On August 13, 2026, Assistant Attorney General Colin McDonald issued the first enforcement priorities memorandum for the Department of Justice's (DOJ) newly created National Fraud Enforcement Division (Fraud Division or Division).1 The memorandum provides important insight into the DOJ’s current fraud enforcement priorities and the areas where organizations may face heightened scrutiny. The Division itself was first announced in April 2026 and was created to consolidate fraud enforcement functions that were previously dispersed across various department components. The memorandum provides the first detailed roadmap of how the Division intends to prioritize and execute its enforcement mission. Five days later, on August 18, 2026, the DOJ issued a final rule formally delegating healthcare, tax, and trade fraud enforcement authority from the Criminal Division to the new Division and authorizing it to convene special grand juries nationwide.
The memorandum points to a more centralized and coordinated fraud enforcement posture, with the DOJ emphasizing advanced data analytics, cross-agency collaboration, and fraud affecting federal programs, taxpayers, consumers, and U.S. markets. The stakes are considerable. The Government Accountability Office estimates that the federal government loses between $233 billion and $521 billion annually to fraud, and the Division's mandate is framed as a direct response to losses of that magnitude.
Key Enforcement Priorities Identified in the DOJ Memorandum
The memorandum identifies five primary enforcement priorities. Organizations operating in these areas should consider how their risk profile, controls, and response protocols align with the DOJ’s stated areas of focus.
Public Trust and Financial Integrity
The Fraud Division intends to aggressively pursue fraud involving government contracts, grants, benefits programs, and other taxpayer-funded initiatives. It will place particular focus on procurement fraud, bid-rigging, bribery, defective pricing, and schemes that divert public funds or undermine confidence in government programs. The memorandum also identifies self-dealing, product substitution, and billing fraud, along with fraud against federal benefit and grant programs, including student loans, veterans' benefits, disaster relief, and small business programs.
Healthcare Fraud
Healthcare enforcement remains a top priority, with the DOJ focused on fraud schemes that increase costs, exploit vulnerable patients, or compromise patient safety. Key areas include Medicare and Medicaid fraud, telemedicine arrangements, kickbacks, controlled substance diversion, home health and hospice fraud, and deceptive marketing practices.
Internal Revenue
The Fraud Division views tax enforcement as a critical fraud-fighting tool and will target tax preparer misconduct, abusive tax schemes, false filings, income concealment, and tax violations tied to broader financial crimes. Enhanced use of data analytics and financial forensics is expected to drive enforcement efforts.
Global Trade and Commerce
The memorandum identifies trade-related fraud as an enforcement priority, particularly where misconduct may threaten economic or national security interests. Potential areas of focus include customs and tariff evasion, false country-of-origin claims, sanctions violations, forced labor in supply chains, and other efforts to circumvent U.S. trade laws. The Division's trade enforcement efforts will operate alongside the cross-agency Trade Fraud Task Force launched in August 2025, which the DOJ reports has already exceeded $1 billion in combined recoveries, penalties, forfeitures, and publicly charged losses.
Corporate Misconduct
The Fraud Division will continue to prioritize corporate fraud and other economic crimes, with an emphasis on accountability for organizations that fail to prevent, detect or address misconduct. The memorandum also reinforces the potential value of voluntary self-disclosure, cooperation, and effective remediation when the DOJ evaluates enforcement outcomes. Organizations weighing disclosure decisions should also be aware that the DOJ's Corporate Enforcement and Voluntary Self-Disclosure Policy, most recently revised in May 2025, provides a defined path to declination for organizations that voluntarily self-disclose, fully cooperate, and remediate in a timely and appropriate manner.
What Organizations May Expect from Future Enforcement Activity
Several themes in the memorandum may help organizations understand how enforcement could evolve.
Increased Data-Driven Investigations
The memorandum repeatedly highlights the Division’s use of advanced data analytics, fraud detection technology, and cross-agency data sharing. Organizations should expect enforcement agencies may be able to identify anomalies, emerging risk indicators, and potential misconduct more efficiently and at a larger scale than in the past. Just as important, the DOJ expects organizations to apply comparable rigor to their own data. The DOJ's Evaluation of Corporate Compliance Programs, updated in September 2024, directs prosecutors to ask whether compliance personnel have adequate access to relevant data sources and whether the organization uses data analytics to test the effectiveness of its controls and compliance program.
Greater Coordination Across Agencies
The Division intends to work closely with U.S. Attorneys' Offices, federal law enforcement agencies, executive departments, and state and local partners. This may result in more coordinated investigations and broader information-sharing among regulators. Because the Division's criminal priorities overlap substantially with existing civil False Claims Act enforcement, particularly in healthcare and government contracting, organizations should recognize that a single set of facts can give rise to parallel criminal and civil exposure.
Expanded Corporate Enforcement
Organizations should anticipate increased scrutiny of compliance programs, internal controls, third-party relationships, and executive oversight. Matters involving procurement, government funds and contracts, international trade, and health care may receive particular attention.
For many organizations, the memo’s practical significance is not limited to whether they operate in one of the named priority areas. It also underscores the importance of being able to identify fraud indicators, document control effectiveness, investigate concerns, and remediate issues before they become enforcement matters.
Steps Organizations Can Take Now
In light of the Division's stated priorities, organizations should consider evaluating whether their fraud risk management, compliance, and investigative response capabilities remain aligned with emerging enforcement expectations.
Conduct Targeted Fraud Risk Assessments
Organizations should reassess their fraud risk profiles aligning with the Fraud Division's stated enforcement priorities. Special attention should be given to government contracting, healthcare activities, tax compliance, international trade, and third-party relationships to identify areas of elevated risk and inform compliance and control enhancements. A useful benchmark is the Fraud Risk Management Guide, Second Edition (2023), issued by COSO in collaboration with the ACFE, which calls for a fraud risk assessment that is distinct from the broader enterprise risk assessment, considers specific fraud schemes and scenarios, maps them to existing anti-fraud controls, and evaluates the likelihood and significance of residual fraud risk.
Strengthen Internal Controls, Data Analytics, and Monitoring
As the DOJ expands its use of data analytics and technology-enabled investigations, organizations should evaluate whether their internal controls, monitoring activities, and data analytics capabilities are sufficient to identify potential misconduct, compliance gaps, and other indicators of fraud risk. Continuous monitoring and targeted analytics can help organizations detect emerging risks, strengthen compliance oversight, and address issues before they escalate.
Evaluate Compliance Program Effectiveness
Organizations should periodically assess whether their compliance programs are appropriately designed, adequately resourced, and operating effectively. Policies, training, reporting mechanisms, and governance structures should be tailored to the organization's risk profile and support compliance with applicable laws and regulations.
Enhance Investigation Readiness
Organizations should be prepared to respond promptly and effectively to allegations of misconduct or potential compliance concerns. Clear investigation protocols, document preservation procedures, and coordination among legal, compliance, and business stakeholders can help facilitate timely internal reviews and regulatory responses when necessary. Organizations should also be prepared to perform and document root cause analysis when misconduct is identified, an expectation reflected in the DOJ's compliance program guidance, and to demonstrate that lessons learned are incorporated into the fraud risk assessment and the control environment.
Review Disclosure and Remediation Protocols
The memorandum reiterates the DOJ's commitment to rewarding organizations that voluntarily self-disclose misconduct, cooperate with investigations, and undertake timely and appropriate remediation. Organizations should therefore review their processes for escalating concerns, evaluating disclosure considerations, conducting investigations, and implementing corrective actions when warranted. The DOJ's Corporate Whistleblower Awards Pilot Program, launched in August 2024, increases the likelihood that the government learns of potential misconduct before the organization completes its own assessment, which raises the practical importance of trusted internal reporting channels, appropriate escalation protocols, and prompt action on the concerns they surface.