti Memo were designed to enlarge the “carrot” for VSDs. Overall, the adjustments signal a friendlier posture for companies accused of misconduct, but risks remain—certain of the factors must be subjective and it will always be DOJ making those determinations.
