On October 1, 2026, Assistant Attorney General Colin M. McDonald issued a memorandum describing the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) National Fraud Enforcement Division’s (Fraud Division) corporate enforcement priorities and certain directives intended to advance the Fraud Division’s mission. AAG McDonald, who was confirmed by the Senate in March to serve as the first Assistant Attorney General over the newly created Fraud Division, writes that the Fraud Division will take an “aggressive, all-tools approach” as it investigates and prosecutes activity involving its priorities: healthcare, government, tax, and trade fraud.1 Additionally, the memorandum outlines a new, close partnership between Fraud Division prosecutors and the Division’s Corporate Enforcement Section, which is responsible for overseeing corporate resolutions, compliance programs, and post-resolution oversight.
Fraud Division’s Corporate Enforcement Priorities. Companies should take note of the Fraud Division’s corporate enforcement priorities as outlined in the memorandum:
- fraud schemes involving the healthcare industry, including distribution of controlled substances and violations of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act;2
- fraud schemes involving the public trust or financial integrity of Americans and markets related to procurement, government contracts and other government functions;3
- fraud schemes involving “significant” evasion of internal or external revenue;4 and
- fraud schemes involving tariff evasion, importation of goods or services, or forced labor.5
These stated priorities are consistent with prior announcements and highlight the ongoing enforcement focus on the healthcare sector, government contractors and manufacturers importing goods into the United States.
The memo also provides a non-exhaustive list of factors that prosecutors are instructed to afford “great weight” as they recommend charges and negotiate plea deals and other agreements:
- knowledge of or involvement in a fraud scheme by corporate management;6
- efforts to conceal fraud from government agencies or auditors or otherwise impede or obstruct a government function or oversight activity;7
- conduct furthering a scheme lasting three years or more;8
- actions threatening the safety or security of Americans, including military readiness;9
- conduct causing substantial financial hardship to a taxpayer-funded program or government function;10
- conduct affecting multiple taxpayer-funded programs or government functions;11
- conduct affecting three or more federal districts;12
- conduct resulting in financial harm to 25 or more victims or losses of $25 million or more;13
- conduct involving the exfiltration of American dollars to support foreign adversaries;14 and
- conduct involving immigration offenses.15
Close Partnership Between Division Prosecutors and Corporate Enforcement Section. In order to promote “efficiency, consistency, and results,” the memorandum directs all Fraud Division prosecutors to within seven days inform the Fraud Division’s Corporate Enforcement Section Chief of any corporate investigations, as well as to notify the Corporate Enforcement Section of any major developments in corporate prosecutions on an ongoing basis.16 Further, the memorandum notes that the Corporate Enforcement Section has primary responsibility for overseeing “compliance with the terms of any corporate criminal resolution,” including assessments of corporate compliance programs and ongoing reporting obligations.17
Data-Driven Lead Generation and Whistleblowers. According to the memorandum, the Fraud Division has deployed “state-of-the-art technology” and “data analytics through the National Fraud Detection Center and partner components” to generate leads and open fraud investigations at a “rapid pace.”18 The Fraud Division also invites the assistance of whistleblowers, other individuals (including participants in criminal activity), and corporate partners to share information about potential corporate fraud.19
To further support this effort, Fraud Division leaders are instructed to develop and implement policies and programs to incentivize whistleblowers to provide credible tips related to fraud and to provide the public with transparency regarding those policies and programs to the extent possible.
Renewed Emphasis on Corporate Enforcement Principles. Finally, the memorandum reiterates DOJ’s long-standing focus on crediting those corporate actors that demonstrate cooperation with enforcement efforts.20 At the same time, the memorandum articulates the Fraud Division’s aim to “firmly guard against overbroad corporate enforcement” that could “interfere with legitimate business purposes.”21 To effectuate these principles, the memorandum directs Fraud Division prosecutors to follow existing DOJ-wide policies, including the Principles of Federal Prosecution of Business Organizations and the Corporate Enforcement and Voluntary Self-Disclosure Policy.
Taken together, this guidance indicates that the Fraud Division intends to use new technology and data at its disposal, establish new policies and procedures to further incentivize whistleblowers, and continue to seek company disclosures and cooperation in order to investigate corporate activity that implicates any of its key enforcement priorities, particularly healthcare, government contracts and procurement, and tax and tariff evasion. Companies facing Fraud Division investigations (in these areas and others) should also anticipate further interactions with the Fraud Division’s Corporate Enforcement Section in connection with any potential corporate resolution or compliance presentation, and potentially in connection with the underlying investigation. Nonetheless, the memorandum reiterates that the Fraud Division’s enforcement activities will be guided by DOJ’s long-standing principles of corporate enforcement, including continued emphasis on effective compliance principles and voluntary disclosure, and commits to “firmly guarding against overbroad corporate enforcement.”23
