Overview
Title
To amend title 18, United States Code to require accountability in deferred prosecution agreements, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
The bill wants to make sure when companies get in trouble but don't go to court (called a "deferred prosecution agreement"), it's fair and clear for everyone. It says if a company pays a fine of $1,000,000 or more, they have to share important details with the public so everyone knows what's happening.
Summary AI
The bill, S. 5252, aims to enhance accountability in deferred prosecution agreements by amending title 18 of the United States Code. It specifies that when a company, rather than an individual, is involved, the court must deem the agreement to be in the public interest, considering factors like the fairness of penalties and the impact on the public. The bill also mandates the use of independent compliance monitoring for larger agreements and requires transparency regarding settlement agreements, including posting information publicly. It also proposes extending the statute of limitations for financial crimes involving corporations to 10 years and calls for identifying individuals responsible in corporate offenses.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
Overview of the Bill
The "Hold Corporate Criminals Accountable Act of 2024," designated as S. 5252, proposes changes to the United States Code, specifically Title 18. The goal is to enhance accountability in deferred prosecution agreements (DPAs). These agreements allow legal proceedings against corporations to be deferred, contingent on meeting certain conditions. The bill introduces measures aimed at providing transparency, extending the statute of limitations for financial crimes, and increasing oversight of compliance with legal agreements. With Senators Welch and Hawley sponsoring the legislation, this bill focuses on stricter accountability for corporate misconduct.
Significant Issues
Complexity and Ambiguity
Several sections of the bill face scrutiny for their complexity and potential vagueness. In Section 2, the criteria that judges use to evaluate DPAs make use of undefined or broad terms like "public interest" and "effective monitoring." This lack of clarity could lead to disparate interpretations among courts, affecting legal consistency.
Transparency and Confidentiality
Section 4 of the bill aims to increase transparency by requiring the publication of federal agency settlement agreements involving $1 million or more. However, confidentiality provisions could still obscure details, raising concerns that the bill does not specify sanctions for non-compliance. This could reduce the effectiveness of its transparency goals.
Financial and Administrative Burden
Sections 3 and 4 raise potential issues related to compliance monitoring and annual reports to Congress. The requirements for "independent monitoring" are not well-defined, which could lead to inconsistencies in application. Additionally, the resource implications for federal agencies in meeting these new demands are not addressed, possibly creating administrative and financial strains.
Public and Stakeholder Impact
Broad Public Impact
For the general public, this bill represents an effort to hold corporations accountable for legal misdeeds. By mandating transparency and extending prosecution timelines for financial crimes, it seeks to mitigate corporate misconduct and its repercussions on society. However, if agencies struggle to implement these provisions effectively, benefits could be diminished.
Specific Stakeholders
Corporate Entities: Corporations may face more rigorous scrutiny and obligations under this bill. Deferred prosecution agreements might become more complex and demanding, compelling corporations to invest in more robust compliance systems.
Government Agencies: The bill could lead to an increased workload for federal agencies, as reporting requirements and maintaining transparency could become cumbersome, diverting resources from other areas.
Legal Practitioners and Courts: Lawyers and judges could face challenges interpreting the ambiguous language within the bill, potentially leading to inconsistencies in legal proceedings. The subjective nature of certain terms could make litigation more complex.
Conclusion
While the "Hold Corporate Criminals Accountable Act of 2024" seeks to foster accountability in corporate practices, several issues related to vague language, transparency, and financial feasibility could hinder its success. Enhancing clarity and defining specific measures within the bill could improve its efficacy, ensuring it effectively serves both the public and the legal system. The impact on corporations and government entities will largely depend on how these challenges are resolved in the process of implementing the legislation.
Financial Assessment
The bill S. 5252 introduces several financial references and benchmarks that aim to ensure accountability and transparency in deferred prosecution agreements involving corporations. The financial aspects of the bill are primarily concentrated in Section 4 and Section 307 concerning transparency requirements for Federal agencies.
Financial Thresholds for Reporting
A notable financial benchmark in the bill is the requirement for a settlement to involve payments of at least $1,000,000 by one or more non-Federal persons for it to be subjected to transparency requirements. This threshold establishes a line for identifying which settlement agreements must be reported and made publicly available. However, this exclusion can create a lack of oversight for smaller settlements that may still hold substantial public interest or impact. This issue is mentioned in the list of concerns, highlighting the potential for significant settlements just below this threshold to escape public scrutiny.
Publication and Accessibility
Section 307 further stipulates that information regarding such agreements must be accessible for at least five years. If the settlement involves payments of $50,000,000 or more, the documents must be available for a minimum of 10 years. This differential timeframe stresses the greater importance placed on monitoring larger financial settlements, theoretically increasing public and governmental oversight over more significant cases. However, the complexity and potentially vague nature of how these agreements are defined and what parts can be made confidential can reduce the effectiveness of this transparency.
Public Financial Disclosures
The bill requires that specific financial details of the settlement, such as civil or criminal penalties and whether payments can be deducted under the Internal Revenue Code, must be disclosed publicly. Each covered settlement's financial commitments, penalties, or designated fines must be transparent to the public. This requirement attempts to bolster accountability by detailing exactly how much each entity is obligated to contribute and for what purpose. This level of detail aims to prevent misconceptions about the financial penalties being paid and what is considered a penalty versus an operational cost.
Potential Resource Burden
The logistics of compliance monitoring and annual reporting could introduce financial and operational strain on federal agencies. Although the bill outlines strict reporting and transparency requirements, it does not address the potential cost implications for the agencies tasked with implementing these provisions. This requirement might necessitate increased administrative resources, which are absent from the bill’s narrative, raising uncertainty about sufficient funding or staffing to meet these obligations effectively.
In conclusion, the bill centers on increasing transparency and accountability mainly through rigorous financial disclosure and reporting standards. While it delineates financial thresholds and the need for detailed public records, the effectiveness in practice will depend significantly on how these provisions are balanced against confidentiality requirements, administrative capabilities, and potential exclusion of significant settlements falling below the established thresholds.
Issues
Section 4: The transparency requirements for Federal agencies entering into deferred prosecution agreements may be undermined by confidentiality provisions. The bill does not adequately address corrective measures or penalties for non-compliance in case of mistaken confidentiality, leading to potential lack of accountability and transparency.
Section 6: There are concerns regarding the investigation of culpable individuals, specifically with terms like 'provide assistance' being vague without defining the nature or extent of this assistance and lacking protections for individuals compelled to provide it.
Section 2: The complexity of language and numerous factors listed can result in varied interpretations, particularly the undefined terms like 'public interest,' 'effective independent monitoring,' and open-ended phrases such as 'any other compelling reasons,' which could lead to inconsistencies in applying deferred prosecution agreements.
Section 4: The financial threshold of $1,000,000 for settlement agreement reporting could exclude significant public interest issues involving smaller settlements, reducing oversight and accountability for smaller but impactful cases.
Section 3: The provision for 'independent monitoring' lacks a clear definition, leading to ambiguity in implementation and potential conflicts of interest, thereby undermining the effectiveness of compliance monitoring.
Section 4: The use of complex legal terminology could hinder public understanding and accessibility, such as the term 'non-Federal persons' instead of 'private entities,' making it less transparent to the general populace.
Section 5: The extension of the statute of limitations to 10 years for crimes involving financial institutions necessitates further justification, as it deviates from the standard 5-year period, which could raise legal and financial implications.
Sections 3 and 4: The potential financial implications and resource strain on agencies due to the requirements for compliance monitoring and annual reporting to Congress are not addressed, creating uncertainty and possible administrative burdens.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The first section of the bill states its name, which is the "Hold Corporate Criminals Accountable Act of 2024."
2. Accountability in deferred prosecution agreements Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The proposed amendment to Section 3161(h)(2) of title 18, United States Code, sets criteria for courts to evaluate deferred prosecution agreements involving non-individual defendants. It requires these agreements to be in the public interest, considering factors such as punitive measures, compliance terms, defendant cooperation, public impact, and any other compelling reasons.
3. Empirically based compliance monitoring Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
Any organization placed on probation or with a deferred prosecution agreement must use independent and objective compliance monitoring. Additionally, the Attorney General is tasked with publishing a report within a year on how the Department of Justice is working to increase compliance monitoring in criminal cases.
4. Transparency requirements on Federal agencies to enter into deferred prosecution agreements Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines requirements for U.S. federal agencies regarding the publication of settlement agreements, especially those involving payments of $1 million or more. It mandates agencies to post details of these agreements online, explains under what circumstances confidentiality is allowed, and requires annual reports to Congress about such agreements.
Money References
- (a) Definition.—In this section, the term ‘covered settlement agreement’ means a settlement agreement (including deferred prosecution agreements and nonprosecution agreements) that is entered into by an Executive agency that— “(1) relates to an alleged violation of Federal civil or criminal law; “(2) involves an agreement to defer prosecution or withhold prosecution of the alleged violation; and “(3) requires the payment of a total of not less than $1,000,000 by 1 or more non-Federal persons.
- “(2) PERIOD.—The head of each Executive agency shall ensure that— “(A) information regarding a covered settlement agreement is publicly available on the list described in paragraph (1)(A)(i) for a period of not less than 5 years, beginning on the date of the covered settlement agreement; and “(B) a copy of a covered settlement agreement made available under paragraph (1)(A)(ii) is publicly available— “(i) for a period of not less than 5 years, beginning on the date of the covered settlement agreement; or “(ii) for a covered settlement agreement under which a non-Federal person is required to pay not less than $50,000,000, for a period of not less than 10 years, beginning on the date of the covered settlement agreement. “(c) Public statement.—If the head of an Executive agency determines that a confidentiality provision in a covered settlement agreement, or the sealing of a covered settlement agreement, is required to protect the public interest of the United States, the head of the Executive agency shall issue a public statement stating why such action is required to protect the public interest of the United States, which shall explain— “(1) what interests confidentiality protects; and “(2) why the interests protected by confidentiality outweigh the public’s interest in knowing about the conduct of the Federal Government and the expenditure of Federal resources. “
307. Information regarding settlement agreements Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The text explains that executive agencies must publicly share information about settlement agreements they make if the total payment is at least $1 million. These agreements, which might defer or withhold prosecution for civil or criminal violations, should be posted online for a minimum of five years, unless confidentiality is necessary to protect public interests. Additionally, agencies must submit annual reports to Congress about these settlements, including details on confidentiality and legal costs.
Money References
- (a) Definition.—In this section, the term “covered settlement agreement” means a settlement agreement (including deferred prosecution agreements and nonprosecution agreements) that is entered into by an Executive agency that— (1) relates to an alleged violation of Federal civil or criminal law; (2) involves an agreement to defer prosecution or withhold prosecution of the alleged violation; and (3) requires the payment of a total of not less than $1,000,000 by 1 or more non-Federal persons.
- — (1) REQUIREMENT.— (A) IN GENERAL.—Subject to subparagraph (B), the head of each Executive agency shall make publicly available in a searchable format in a prominent location on the website of the Executive agency— (i) a list of each covered settlement agreement entered into by the Executive agency, which shall include, for each covered settlement agreement— (I) the date on which the parties entered into the covered settlement agreement; (II) the names of the parties that settled claims under the covered settlement agreement; (III) a description of the claims each party settled under the covered settlement agreement; (IV) the amount each party settling a claim under the covered settlement agreement is obligated to pay under the settlement agreement; (V) the total amount the settling parties are obligated to pay under the settlement agreement; (VI) for each settling party— (aa) the amount, if any, the settling party is obligated to pay that is expressly specified under the covered settlement agreement as a civil or criminal penalty or fine; and (bb) the amount, if any, that is expressly specified under the covered settlement agreement as not deductible for purposes of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; and (VII) a description of where amounts collected under the covered settlement agreement will be deposited, including, if applicable, the deposit of such amounts in an account available for use for 1 or more programs of the Federal Government; and (ii) a copy of each covered settlement agreement entered into by the Executive agency. (B) CONFIDENTIALITY PROVISIONS.—The requirement to disclose information or a copy of a covered settlement agreement under subparagraph (A) shall apply to the extent that the information or copy (or portion thereof) is not subject to a confidentiality provision that prohibits disclosure of the information or copy (or portion thereof). (2) PERIOD.—The head of each Executive agency shall ensure that— (A) information regarding a covered settlement agreement is publicly available on the list described in paragraph (1)(A)(i) for a period of not less than 5 years, beginning on the date of the covered settlement agreement; and (B) a copy of a covered settlement agreement made available under paragraph (1)(A)(ii) is publicly available— (i) for a period of not less than 5 years, beginning on the date of the covered settlement agreement; or (ii) for a covered settlement agreement under which a non-Federal person is required to pay not less than $50,000,000, for a period of not less than 10 years, beginning on the date of the covered settlement agreement. (c) Public statement.—If the head of an Executive agency determines that a confidentiality provision in a covered settlement agreement, or the sealing of a covered settlement agreement, is required to protect the public interest of the United States, the head of the Executive agency shall issue a public statement stating why such action is required to protect the public interest of the United States, which shall explain— (1) what interests confidentiality protects; and (2) why the interests protected by confidentiality outweigh the public’s interest in knowing about the conduct of the Federal Government and the expenditure of Federal resources.
5. Extension of statute of limitations for certain crimes Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The bill extends the time limit to prosecute crimes involving financial institutions, corporations, or their subsidiaries to 10 years, except where the law says otherwise.
6. Investigation of fully culpable individuals Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
Section 6 amends section 3553(e) of title 18 of the United States Code by requiring that anyone other than the individual seeking a reduced sentence must help the government identify and fully investigate any employees or former employees involved in the crime.