SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
"The increase in corporate prosecutions is a welcome shift from the previous decline, and the new policy of rewarding corporate crime whistleblowers could go further toward restoring enforcement."
While welcoming a "modest uptick" in corporate prosecutions by the U.S. Department of Justice last year, the watchdog Public Citizen on Monday called for the "bold ramp-up Biden DOJ leadership promised early in the administration."
Federal prosecutions of corporations over the past 25 years peaked in 2000, at 304, according to the organization's analysis of various datasets. After the turn of the century, figures trended down, with a low of 90 in 2021, the year that President Joe Biden was sworn in. Since then, the numbers have started to climb again—hitting 99 in 2022 and 113 in 2023.
However, the impact isn't felt equally across the corporate world. Last year, "about 76% of the corporations DOJ prosecuted had only 50 employees or less, while only about 12% had 1,000 employees or more," the report states. "This is the continuation of a long-standing trend—about 70% of the 4,946 corporations the federal government prosecuted between 1992 and 2021 were small businesses with fewer than 50 employees. Only about 6% employed 1,000 or more."
"Prosecutions remain far too few, and the ongoing overuse of leniency deals for big corporations that break the law continues to undermine deterrence."
Still, "the increase in corporate prosecutions is a welcome shift from the previous decline, and the new policy of rewarding corporate crime whistleblowers could go further toward restoring enforcement," said Rick Claypool, a Public Citizen research director who authored the report, in a statement Monday.
Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco announced the "DOJ-run whistleblower rewards program," through which an individual who helps the department discover "significant corporate or financial misconduct" could receive some of the forfeiture, in a speech to the American Bar Association's 39th National Institute on White Collar Crime earlier this month.
Although Claypool applauded the progress, he also emphasized that "prosecutions remain far too few, and the ongoing overuse of leniency deals for big corporations that break the law continues to undermine deterrence."
The report explains that "prosecutors use DOJ leniency agreements—deferred prosecution agreements (DPAs) and nonprosecution agreements (NPAs)—to avoid filing criminal charges against corporate defendants. Originally developed to offer nonviolent first-time individual offenders a second chance, such agreements now help the most powerful businesses in the world dodge the legal consequences of their criminal misconduct."
Previous Public Citizen research shows that "about 15% of the agreements historically involve repeat offenders, casting doubt on their deterrent effect," the report notes. "Most corporate repeat offenders that receive leniency agreements from the Department of Justice are large multinationals. Of the 14 corporations that received leniency deals in 2023, the majority (10, or 71%) had at least 5,000 employees or more."
Of those who took deals last year, the watchdog highlighted "generic pharmaceutical companies Teva and Glenmark, multinational tobacco corporation British American Tobacco, the Illinois subsidiary of telecommunications corporation AT&T, and the Swiss multinational technology firm ABB."
While calling out the DOJ for creating "the appearance that some businesses are 'too big to jail'" with its leniency agreements, Public Citizen also lauded Monaco's recent remarks about "delivering consequences for corporate recidivists."
"A history of misconduct matters," she said during the early March address. "After all, penalties exist, in part, to deter future misconduct. They're not the cost of doing business. So when a company breaks the law again—and it's clear the message wasn't received—we need to ratchet up the sanctions."
As the report details:
The first example Monaco provides of the Justice Department holding corporate repeat offenders accountable is Ericsson. Ericsson breached its 2019 leniency agreement with the DOJ to resolve allegations of criminal violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act in Djibouti, China, Vietnam, Indonesia, and Kuwait. Following the breach—failing to meet cooperation and disclosure requirements—the DOJ subsequently prosecuted the corporation for its misconduct.
Other major corporations that have been prosecuted after breaching leniency agreements include the multinational agrichemical corporation Monsanto and the financial corporation formerly known as Royal Bank of Scotland, NatWest Group, which reportedly rebranded in part to dissociate itself from its past misconduct.
"The DOJ's fresh willingness to hold corporate offenders accountable for leniency agreement breaches is among the strongest and most necessary corporate accountability reforms implemented by the Biden administration," the report says. "It's also one that is currently facing its greatest test: Boeing."
Boeing entered into DPA in 2021, after a pair of deadly 737 MAX 8 jet crashes in 2018 and 2019. In January, a door plug flew off a 737 MAX 9 during a flight, resulting in an emergency landing and fresh scrutiny—including a DOJ criminal investigation.
In a February letter to DOJ leaders including Monaco and Attorney General Merrick Garland, Weissman wrote that "if the DOJ finds that Boeing again violated the law, Boeing should be prosecuted both for its original and its subsequent misconduct."
As Common Dreamsreported earlier Monday, Boeing announced that its commercial airplanes division leader will leave immediately, the chairman of the board will resign after the annual meeting in May, and the CEO will step down at the end of this year.
"Of course CEO Dave Calhoun should be dismissed," responded Weissman. "But for real and lasting change to occur, Boeing must now be held criminally accountable both for the recent safety failures and the... crashes that took 346 lives."
After three congressional Democrats on Tuesday unveiled the Corporate Crime Database Act, which would direct the U.S. Department of Justice to make information about corporate wrongdoing and efforts to curb it publicly available, dozens of progressive organizations and individuals implored federal lawmakers to pass the legislation as quickly as possible.
"The runaway consequences of rogue corporations are nothing short of catastrophic."
Introduced by Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Ct.), and Rep. Mary Gay Scanlon (D-Pa.), the bicameral legislation would, according to the lawmakers, require the Justice Department "to collect, aggregate, analyze, and publish comprehensive data on federal corporate criminal enforcement actions."
As the trio--which sent a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland last month urging him to begin systematically tracking the DOJ's attempts to crack down on corporate crime--noted on Tuesday, people in the U.S. currently lack access to this crucial information.
"While the Department of Justice regularly collects data on nearly every type of street-level crime, there is very little reporting of corporate and white-collar crimes, with the last thorough DOJ report on corporate crime being in 1979," said Scanlon. "Without data or transparency, lawmakers, journalists, and the public are left in the dark about the size and scope of corporate crime in America and the effectiveness of the federal government's response."
Durbin argued that "comprehensive, national data collection and a searchable public database of the results of federal enforcement actions against corporations and individual actors engaging in corporate misconduct would provide better oversight, inform DOJ's corporate criminal prosecution practices, and demonstrate the effectiveness of corporate sanctions."
Blumenthal echoed his colleague, saying that the legislation would "aid efforts to fight criminal corporate conduct."
"Collecting and reporting data on enforcement actions against white-collar criminals are essential to holding wrongdoers accountable," said Blumenthal. "By providing this critical information, the Corporate Crime Database Act will deter future crimes and protect victims."
The new bill was welcomed by a coalition of more than three dozen progressive advocacy groups and scholars. In a letter to members of Congress, the coalition wrote that "this legislation would address a shocking gap in public knowledge about corporate lawbreaking--and the federal government's actions to address it."
The letter continues:
Corporate lawbreaking harms millions upon millions of Americans every year... A Harvard Business School analysis recently concluded that major firms are engaging in misconduct at least twice a week. Health and safety violations sicken, injure, and kill countless Americans, while data security violations place individuals' finances and personal safety at risk. Investors and shareholders, meanwhile, are lured into fraudulent schemes.
The annual cost of corporate and white-collar crime to Americans is estimated at between $300 and $800 billion a year, while street-level crimes cost about $16 billion. Yet, while the FBI releases a detailed report on crime in the United States every year focusing on street-level crimes, the Department of Justice has not released a report on corporate crime since 1979. This information asymmetry mirrors outdated enforcement priorities that concentrate disproportionate resources toward arresting low-level offenders while turning a blind eye to the crimes of the powerful.
"The Corporate Crime Database act would begin to correct this historic oversight by requiring the DOJ to release an annual report on corporate crime," according to the coalition, which includes Public Citizen, Food and Water Watch, the Institute for Policy Studies, and Oxfam America.
As the letter points out: "Enforcement agencies penalize numerous lawbreaking corporations every year. But the lack of a unified authority on corporate enforcement data when corporations break different laws in different enforcement jurisdictions--such as when a single company violates consumer protection laws, employment laws, and environmental laws--means corporate recidivism goes unnoticed."
"Between 10% and 20% of the DOJ's criminal resolutions against large corporations involve repeat offenders," the letter continues, citing an estimate from Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco. "Inconsistencies across how agencies report enforcement against corporate lawbreaking is a barrier to understanding the scope and scale of these corporate misdeeds. A whole-of-government approach is needed."
Signatories argued that "the Corporate Crime Database Act would introduce much-needed consistency to how federal agencies report corporate wrongdoing in a way that would be particularly effective for holding corporate recidivists accountable."
After summarizing the devastating effects of corporate wrongdoing, Public Citizen president Robert Weissman made the case for why he thinks this new legislation would make a positive difference in the lives of ordinary people.
"Corporate crime sickens consumers, rips off investors, and robs workers of their livelihoods," said Weissman. "It pollutes our environment, exploits our private data, and corrupts our government. It crashes planes, smashes automobiles, and devastates struggling communities."
"The runaway consequences of rogue corporations are nothing short of catastrophic--yet more than four decades have passed since the DOJ has released any kind of comprehensive report on corporate crime," Weissman continued. "Enough is enough."
"The Corporate Crime Database Act will bring transparency to the corporate crime crisis so that the DOJ and other law enforcement agencies can better reckon with this greed-driven menace," he added. "That data will help the public hold these agencies accountable if enforcement efforts fall short."