DOJ’s $1 Million Award to Antitrust Whistleblower: 4 Key Takeaways for Corporate Compliance Programs

Quick Hits

• On January 29, 2026, less than six months after the DOJ launched its Antitrust Whistleblower Award Program, the department awarded $1 million to a whistleblower for information leading to the prosecution of antitrust violations and fraud in automobile auctions.
• The SEC’s whistleblower program, which has issued over $1 billion in awards since 2011, has significantly increased whistleblower activity and enforcement under anti-retaliation laws.
• Companies may want to ensure compliance with DOJ guidelines, foster robust compliance cultures, conduct prompt and thorough whistleblower investigations, and maintain clear anti-retaliation policies to mitigate risks.

For more than a decade, the SEC’s Office of the Whistleblower at the Securities and Exchange Commission has led to a wave of so-called “bounty programs” that provide monetary rewards to whistleblowers who provide information to enforcement agencies that results in substantial recoveries or fines. The SEC’s whistleblower program has issued over $1 billion in monetary awards since its inception in 2011. Due to these substantial monetary awards, practitioners have seen not only an increase in whistleblower activity (both internally at companies through their internal compliance functions and to the government), but also a substantial increase of activity under whistleblower anti-retaliation laws affecting employers under dozens of federal laws—no matter the subject matter of the whistleblower report.

Recent DOJ Whistleblower Award

The antitrust violations and fraud arose following one corporation’s acquisition of another company, an online auction platform for used vehicles. The DOJ said that the acquired company’s employees conspired with a third company’s employees to suppress and eliminate competition for used vehicles through the placement of fake bids, which artificially increased the sales price of used vehicles. The DOJ charged the acquiring company with failure to take immediate action to end this illegal practice at the acquired company, resulting in a $3.28 million criminal fine through a deferred prosecution agreement.

The DOJ Antitrust Division, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and the U.S. Postal Inspection Service worked together to investigate the scheme that used the U.S. Mail. In noting the importance of the new whistleblower program, Acting Director of Criminal Enforcement Daniel Glad of the Antitrust Division noted “[t]oday’s reward shows that the Antitrust Division leverages whistleblower reports to drive forward our investigations.”

Four Key Takeaways for Companies

The speed with which this award was paid signals that the DOJ intends to vigorously use whistleblower tips to open and drive forward their investigations. Employers may want to take note of the following points:

• First, in light of the size of this award, employers may want to ensure that their compliance programs comply with the DOJ Antitrust Division’s Evaluation of Corporate Compliance Programs. The DOJ considers whether a compliance program is effective when determining cooperation and leniency.
• Second, the award highlights the importance of robust compliance cultures, including in acquisitions and mergers. For example, a company that is acquiring another may want to ensure that the acquired company is brought under its compliance umbrella as soon as possible. This includes having clear internal reporting lines, policies, and controls, as well as written procedures for investigation when a report is made. Compliance measures typically include training employees of the acquired entity as soon as possible after the acquisition on where and how to internally report suspected violations of the law.
• Third, consider ensuring whistleblower investigations are prompt and thorough, allowing for time to make appropriate corrections and self-reporting, if necessary. The DOJ Antitrust Division’s Leniency Program (and other federal government cooperation programs) gives credit if the company self-reports before the whistleblower contacts the DOJ with the information. Email or digital communications between employees are often the smoking guns and proof of the illegal conduct. Therefore, if the tip is serious enough to warrant, consider ensuring the scope of the investigation includes a review of these types of communications.
• Fourth, the first communication with an internal whistleblower is critical. Retaliation claims have resulted from suspicion that the company is not taking action on an internal report but rather taking actions against the whistleblower. Consider updating whistleblower policies to ensure clear guidelines for communicating with an internal whistleblower. Employers may also want to ensure training on anti-retaliation policies is provided for all levels in the organization.

Jane A. Norberg, former chief of the Office of the Whistleblower at the SEC, is co-chair of Ogletree Deakins’ Whistleblower and Compliance Practice Group. Lauren M. Pritchard is an associate with the firm’s Employment Law Practice Group.

Ogletree Deakins’ Whistleblower and Compliance Practice Group will continue to monitor developments and will post updates on the Ethics / Whistleblower blog as additional information becomes available.

Follow and Subscribe
LinkedIn | Instagram | Webinars | Podcasts