Federal prosecutors are preparing to sweeten the deal for companies that step forward during criminal investigations, offering tangible assurances that cooperation can spare them from charges. The shift was outlined this week by Jay Clayton, who said businesses need certainty that helping investigators will lead to meaningful outcomes — including the possibility of avoiding prosecution altogether. As part of that message, U.S. prosecutor says firms that cooperate in criminal probes will not be charged.
Speaking at the Securities Enforcement Forum in New York, Clayton said the approach reflects a broader reprioritization within the U.S. Department of Justice, which has been narrowing its corporate crime focus while emphasizing immigration and drug-related cases under President Donald Trump.
Faster Deals, Faster Relief
At the core of the strategy is an expanded use of non-prosecution agreements, or NPAs — arrangements in which prosecutors agree not to pursue charges in exchange for swift and continued cooperation. While such deals have drawn criticism in the past, Clayton argued they can accelerate investigations and deliver quicker compensation to victims.
“Our thinking is straightforward,” Clayton told attendees. “Let’s move fast, lock in an NPA early, and keep the cooperation going.”
According to Andrew Thomas, co-chief of the Securities and Commodities Fraud Task Force at the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York, the office plans to begin with conditional agreements that initially shield cooperating firms from prosecution. The goal, he said, is efficiency — resolving cases sooner and returning funds to those harmed without years of litigation.
Shareholders and Small Investors in Focus
Clayton also framed the policy shift as a win for shareholders. A former head of the Securities and Exchange Commission, he said his enforcement philosophy continues to prioritize retail investors, particularly in areas prone to abuse such as small-cap stocks, private funds, and emerging prediction markets. Asked whether those markets could face prosecutions, Clayton was blunt: “Yes.”
Rethinking Anti-Bribery Enforcement
The U.S. attorney did not shy away from controversy, taking aim at the long-standing enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. While emphasizing his opposition to bribery, Clayton argued the law has too often penalized companies rather than the individuals responsible — and, in his view, placed U.S. firms at a competitive disadvantage globally.
“I hate corruption,” he said. “But I don’t like how the FCPA has been applied.”
Taken together, the remarks signal a more pragmatic, deal-driven era of corporate enforcement — one where cooperation is not just encouraged, but clearly rewarded.
