1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |New Amendments to Corporate Sentencing Guidelines: Important Changes in Requirements for Effective Compliance and Ethics Programs

New Amendments to Corporate Sentencing Guidelines: Important Changes in Requirements for Effective Compliance and Ethics Programs

Client Alert | 2 min read | 05.03.10

Last Friday, April 30, 2010, the United States Sentencing Commission finalized significant revisions to the Federal Sentencing Guidelines. These changes directly implicate the relationship between a corporation's chief compliance officer and the board of directors and the manner in which a corporation should respond to the discovery of criminal conduct.

For the first time, the Sentencing Guidelines now allow a corporation to receive a three level downward departure in sentencing for maintaining an effective compliance and ethics program, even where high level or substantial authority personnel are involved in the offense. However, the following conditions must be met:

  1. the individual(s) with "operational responsibility for the compliance and ethics program" (usually the chief compliance officer) must have had "direct reporting obligations" to the governing authority (usually the board of directors) or an appropriate subgroup thereof (e.g., an audit committee of the board of directors);

  2. the compliance and ethics program must have detected the offense before discovery outside of the corporation or before such discovery was reasonably likely;

  3. the corporation must have promptly reported the offense to appropriate governmental authorities; and

  4. no individual with "operational responsibility for the compliance and ethics program" must have participated in, condoned, or have been willfully ignorant of the offense.

A compliance officer has "direct reporting obligations" if the officer has "express authority to communicate personally" and promptly to the board "on any matter involving criminal conduct or potential criminal conduct." Additionally, the compliance officer must communicate to the board of directors at least once a year regarding "the implementation and effectiveness of the compliance and ethics program."

The Sentencing Guidelines were additionally amended to define a corporation's responsibilities after it has discovered criminal conduct. After the discovery of an offense, an effective compliance and ethics program requires that the corporation take reasonable steps to "remedy the harm resulting from the criminal conduct." These steps may include: i) providing restitution to identifiable victims; ii) self-reporting criminal conduct to relevant governmental authorities; and iii) cooperating with those governmental authorities. The list is not exhaustive.

After the discovery of criminal conduct, a corporation must also assess its current compliance and ethics program and make appropriate modifications as required. Notably, the Sentencing Guidelines now encourage the engagement and retention of an outside professional advisor by the corporation to ensure adequate assessment and implementation of any modifications to the corporation's compliance and ethics program. This change is significant because the retention of an outside monitor usually occurs as a condition to settling the matter with the government.

The amendments will become effective November 1, 2010, unless Congress takes affirmative action to block the amendments.

Contacts

Insights

Client Alert | 7 min read | 10.29.26

7th EU Competition Law Conference, co-hosted by Crowell & Moring, King’s College London and the Competition Law Center at George Washington University

On 8 October 2026, Crowell & Moring, King's College London, and the Competition Law Center at George Washington University co-hosted the 7th EU Competition Law Conference at De Warande in Brussels. Mark Meador, Commissioner at the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC), delivered the opening keynote address, followed by four panels bringing together practitioners, regulators, academics, and in-house counsel to discuss the latest developments in EU, UK, and US competition law enforcement. Among other things, the panels examined algorithmic pricing; the European Commission's (Commission) new guidelines on exclusionary abuses under Article 102 TFEU (Article 102 Guidelines); the impact of dominant positions in merger reviews; and lessons from the enforcement of the Digital Markets Act (DMA) and the UK’s Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act. ...

View All Insights