Alert
Alert
10.12.26
On October 1, the National Fraud Enforcement Division (NFED) of the Department of Justice (DOJ) issued Directive 26-12, describing how it will handle corporate fraud cases. NFED was created in January 2026 as part of President Trump’s Task Force to Eliminate Fraud, a whole-of-government effort chaired by Vice President Vance to “eliminate fraud, waste, and abuse within Federal benefit programs.” The Directive identifies the matters the Division will prioritize, gives its Corporate Enforcement Section a role throughout corporate investigations and specifies factors prosecutors must weigh heavily when considering charges and resolutions. It does not change DOJ’s existing corporate voluntary self-disclosure policy.
What the Directive Says
According to the directive, the Division will prioritize fraud involving health care; government contracts, procurement and other government functions; significant revenue evasion; and trade, including tariff evasion, imports and forced labor. When deciding whether to charge a company or negotiate a resolution, prosecutors must give “great weight” to ten factors. These include management involvement, concealment from the government or auditors, harm to public programs or national security, and the duration and reach of the conduct.
These priorities align with NFED’s existing sections—the Health Care Fraud Section, the Public Trust & Financial Integrity Section, the Tax Section and the Global Trade & Commerce Enforcement Section.
The directive also prioritizes schemes lasting at least three years, affecting three or more federal districts, or causing financial harm to at least 25 victims or losses of at least $25 million. These factors are not exhaustive, and prosecutors must still apply DOJ’s Department-wide corporate enforcement policies.
Pursuant to the directive, NFED prosecutors are now required to report all current, ongoing corporate investigations to the CES Chief—though this requirement does not apply to corporate cases being pursued exclusively by local U.S. Attorney’s Offices. The Division’s Corporate Enforcement Section will work with prosecutors from the start of a corporate investigation through its resolution or litigation, and it will take primary responsibility for assessing compliance with corporate criminal resolutions.
Finally, the directive instructs Division leadership to develop ways to encourage whistleblowers to report fraud, but it does not announce a new whistleblower program. It further states that NFED will proactively generate leads through data analytics, the National Fraud Detection Center and partner components.
Key Considerations
The directive signals that NFED intends to continue devoting substantial resources to corporate fraud cases, while increasing coordination among its prosecutors and its dedicated Corporate Enforcement Section. While its effect on the number of investigations remains to be seen, companies that operate in NFED’s priority areas should take care to evaluate whether their existing reporting and escalation processes are sufficient to bring credible fraud concerns promptly to the right decision-makers. That question is especially pressing where an allegation involves senior management, concealment, substantial losses or conduct spanning several years or locations.
When a concern arises, companies should preserve relevant records and assess the facts quickly enough to make an informed disclosure decision. DOJ’s Department-wide policy offers a path to a declination for companies that voluntarily disclose qualifying misconduct, fully cooperate and remediate it—but disclosure alone does not secure that result. For companies, the immediate task is to make sure significant concerns can be identified, investigated and escalated before the opportunity for a meaningful disclosure decision is lost. It may also be valuable to consult with counsel to determine whether a proactive, voluntary self-disclosure to DOJ is appropriate—and whether NFED or another DOJ component is the appropriate reporting contact.