DOJ's Fraud Division Just Named Its Five Targets: What the August 2026 Enforcement Priorities Memo Means if You Are Under Federal Investigation in Florida

Federal prosecutors just put their target list in writing. On August 13, 2026, the Justice Department's National Fraud Enforcement Division released a memorandum from Assistant Attorney General Colin M. McDonald setting out the Division's structure, its resources, and its five enforcement priorities. Anyone who bills Medicare or Medicaid, holds a federal contract, prescribes controlled substances, imports goods, or sits in a corporate officer's chair should read it as a charging roadmap rather than a policy announcement.

The August 13, 2026 memorandum is the first coherent statement of what the Fraud Division intends to prosecute. It names five priorities and funds roughly 500 attorneys and staff to pursue them.

Key Takeaways

• The Fraud Division's August 13, 2026 memorandum names five priorities: public trust and financial integrity, health care, internal revenue, global trade, and corporate misconduct.
• Health care exposure runs through 18 U.S.C. 1347 and the Anti-Kickback Statute at 42 U.S.C. 1320a-7b, with parallel civil liability under 31 U.S.C. 3729.
• The Division plans roughly 500 attorneys and staff by late August 2026, plus a National Fraud Detection Center and a standalone Asset Recovery Section.
• Most new matters will start from government data leads rather than whistleblowers, so targets learn late and the pre-indictment window is shorter than it used to be.
• The Southern and Middle Districts of Florida remain among the most active health care fraud enforcement zones in the country, and the memo funds more of that model.

What the Memorandum Actually Says

The National Fraud Enforcement Division was established in April 2026 and until last week had announced enforcement actions without publishing a coherent statement of what it intends to prosecute. The August 13 memorandum fills that gap. The stated mission is to prosecute fraud without regard to size or complexity, framed around the public fisc and citing Government Accountability Office estimates that the federal government loses between $233 billion and $521 billion each year to fraud. A division measuring itself against a $500 billion problem will charge small and mid-sized cases, not only headline prosecutions.

A structural change landed alongside it. The Criminal Division's longstanding Fraud Section was renamed the White Collar and Corporate Enforcement Section and narrowed to private-sector financial crime. Everything touching taxpayer dollars, including procurement and federal benefit programs, moved to the new Fraud Division, and the old Health Care Fraud Unit moved with it.

What the Government Is Building

The memorandum describes a division designed to be lean, flat, and agile, with reduced supervisory layers and career prosecutors deployed alongside United States Attorneys' Offices. That means faster charging decisions and fewer internal checkpoints where a white collar defense attorney can slow a case down.

The buildout is substantial: roughly 500 attorneys and staff by late August 2026, organized into specialized sections for health care fraud, public trust and financial integrity, tax, global trade, corporate enforcement, and appeals. Three components deserve attention. A National Fraud Detection Center paired with a Criminal Investigation Section. A standalone Asset Recovery Section with its own attorneys and investigators, which signals that forfeiture gets worked up in parallel with the criminal case rather than bolted on at sentencing. And a dedicated privilege review team, which tells you the Division expects to be seizing large volumes of material from professionals.

When a division generates its own leads from claims and billing data, the government arrives with a theory already built. There is no complaint on file to discover and no early signal that anyone reported you.

The analytics point is the one most people miss. When a division generates its own leads from claims and billing data, the government arrives with a theory already built. There is no disgruntled employee to cross-examine and no early signal that a complaint was filed. First contact is often a federal grand jury subpoena or agents at the door.

The Five Priorities, and Where the Exposure Sits

Public trust and financial integrity comes first. Government procurement fraud is a critical priority, covering defective pricing, bid rigging, self-dealing, bribery, product substitution, and billing schemes, alongside fraud against federal benefit and grant programs. Contractors and grant recipients should assume their submissions are being read against 18 U.S.C. 287 and 18 U.S.C. 1343.

Health care is the center of gravity and the priority most relevant to South Florida. Citing projections that national health care spending grows from over $3 trillion annually to over $7 trillion, with three to ten percent lost to fraud, the memorandum says the Division is supercharging the Health Care Fraud Strike Force model with more resources and better analytics. Named focus areas include Medicare and Medicaid fraud, controlled substance diversion, home health and hospice schemes, telemedicine fraud, and deceptive marketing of unsafe products. Every one has a prosecution history in the Southern District of Florida.

Every named health care focus area has a prosecution history in the Southern District of Florida. The memo does not create new theories here. It funds more of the model this district already runs.

That leaves internal revenue, global trade, and corporate misconduct. Criminal enforcement under Title 26 is called integral to protecting the public fisc, so anyone facing an IRS CI investigation should expect tighter coordination between revenue agents and Fraud Division prosecutors. A cross-agency Trade Fraud Task Force will pursue illicit transshipment, country-of-origin misrepresentation, undervaluation of imports, and sanctions evasion, which for a Miami importer is the first time trade compliance has been named a criminal fraud priority in this form. And the Division commits to rewarding self-disclosure, cooperation, and remediation under the Department-wide Corporate Enforcement Policy, having already issued a declination to a health care company under it.

Charges and Sentencing Exposure

The statutes have not changed. What changed is the volume of resources pointed at them.

In health care matters the core charge is health care fraud under 18 U.S.C. 1347, carrying up to ten years per count and up to twenty where serious bodily injury results. Kickback allegations proceed under 42 U.S.C. 1320a-7b. Wire fraud under 18 U.S.C. 1343 and conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. 1349 are routinely stacked on top. Where prescribing conduct is involved the government charges distribution under 21 U.S.C. 841. Proceeds allegations bring 18 U.S.C. 1956, and both DOJ health care enforcement actions announced in the same week as the memorandum involved laundering fraud proceeds through banks. Criminal tax counts arise under 26 U.S.C. 7201 and 26 U.S.C. 7206, customs offenses under 18 U.S.C. 542, and false claims under 18 U.S.C. 287.

A physician or practice owner facing a well-documented loss figure can be looking at a double-digit guideline range on conduct that felt like billing disputes at the time. Civil exposure under the False Claims Act at 31 U.S.C. 3729 adds treble damages, and HHS-OIG program exclusion can end a career independent of any prison term.

The Mistakes That Make These Cases Worse

Assuming an audit is only an audit. A CMS, ZPIC, or UPIC audit that starts requesting patient files, marketing materials, and communications is frequently the visible edge of a criminal investigation. Answering it as a billing dispute is how defensible cases become indictments.

Talking to agents without counsel. Agents write the report. Any inconsistency between what a client says at the kitchen table and what the records show becomes evidence of intent, and a false statement charge under 18 U.S.C. 1001 can be added on facts unrelated to the underlying conduct.

"Touching records after learning of an investigation is the single most damaging thing a person under federal investigation can do. It converts a triable case into an obstruction case, and obstruction is what sentencing judges punish."— Aaron M. Cohen, AMC Defense Law

Producing documents without a strategy is the next error. A grand jury subpoena requires a response. It does not require a volunteered narrative, an unreviewed production, or a waiver of privilege. And waiting for the indictment is the most expensive mistake of all. Once charges are filed, the realistic range of outcomes has already narrowed.

What Effective Defense Work Looks Like Now

Get counsel involved at the audit or subpoena stage, not the arraignment. A federal target letter attorney can engage the assigned prosecutor while charging decisions are still open. Declinations happen in the pre-indictment phase, on a record defense counsel helped build, and almost never afterward.

Attack the data theory directly. If the Division generates leads from claims analytics, the government's case starts as a statistical inference, and inferences rest on assumptions that can be wrong. Coding decisions, patient acuity, referral sources, supervising physician arrangements, and documentation practices all explain outliers that look damning on a spreadsheet. That work has to happen before the theory hardens into an indictment.

Make the self-disclosure decision deliberately. For an entity, the Corporate Enforcement Policy is a real path. For an individual officer, self-disclosure by the company can be the event that creates personal exposure. Those interests diverge and should be analyzed separately.

With a standalone Asset Recovery Section, forfeiture is a core issue rather than an afterthought. One set of facts can also generate a False Claims Act action, an HHS-OIG exclusion proceeding, and a state licensure matter, and statements made in one forum follow you into the others. This is the same posture that drives every federal healthcare fraud defense matter in this district.

Why the Timing Matters Right Now

Two dates make this practical. The Division reaches roughly 500 attorneys and staff by late August 2026, and new prosecutors need cases. A division that just published its priorities and just finished hiring will be opening matters this fall, most of them from data leads. Separately, the amended federal sentencing guidelines take effect November 1, 2026, so anyone with a charging decision or sentencing date in the next several months is already making timing choices.

The window that matters is the one before charges are filed. If you have received a target letter, a grand jury subpoena, an HHS-OIG subpoena, or an audit request that has started asking about intent rather than arithmetic, the useful question is not whether the government has a case. It is how much of the record is still within your control.

Common Questions

Under Federal Investigation in Florida, or Facing an Audit That Has Started to Feel Criminal?

AMC Defense Law represents individuals, physicians, executives, and businesses in federal investigations and prosecutions in the Southern and Middle Districts of Florida and nationwide, including pre-indictment matters, target letter and grand jury subpoena responses, HHS-OIG and CMS audit escalations, trial, and federal sentencing. The earlier counsel is involved, the more of the record remains within your control. Consultations are confidential.

Declinations happen in the pre-indictment phase, on a record defense counsel helped build. Once charges are filed, the realistic range of outcomes has already narrowed.

If you or your loved ones have been arrested or are under federal investigation in Florida, call Aaron M. Cohen for a confidential consultation, 24 hours a day, to get help.

This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading this article does not create an attorney-client relationship with AMC Defense Law or any of its attorneys. Every case turns on its own facts, and prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. If you are under investigation or facing charges, consult a licensed attorney about your specific situation.

About the author: Aaron M. Cohen, Esq. is the founding attorney of AMC Defense Law (The Law Offices of Aaron M. Cohen, P.A.), a criminal defense firm based in Boca Raton, Florida. With more than 30 years of experience, Mr. Cohen represents individuals and entities in complex federal and state criminal investigations and prosecutions nationwide. He is admitted to practice law in Florida, New York, New Jersey, and the District of Columbia, and in the United States District Courts for the Southern, Middle, and Northern Districts of Florida, the District of Columbia, the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York, and the District of New Jersey.