What does the DOJ’s response to FAQ No. 4 tell us about cooperation? This is the second of two posts relating to FAQ No. 4. In a previous post, we addressed the DOJ’s response to FAQ No. 4 regarding voluntary disclosure by a company. This post will address what the DOJ’s response says about a company cooperating, which includes, as we noted in Part 1, only a brief but important reference to cooperation: “In recognition of the significant value early reporting holds for the government, the Principles [of Federal Prosecution Of Business Organizations] were revised to separate voluntary disclosure from cooperation in order to treat prompt voluntary disclosure as an independent factor to be considered.” While it may be a rare, and probably highly unusual, situation when a company voluntarily discloses misconduct, but then decides not to cooperate with the government, such a situation is not outside the realm of possibility. Voluntary disclosure does not obligate a company to cooperate. However, according to the DOJ’s response to FAQ No. 4, “it is expected that, in circumstances where the company self-discloses before all facts are known, the company will continue to turn over additional information to the government as it becomes available.” This language indicates that if a company makes a voluntary disclosure, it will have established an expectation in the DOJ that the company will cooperate thereafter. Even if a company does not voluntarily disclose wrongdoing, it might still end up cooperating with a government investigation. If that situation arises, it must be remembered that under the Sentencing Guidelines, the company may well have given up an argument that it is entitled to the maximum reduction in its Culpability Score calculation because it will not be able to demonstrate that it self-reported misconduct “prior to an imminent threat of disclosure or government investigation” and/or that it did not self-report “within a reasonably prompt time after becoming aware of the offense.” U.S.S.G. § 8C2.5(g)(1). U.S.S.G. § 8C2.5, Application Note 13 focuses on cooperation illustrating the difference between voluntary disclosure and cooperation, and provides in part: “To qualify for a reduction under subsection (g)(1) or (g)(2), cooperation must be both timely and thorough. To be timely, the cooperation must begin essentially at the same time as the organization is officially notified of a criminal investigation. To be thorough, the cooperation should include the disclosure of all pertinent information known by the organization.” The DOJ policy provides that “[t]he extent of the cooperation credit earned [by a company] will depend on all the various factors that have traditionally applied in making [the] assessment (e.g., the timeliness of the cooperation, the diligence, thoroughness and speed of the internal investigation, and the proactive nature of the cooperation).” USAM § 9-28.700. On the other hand, company counsel must keep in mind that while voluntary disclosure is not the same as cooperation, they are very much inter-related: “prosecutors may consider a corporation’s timely and voluntary disclosure, both as [A] an independent factor and [B] in evaluating [i] the company’s overall cooperation and [ii] the adequacy of the corporation’s compliance program and [iii] its management’s commitment to the compliance program. See USAM 9-28.700 and 9-28.800. In order to illustrate the potential significance of reducing a company’s Culpability Score as much as possible under the Sentencing Guidelines for those less familiar with the Sentencing Guidelines, we will compare the hypothetical fine range for “Company A” with that of “Company B.” We will assume that Company B qualifies for a five-point reduction in its Culpability Score because it timely self-reported the offense to appropriate governmental authorities, fully cooperated in the investigation, and clearly demonstrated recognition and affirmative acceptance of responsibility for its criminal conduct. Company A on the other hand did not timely self-report the offense to appropriate governmental authorities, and did not fully cooperate in the investigation, but it did clearly demonstrate recognition and affirmative acceptance of responsibility for its criminal conduct; thereby garnering a one-point reduction. Assuming that all other sentencing factors are identical for Company A and Company B, we will say that Company A has a Culpability Score of 12 (with its 1 point reduction), while Company B has a Culpability Score of 8 (with its 5 point reduction). If the Base Fine for both companies is $2 million dollars, Company A will face a fine range of $4 million to $8 million but Company B will face a fine range of $3.2 million to $6.4 million. Both companies face very substantial fine ranges in our hypothetical, but Company B would face an appreciably lower fine range because it timely self-reported the offense to appropriate governmental authorities and fully cooperated in the investigation. The risks of voluntarily disclosing misconduct, and/or cooperating with the government, must be balanced against the benefits of doing one or the other or both. In some situations the potential benefits will outweigh the risks. In other situations, the scale will tip the other way. To some extent, the balancing of the risks and benefits can be ‘quantified’ by assessing, and if need be re-assessing, the impact on a company’s fine range under the Sentencing Guidelines. The decision to voluntarily disclose or not voluntarily disclose, and to cooperate or not cooperate, should not be made without having the benefit of a sufficiently in-depth and robust internal investigation before making those decisions.
RELATED ARTICLES
Digital Asset Businesses Amp Up Their Compliance Measures to Avoid Insider Trading Actions
August 26, 2022 | The GEE Blog, Department of Justice, SEC
Impact of Compliance Professional as New Fraud Section Chief
June 13, 2022 | The GEE Blog, Department of Justice
DOJ Issues Expedited FCPA Opinion, Shows Willingness to Communicate With Requestors
February 7, 2022 | The GEE Blog, FCPA, Department of Justice
The Enforcement Climate is Changing for ESG Disclosures
January 26, 2022 | Environmental, The GEE Blog
Scope of DOJ’s Enforcement of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act After Van Buren
June 30, 2021 | The GEE Blog, Department of Justice
Digital Asset Businesses Amp Up Their Compliance Measures to Avoid Insider Trading Actions
August 26, 2022 | The GEE Blog, Department of Justice, SEC
Impact of Compliance Professional as New Fraud Section Chief
June 13, 2022 | The GEE Blog, Department of Justice
DOJ Issues Expedited FCPA Opinion, Shows Willingness to Communicate With Requestors
February 7, 2022 | The GEE Blog, FCPA, Department of Justice
The Enforcement Climate is Changing for ESG Disclosures
January 26, 2022 | Environmental, The GEE Blog
Scope of DOJ’s Enforcement of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act After Van Buren
June 30, 2021 | The GEE Blog, Department of Justice
DOJ Targets COVID-19 Fraud With Coordinated, Multi-District Law Enforcement Action
June 2, 2021 | The GEE Blog, Department of Justice
Analyzing Price Gouging Under the Federal Defense Production Act
September 8, 2020 | The GEE Blog, Department of Justice
DOJ’s First FCPA Opinion Release in Six Years Highlights Long-Standing Principles
August 21, 2020 | The GEE Blog, FCPA
Don’t Overthink It! Advocate for Easy to Understand Jury Instructions to Effectively Communicate Your Case
May 17, 2018 | Government Investigations, Jury Instructions, The GEE Blog
Don't Let DOJ Defections Fool You: Corporate Conduct Still in the Crosshairs
September 6, 2017 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
The Yates Memo – DOJ Issues Questions and Answers: Question 7
May 1, 2017 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
The Yates Memo – DOJ Issues Questions and Answers: Question 6
April 27, 2017 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
The Yates Memo – DOJ Issues Questions and Answers: Question 5
April 25, 2017 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
The Yates Memo – DOJ Issues Questions and Answers: Question 4 (Part 1)
April 4, 2017 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
DOJ’s Corporate Compliance Program Guidance Provides Succinct Resource for Companies
March 31, 2017 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
The Yates Memo – DOJ Issues Questions and Answers: Question 3
March 31, 2017 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
Recently Announced: DOJ Will Extend the FCPA Pilot Program
March 28, 2017 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
The Yates Memo – DOJ Issues Questions and Answers: Question 2
March 21, 2017 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
The Yates Memo – DOJ Issues Questions and Answers: Question No. 1
March 17, 2017 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
The Yates Memo – DOJ Issues Questions and Answers
March 15, 2017 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
Department of Justice Rolls Out FCPA Enforcement Pilot Program
April 8, 2016 | Department of Justice, FCPA, The GEE Blog
DOJ Launches Targeted Elder Justice Task Forces
April 1, 2016 | Government Investigations, The GEE Blog
A New Approach: DOJ Antitrust Division in Wake of Yates Memo
March 23, 2016 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
DOJ Leaves Much Unsaid After Announcing Need for Corporate Certifications to Finalize Settlements
March 8, 2016 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
The “Other Yates Memo:” DOJ to Enhance Workplace Safety Violation Prosecutions by Tacking On More Severe Charges Where Possible
February 8, 2016 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
“Hide No Harm Act Of 2015” Targets Employers, Directors and Officers
November 5, 2015 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT POLICY CHANGE TARGETS CORPORATE EXECUTIVES
September 11, 2015 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
What the DOJ Expects of 'Effective' Compliance Programs
August 12, 2015 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
U.S. v. Sigelman: Another FCPA Enforcement Setback for the DOJ
June 25, 2015 | FCPA, The GEE Blog
Justice Department Guidelines Seek to Focus Enforcement of Structuring Law on Most Serious Cases
June 8, 2015 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
THE BENEFITS OF COOPERATION – HYPERDYNAMICS AVOIDS INDICTMENT
May 29, 2015 | FCPA, The GEE Blog
RENEWED GOVERNMENT INTERFERENCE IN ATTORNEY FEE ARRANGEMENTS?
May 28, 2015 | Government Investigations, The GEE Blog
Extradition from Japan: The Gamble
May 5, 2015 | Government Investigations, The GEE Blog
Self-Reporting: A Wise Strategy or Chasing Unicorns?
April 28, 2015 | SEC, The GEE Blog
Top 10 Takeaways from ABA White Collar Crime Conference 2015 (Part 2)
March 18, 2015 | The GEE Blog
Top 10 Takeaways from ABA White Collar Crime Conference 2015 (Part 1)
March 17, 2015 | The GEE Blog
ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL URGES COMPANIES TO COOPERATE AND CONDUCT THOROUGH INTERNAL INVESTIGATIONS OF FCPA VIOLATIONS
November 21, 2014 | FCPA, The GEE Blog
Bio-Rad Settlement Reinforces FCPA Trends
November 7, 2014 | FCPA, SEC, The GEE Blog
A Cozy Relationship: The DOJ and JFTC, and the Potential Risks of Taking Advantage of JFTC’s Leniency Program
October 31, 2014 | Government Investigations, The GEE Blog
Supreme Court Passes on Esquenazi, Makes Instrumentality Test Settled Law
October 6, 2014 | FCPA, The GEE Blog
REDUCING THE COST OF FCPA MONITORING
June 11, 2014 | Bank Securities Fraud, The GEE Blog
Honest Services Fraud, Ray Nagin & "Big Easy" Money
March 28, 2014 | Government Investigations, The GEE Blog
My Partner Left Me for the Government! DOJ’s First Opinion Procedure Release of 2014 Approves Buyout of Minority Shareholder-Turned-Government Official
March 25, 2014 | FCPA, The GEE Blog
D.C. District Court Order Provides a Warning About Attorney-Client Privilege Protection for Internal Investigations
March 20, 2014 | Internal Investigations, The GEE Blog
Heightened SEC/DOJ FCPA Standards Offer Risks and Opportunities to Companies and Their Lawyers
March 18, 2014 | Financial Regulation, The GEE Blog
Top 10 Takeaways from ABA White Collar Crime Conference 2014 (Part 2 of 2)
March 13, 2014 | Government Investigations, The GEE Blog
Top 10 Takeaways from ABA White Collar Crime Conference 2014 (Part 1 of 2)
March 12, 2014 | Government Investigations, The GEE Blog
The Department of Justice Continues to Bring the "HEAT" in Pursuing Health Care Fraud
March 5, 2014 | Government Investigations, The GEE Blog
The Position Of Assistant Attorney General For The Criminal Division May Be Filled In The Near Future
February 19, 2014 | The GEE Blog
DOJ Wins Big Insider Trading Case: Martoma Conviction; Bad News for Cohen and SAC
February 8, 2014 | Insider Trading, The GEE Blog
Going South: What U.S. Companies Need to Know About the FCPA and Doing Business in Latin America
January 30, 2014 | Criminal Procedure, Government Investigations, The GEE Blog
RELATED PRACTICE AREAS
Subscribe
Do you want to receive more valuable insights directly in your inbox? Visit our subscription center and let us know what you're interested in learning more about.
View Subscription Center