DOJ Criminal Fraud Section 2025 Year in Review: Major Reorganization Confirms Shifting Enforcement Landscape

The Department of Justice's (DOJ or the Department) Criminal Fraud Section has undergone its most significant reorganization in years, according to its recently released 2025 Year in Review. Those changes and the current climate of enforcement uncertainty require more vigilance, not less, from corporate compliance and law departments.

The Big Picture: Expansion and Realignment

The Criminal Fraud Section now boasts its largest staff ever (200 lawyers), following the November 2025 absorption of the Criminal Division's Consumer Protection Branch. This isn't just administrative housekeeping—it represents a fundamental expansion of the Section's enforcement reach into product safety, food and drug violations, and consumer protection crimes.

The reorganization created a new Health and Safety Unit (HSU) focused on prosecuting violations of the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and Consumer Product Safety Act. Meanwhile, the former Market Integrity and Major Frauds Unit rebranded as the Market, Government, and Consumer Fraud (MGC) Unit, reflecting its expanded consumer fraud portfolio and new Trump Administration emphasis on trade enforcement.

New Enforcement Priorities to Watch

1. Trade and Tariff Fraud Takes Center Stage

For the first time, trade fraud has emerged as a major Fraud Section priority. The MGC Unit brought its first trade fraud corporate case in 2025 and joined a cross-agency Trade Fraud Task Force targeting circumvention of tariff rules and smuggling operations.

The MGI International resolution—the most recently heralded under the 2025 revised Corporate Enforcement and Voluntary Self-Disclosure Policy (the Revised CEP)[1]—resulted in a declination involving false Country of Origin declarations to avoid Section 301 duties on Chinese imports. This resolution provides a template for what companies can expect. With heightened focus on supply chain compliance and customs declarations, import-heavy industries should take note of both the risk and opportunity.

2. Foreign Issuers and VIEs Under the Microscope

The Fraud Section is laser-focused on securities fraud involving foreign companies listed on U.S. exchanges, particularly those using Variable Interest Entity (VIE) structures. The charging of executives in the Ostin Technology Group "ramp and dump" scheme—where over 70 million shares were allegedly placed in co-conspirators' hands for pennies before a coordinated social media pump—signals aggressive enforcement against schemes targeting retail investors.

Expect continued scrutiny of cross-border securities offerings, particularly those involving Chinese companies with complex corporate structures.

3. The FCPA Recalibration

Perhaps most notable: the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) Unit shrank from 32 to 22 prosecutors and entered only three corporate resolutions (compared to nine in 2024). Following a February 2025 Presidential Executive Order pausing FCPA enforcement, the Deputy Attorney General issued new guidelines in June focusing on four priority areas:

• Bribery facilitating cartels and transnational criminal organizations
• Conduct depriving U.S. companies of fair opportunities to compete
• Threats to U.S. national security
• Substantial bribes with sophisticated concealment

The TIGO Guatemala resolution—involving narcotics proceeds used for bribe payments—exemplifies this refocused approach. Companies should understand that while FCPA enforcement continues, the lens has definitely narrowed but we must continue to watch to see by how much.

4. Corporate Indictments Are Back—or Are They?

After a 15-year hiatus, the Fraud Section indicted three corporate entities in 2025: SGO Corporation (Smartmatic), Done Global, and Mindful Mental Wellness. Whether these reflect an aggressive approach to corporate enforcement under the Trump Administration or the conclusion of long running investigations initiated in prior administrations, remains to be seen.

5. Health Care Fraud Goes Global

Health care fraud enforcement reached new heights with 194 individuals charged and alleged fraud losses exceeding $15 billion—more than four times 2024's total. But the most striking development is the focus on transnational criminal organizations.

Operation Gold Rush was a nationwide enforcement action and part of the Health Care Fraud Takedown, which has resulted in 21 defendants charged in five districts for their roles in a transnational criminal organization, based in Russia and elsewhere, that submitted over $12 billion in fraudulent claims to U.S. health insurance programs—including $10.6 billion to Medicare—the largest intended loss ever charged in a health care fraud case brought by the Department.

For health care companies, the establishment of a new Health Care Fraud Data Fusion Center using AI and advanced analytics means proactive fraud detection will continue to intensify. The Health Care Fraud (HCF) Unit's data analytics team completed 2,085 data requests and 164 proactive referrals in 2025, and these figures can only be expected to increase moving forward, given the calculated return on investment of $106.76 per $1 spent on health care enforcement efforts.  Data analytics are likely to drive the ROI even higher in coming years making it an even more attractive tool to detect fraud. [2]

6. Fraud on the Government Remains a Core Mission

The 2025 Year in Review signals a clear Trump Administration priority: protecting taxpayer dollars through aggressive prosecution of government procurement fraud, irrespective of the type. The MGC Unit's expanded focus—including the new Trade Fraud Task Force, continued Paycheck Protection Program fraud prosecutions, and major cases brought—reflects an even greater focus on traditional "fraud on the fisc" enforcement that enjoys bipartisan support and fewer political headwinds than other white collar areas. For companies with government contracts, federal program participation, or significant import/export operations, this emphasis suggests heightened scrutiny of any conduct that diverts taxpayer funds or evades duties owed to the Treasury.

The Year in Review did not reference the new DOJ Division for National Fraud Enforcement announced by the White House in early January 2026 and for which President Trump nominated long time prosecutor Colin McDonald to fill the position of Assistant Attorney General for National Fraud Enforcement to run the division.  It remains unclear how the new National Fraud Enforcement Division's remit will overlap with existing DOJ components that already investigate and prosecute fraud, or how responsibilities will be divided among these various components.

The Pipeline Reality: Today's Cases Reflect Yesterday's Investigations

While there's considerable speculation about whether white collar enforcement is declining under the current administration, the 2025 Year in Review reveals an important truth that compliance professionals must understand: most cases announced in 2025 were initiated years earlier.

Consider the timeline on several marquee 2025 matters:

• TIGO Guatemala (November 2025 resolution via Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA)): The investigation began with Millicom's voluntary disclosure in 2015, was closed in 2018, then reopened in 2020 based on new evidence
• Boeing (May 2025 Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA)): Related to the 737 MAX crashes from 2018-2019 and prior DPA violations
• Vistant/Apprio (June 2025 DPAs): The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) bribery scheme ran from approximately 2010-2020
• Done Global/Ruthia He trial (December 2025 indictment): The Adderall distribution scheme operated from 2019-2023
• Carl Zaglin FCPA trial (September 2025 conviction): The Honduras bribery scheme spanned 2014-2019

This lag time is inherent to complex white collar investigations, which typically require 2-5 years from initiation to resolution. Grand jury investigations, forensic accounting, international cooperation, and extensive document review don't happen overnight.

The Statute of Limitations Reality Check

Here's what keeps defense lawyers up at night: the five-year statute of limitations for most federal fraud offenses means conduct occurring today remains prosecutable until 2031—well into the next administration, regardless of who occupies the White House.

For compliance professionals, this creates several critical implications:

1. The "Wait and See" Approach Is Dangerous
Some companies may be tempted to adopt a less aggressive compliance posture based on perceptions of reduced enforcement appetite. This is misguided. Conduct that occurs in 2025-2026 can be prosecuted through 2030-2031. Enforcement priorities shift, but prosecutors have long memories and longer statutory periods.

2. Voluntary Self-Disclosure Windows Are Time-Sensitive
The benefits of voluntary self-disclosure under the Revised CEP are most valuable when made promptly after discovery of misconduct. Waiting to "see how enforcement trends develop" can eliminate eligibility for Part I resolutions, which require disclosure "within a reasonably prompt time after becoming aware of the misconduct."

3. Investigation Pipelines Continue
Even if new investigations slow—and the data doesn't clearly support that conclusion—existing investigations proceed through their multi-year lifecycles. The Fraud Section charged 265 individuals in 2025 (a 10% increase from 2024) and reported alleged aggregate intended fraud losses of $16 billion across those charges (double 2024's total). Those numbers don't suggest an enforcement pullback.

4. Career Prosecutors Drive Cases
While political appointees set priorities, career prosecutors in the Fraud Section drive individual cases. These attorneys—many with 10-20+ year tenures—maintain institutional knowledge and investigative momentum regardless of administration changes. The continuity of key Fraud Section leadership (Lorinda Laryea, David Fuhr, John Kosmidis, Christina Weidner) reinforces this point.

The Data Analytics Wild Card

Perhaps most significant for future enforcement: the Fraud Section's investment in advanced data analytics and AI-powered fraud detection continues to mature. The 2025 creation of the Health Care Fraud Data Fusion Center, the Special Matters Unit's expanded oversight of data analytics initiatives, and the proven ROI of proactive data-driven investigations (Operation Gold Rush began with data analytics) suggest the government's ability to detect misconduct is improving regardless of resource levels.

Companies should assume that anomalous billing patterns, suspicious trading activity, customs declaration inconsistencies, and other red flags are increasingly likely to trigger automated alerts—even if fewer agents are assigned to traditional reactive investigations.

What This Means for Compliance Programs

1. Supply Chain Diligence is Non-Negotiable
Trade fraud enforcement means companies must verify Country of Origin declarations, properly classify goods, and maintain robust customs compliance programs. The MGI resolution demonstrates that voluntary self-disclosure and cooperation may be the best path forward when issues arise.

2. Enhanced Foreign Issuer Due Diligence
If your company invests in or partners with foreign issuers—particularly those with VIE structures—enhanced due diligence on beneficial ownership, transaction legitimacy, and disclosure accuracy is essential.

3. FCPA Compliance with a Narrower Focus
While FCPA enforcement has recalibrated, the four priority areas represent serious risk zones. Companies should assess exposure in these specific areas and ensure compliance programs address cartel connections, competitive harm, national security implications, and sophisticated concealment schemes.

4. Health Care: Data Analytics Arms Race
Health care companies must assume the government is deploying advanced analytics to identify billing anomalies. Proactive internal auditing using similar tools can identify issues before the government does.

5. Product Safety and Reporting Obligations
The new HSU's focus on failure-to-report cases (such as Royal Sovereign's $395K penalty for not immediately reporting fire hazards) underscores that knowing about defects without prompt Consumer Product Safety Commission notification is now squarely in criminal enforcement crosshairs.

6. Don't Confuse Perception with Reality on Enforcement Trends
Compliance programs should be built on risk assessment, not political prognostication. Conduct today faces potential prosecution for years to come. The prudent approach: maintain robust controls, investigate red flags promptly, and consider voluntary disclosure when issues arise—regardless of current enforcement rhetoric.

Looking Ahead to 2026 and Beyond

The Fraud Section's 70th anniversary finds it more expansive, data-driven, and internationally focused than ever before. The integration of consumer protection prosecutors, new emphasis on trade enforcement, and deployment of AI-powered analytics represent a Section evolving to meet modern threats.

For compliance professionals, the key takeaway is clear: the enforcement landscape has shifted significantly, but the fundamentals remain unchanged. Misconduct has consequences, investigations take time, and statutes of limitations run for years.

Companies should reassess risk areas—particularly in trade compliance, foreign issuer dealings, and health care billing—while ensuring their compliance programs address the Section's articulated priorities. The cases announced in 2028 and 2029 will reflect the compliance decisions companies make today.

As the Fraud Section demonstrated with its first corporate indictments in 15 years, cooperation remains paramount, but the stakes for non-compliance have never been higher. And the five-year clock on today's conduct is already ticking.

Subscribe To Viewpoints