Criminal Debt: Court-Ordered Restitution Amounts Far Exceed Likely Collections for the Crime Victims in Selected Financial Fraud Cases: GAO-05-80

Engel, Gary T.
January 2005
GAO Reports;1/31/2005, p1
Government Document
In the wake of a recent wave of corporate scandals, Senator Byron L. Dorgan noted that the American taxpayers have a right to expect that those who have committed corporate fraud and other criminal wrongdoing will be punished, and that the federal government will make every effort to recover assets held by the offenders. Recognizing that GAO previously reported on deficiencies in the Department of Justice's (Justice) criminal debt collection processes (GAO-01-664), Senator Dorgan asked GAO to review selected criminal white-collar financial fraud cases for which large restitution debts have been established but little has been collected. Specifically, GAO was asked to determine (1) the status of Justice's efforts to collect on the outstanding debt, (2) the prospects for future collections, and (3) whether specific problems have affected Justice's ability to collect the debt. The court-ordered restitution for the five selected white-collar financial fraud criminal debt cases GAO reviewed far exceeded amounts likely to be collected and paid to the victims. These offenders, who had either been high-ranking officials of companies or operated their own business, pled guilty to crimes for which the courts ordered restitution totaling about $568 million to victims. As of the completion of GAO's fieldwork, which was up to 8 years after the offenders' sentencing, court records showed that amounts collected for the victims in these cases totaled only about $40 million, or about 7 percent of the ordered restitution. At some point prior to the judgments establishing the restitution debts, each of the five offenders either reported having wealth or significant financial resources to the courts or to Justice, or there were indicators of such. However, following the judgments, the offenders claimed that they were not financially able to pay full restitution to their victims. Justice's Financial Litigation Units (FLU) that were responsible for collection performed certain activities to collect the debts after the judgments, but the debts had not been significantly reduced as a result of the FLUs' identification and liquidation of additional assets of the offenders. The FLUs' prospects are not good for collecting additional restitution amounts on these cases. A major problem hindering the FLUs' ability to collect restitution debt in the selected cases was the long time intervals between the criminal offense and the judgment. Court records show that 5 to 13 years passed between when the offenders began to engage in the criminal activity for which they were sentenced and the date of their judgments. For each of the selected cases, by the time the court rendered the judgment establishing the restitution debt, certain of the offenders' assets had been, among other things, transferred to family members or others, involved in forfeiture actions, subject to bankruptcy, or moved to a foreign account. In addition, one of the selected cases involved an offender who was jointly and severally liable for the debt with another offender who had been deported. Justice acknowledged that such dispositions or circumstances are not uncommon and create major debt collection challenges for the FLUs. Moreover, there were minimal, if any, apparent negative consequences to these offenders for not paying their restitution debts. Recently, to further implementation of a related recommendation made in 2001 by GAO, the Congress directed the Attorney General to develop a strategic plan with certain other federal agencies to improve criminal debt collection. Given the significant upward trend in outstanding criminal debt and the difficulty experienced by Justice in collecting criminal restitution debt, it is important that Justice include in such a plan legislative initiatives, operational initiatives, or both to enhance the federal government's capacity to collect restitution for victims of financial crimes.


Related Articles

  • Corporate Convictions. Mokhiber, Russell // Multinational Monitor;Sep/Oct2007, Vol. 28 Issue 4, p48 

    This article reports on the announcement by the U.S. Department of Justice in July 2007 that the President's Corporate Fraud Task Force, which was created by President George W. Bush in 2002 in response to a wave of corporate scandals, has obtained 1,236 total corporate fraud convictions. It...

  • Increasing Coordination among Federal Prosecutors, Regulators, and Civil Enforcers. Spicer, Adam J. // Mass Torts;Summer2015, Vol. 13 Issue 4, p13 

    The article discusses a policy introduced by the U.S. Department of Justice which increase coordination between criminal prosecutors and civil attorneys. It further discussed a report by the U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) which reveals that the Department of Justice is not making full use...

  • DOJ Has Taken Steps to Better Track Its Use of Deferred and Non-Prosecution Agreements, but Should Evaluate Effectiveness.  // GAO Reports;1/11/2010, preceding p1 

    The article highlights the report of Government Accountability Office (GAO) concerning the move of Department of Justice (DOJ) to track corporate crime using the deferred prosecution and non-prosecution agreements (DPAs and NPAs) in the U.S. It examines the effectiveness of DPAs and NPAs to...

  • CORPORATE CRIME: Preliminary Observations on DOJ's Use and Oversight of Deferred Prosecution and Non-Prosecution Agreements. Larence, Eileen // GAO Reports;6/25/2009, preceding p1 

    The article presents a report as prepared by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) in relation to the corporate crimes at the Department of Justice (DOJ). GAO studied DOJ's use of deferred prosecution and non-prosecution agreements (DPAs and NPAs), in which prosecutors requires company...


    The article examines the trend where U.S. prosecutors are working in coordination with their foreign counterpart to share information and defer to the enforcement actions of foreign prosecutors without an accompanying U.S. action. Topics discussed include the aggressiveness of the Justice...

  • CORPORATE CRIME: Prosecutors Adhered to Guidance in Selecting Monitors for Deferred Prosecution and Non-Prosecution Agreements, but DOJ Could Better Communicate Its Role in Resolving Conflicts.  // GAO Reports;10/19/2009, preceding p1 

    The article presents the statements of Eileen R. Larence, director of the U.S. Homeland Security and Justice, before the Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law of the House's Committee on the Judiciary, discussing the cases of corporate fraud and mismanagement. It focuses on the...

  • Asian bribery case closed as Schnitzer pays penalty. Truini, Joe // Waste News;10/23/2006, Vol. 12 Issue 13, p6 

    The article reports that Schnitzer Steel Industries Inc. will be paying $15.2 million to settle bribery charges against its Asian subsidiary. The agreement is the aftermath of an investigation conducted by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and the Department of Justice into improper...

  • Fall from grace. Byrt, Frank // Business NH Magazine;Oct95, Vol. 12 Issue 10, p12 

    Speculates for more indictments in white collar crimes in New Hampshire. Rise in the number of commercial crimes due to economic boom; Federal prosecutors' efforts to investigate abuses in second mortgage loan schemes; Factors for the fraudulent transactions.

  • Cracking Down on Corporate Crime. Mokhiber, Russell // Ecologist;Jul99, Vol. 29 Issue 4, p247 

    Editorial. Argues that corporate criminals inflict more damage to society than individual criminals. Examples of corporate frauds; Reasons corporate crimes goes undetected; What should be done against unprosecuted corporate crime and violence.


Read the Article

Other Topics