What is the Federal False Claims Act? 31 USC 3729 What Must You Know?

What Is the Federal False Claims Act (31 USC 3729)— And What Happens If It’s Being Used Against You?

Theodore P. Watson, Esq. Former Procurement Official, Veteran, Federal FCA defense Lawyer – US Supreme Court Attorney: If you were just served with a subpoena, a Civil Investigative Demand, or a target letter for alleged violation of the False Claims Act, how you respond has a huge impact on how your case could develop. Handled the right way, cases can lead to complete dismissal.  The longer you simply sit back and wait to see what the government does, the less chance they will actually dismiss your case. 

Recipients of False Claims Act subpoenas or Civil Investigative Demands have to know three things: what this actually means for you, what mistakes could make it worse, and what to do in the next 24 hours. Here are suggested answers to all three — and covers the law in full below it, for when you’re ready.

Call our False Claims Act defense team 24/7: 1-866-601-5518, or tell us what’s happening and we’ll call you back.

Which Situation Are You In?

Not every False Claims Act case looks the same, and the right first move depends on where you are right now.

1. I received a subpoena or Civil Investigative Demand (CID). This means the government — or a whistleblower’s attorney on the government’s behalf — is actively gathering evidence. It does not automatically mean you’ll be charged or sued. It does mean everything you do from here matters. See our CID response guide →

2. I was notified that an employee or competitor filed a qui tam complaint against my company. Qui tam cases are filed under seal — you may be one of the last people to find out. By the time you’re notified, the government has often already been investigating for months. Learn how qui tam cases move →

3. I’m a government contractor worried about a pricing, invoicing, or compliance issue before anyone contacts me. Getting ahead of a problem — through a disclosure strategy or internal review — is the cheapest and most effective time to involve counsel. See our compliance and disclosure guidance →

4. My company is under a healthcare fraud investigation (Medicare, Medicaid, DOJ Healthcare Fraud Unit). Healthcare Fraud False Claims Act cases carry their own rules, data-mining triggers, and agency players.

5. I don’t know yet — I just know something is wrong. That’s a reasonable place to start. Call us, and we’ll help you figure out what you’re actually facing before you decide anything.

What To Do — and Not Do — Right Now

Do:

• Preserve all documents and communications related to the matter immediately (a litigation hold, even an informal one, protects you)
• Loop in counsel before you respond to any government request, even an informal one
• Get a clear-eyed read on your actual exposure before deciding on a strategy

Don’t:

• Talk to investigating agents without counsel present, even if “you have nothing to hide” — statements made in that moment are frequently used to build the case, not clear your name
• Alter, delete, or “clean up” files or emails once you know an inquiry exists — this can turn a civil exposure into an obstruction charge
• Assume a civil case can’t turn criminal, or that a criminal referral is off the table because DOJ hasn’t said so yet

We can’t promise a particular outcome — no ethical attorney can. What experienced FCA counsel can do is help you avoid the mistakes that turn a defensible position into a costly one, and put you in the strongest realistic position for resolution, whether that’s a declination, a negotiated settlement, or trial.

What Is the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3729?

The Federal False Claims Act , 31 U.S.C. § 3729, is the federal government’s primary tool for pursuing fraud against federal money — whether that’s a federal defense contract, a federal grant, or a Medicare claim. Congress passed it in 1863 in response to contractors overbilling and shortchanging the Union Army, and it has been strengthened repeatedly since, most significantly in 1986 and 2009. When you least expect it, your company can be subject to an investigation.

The FCA imposes liability — civil, and in serious cases criminal — on anyone who knowingly submits a false or fraudulent claim for payment to the government, or knowingly avoids an obligation to pay money back to the government. “Knowingly” is broader than most people assume: it covers actual knowledge, but also deliberate ignorance and reckless disregard of the truth. You do not need to have intended to defraud the government to face liability — you can be liable for not checking when you had reason to.

A claim can be a direct bill to a federal agency, or a reimbursement request made through a federal program, like a Medicare claim submitted to a private insurer administering federal funds.

How Do Prosecutors Ultimately Reach the False Claims Act? How Do They Monetize or Criminalize Your Alleged Behavior?

Many defendants under the FCA wonder how they end up being charged under the False Claims Act. The reality is that federal prosecutors and their investigative agents usually start by finding some relevant alleged actions/ violations. This could include violations of SBA small business regulations (HUBZone, SBA 8a BD, SDVOSB); Trade Agreements Act violations; Buy American Act violations; subcontracting limitations; false billing; kickbacks; etc. Once the government believes it has sufficient evidence to bring the case, it jumps to the False Claims Act (criminalize or monetize the charges).

What are Some Ways You Can Violate the FCA

1. Presenting a false claim for payment or approval
2. Making or using a false record or statement material to a false claim
3. Conspiring with others to violate the Act
4. Failing to return government property in your possession
5. Certifying false receipt of government property
6. Buying government property from someone not authorized to sell it
7. Reverse false claims — using a false statement to avoid paying money you owe the government (this one catches contractors and healthcare providers by surprise most often)

Prime contractors and subcontractors are both exposed. Subs are not shielded just because they didn’t contract with the government directly.

Civil vs. Criminal False Claims Act Investigations: What’s Actually at Stake

Most federal False Claims Act matters are civil, but the same underlying conduct can trigger a parallel or follow-on criminal investigation, particularly where DOJ believes the false statements were intentional rather than the product of sloppy compliance.

Civil exposure:

• Treble (3x) damages — three times what the government actually lost
• A per-claim penalty, currently in the range of roughly $13,000–$27,000 per false claim (adjusted periodically for inflation) — and note that “per claim” can mean per invoice, not per contract, which is how penalties multiply quickly
• Potential suspension or debarment from future federal contracting

Criminal exposure (when DOJ pursues it as fraud, false statements, or conspiracy):

• Fines
• Imprisonment
• A federal conviction that follows an individual or a company far beyond the case itself

Whistleblower incentive: a qui tam relator who brings a successful case can recover 15–30% of what the government collects, which is a major reason these cases get filed and aggressively pursued.

Government Contract False Claims Act Defense

Government contract FCA cases have their own recurring fact patterns. A few of the most common:

Defective pricing and cost/pricing data claims. Allegations that a contractor didn’t disclose current, accurate cost data during negotiations, or delayed disclosing a price reduction. Watch for red flags like inconsistent internal records on vendor discounts or distorted overhead allocations — these are exactly what investigators look for.

Trade Agreements Act (TAA) violations. Certifying that end products are manufactured or “substantially transformed” in a TAA-designated country when they’re not. These often surface through audits of country-of-origin certifications on GSA schedule contracts.

Buy American Act issues. Similar in shape to TAA problems but governed by different domestic-content thresholds — certifying TAA compliance without verifying your supply chain is a common trigger.

Small business and SBA program matters. Misrepresenting size status, ownership, or control to qualify for small business, 8(a), SDVOSB, or WOSB set-asides. Competitor protests increasingly initiate these cases, which then turn into FCA referrals.

Substandard product or service claims (“worthless services”). Billing for goods or services that didn’t meet contract specifications, or didn’t happen at all.

Read our full Government Contract Fraud Defense guide →

Healthcare Fraud False Claims Act Defense

Healthcare Fraud False Claims Act cases move differently than contract cases — they’re often built from claims-data analysis rather than a single whistleblower tip, which means providers can be under investigation long before they know it. Common triggers:

• Medical necessity disputes — billing for services DOJ or a payer later argues weren’t medically necessary
• Upcoding and unbundling — billing at a higher-reimbursement code than the service supports, or billing bundled services separately
• Anti-Kickback Statute and Stark Law overlap — a kickback or improper physician referral arrangement can independently create FCA liability, because a claim tainted by an AKS or Stark violation is treated as a false claim
• Data mining–driven investigations — CMS and DOJ increasingly flag providers through billing-pattern analytics before a complaint is ever filed

If you’ve received a request for records, a subpoena from HHS-OIG, or notice of a qui tam suit involving billing practices, the same rule applies: what you say and produce before counsel is involved shapes the rest of the case.

Read our full Healthcare Fraud FCA Defense guide →

How to Respond to a Subpoena or Civil Investigative Demand 

A Civil Investigative Demand or subpoena is a legal document with a deadline, not a request you can set aside. Here’s the general sequence, though your specific response should always be shaped around your facts:

1. Read the scope before you do anything else. A CID or subpoena will define a document date range, specific custodians (people), and specific search terms or categories. Responding too broadly hands over material that was never at issue; responding too narrowly can be read as obstruction. Get this scope right first.

2. Put a litigation hold in place immediately. Notify everyone who might have responsive documents — email, texts, shared drives, physical files — that nothing related to the matter gets deleted, including through routine auto-delete policies. Document that the hold went out and when.

3. Identify who’s a fact witness before they’re interviewed. Government agents may contact employees directly, sometimes before your company is formally aware of the scope of the investigation. Employees are generally entitled to have counsel present, and companies can (carefully, without instructing anyone what to say) make sure employees know that.

4. Negotiate the deadline and scope with counsel, not directly. CID and subpoena deadlines are frequently negotiable if you engage promptly and reasonably — DOJ and OIG attorneys deal with scope negotiations constantly. Waiting until the deadline to raise a problem removes your leverage to do this.

5. Review documents for privilege before production. Attorney-client communications and work product should be logged and withheld, not produced by default. This step alone is why document review needs to run through counsel rather than through your compliance or IT team independently.

6. Decide early whether a voluntary disclosure changes your position. In some cases, getting ahead of what the government will eventually find — through a structured voluntary disclosure — can meaningfully change the trajectory of a case. This is a strategic call, not a reflexive one, and it should never be made without counsel weighing the specific facts.

7. Track every deadline and every communication with the government in one place. These matters can run for months or years. A clear internal record of what was produced, when, and what was said protects you later, including in negotiations.

What Happens After a CID or Subpoena — A Realistic Timeline

People often ask how long this takes and what happens next. There’s no fixed timeline — FCA investigations can run from several months to several years — but the general phases look like this:

Investigation phase (months to years). The government gathers documents and witness interviews. Many investigations end quietly here, with no further action, because the evidence doesn’t support a case. Others continue.

Intervention decision (qui tam cases only). If the case started as a sealed whistleblower complaint, DOJ must decide within a statutory window (extended repeatedly in practice) whether to intervene and take over the case, or decline and let the relator’s attorney pursue it alone. Intervention signals the government believes the case has merit; declination doesn’t mean the case disappears, but it does change its trajectory.

Pre-suit resolution or civil complaint. Many civil FCA matters resolve through negotiated settlement before a complaint is ever filed publicly. If no resolution is reached, DOJ or the relator can file suit.

Litigation or settlement negotiation. From here the case proceeds like other federal civil litigation — motions, discovery, potential trial — unless resolved by settlement, which is how the substantial majority of FCA cases end.

Parallel criminal referral (in some cases). If evidence suggests intentional fraud, DOJ can pursue criminal charges in parallel or afterward, through a separate grand jury process. This is the exception, not the rule, but it’s why civil responses need to be handled with criminal exposure in mind from day one.

False Claims Act Statute of Limitations

The federal False Claims Act case generally must be brought within six years of the violation, or three years from when a responsible government official knew or should have known the material facts — whichever is later — subject to an outer ten-year limit. This “whichever is later” structure is why FCA cases sometimes surface years after the conduct occurred, and why simply waiting doesn’t resolve exposure. Full statute of limitations breakdown →

FCA Whistleblower (Qui Tam) Basics You Should Understand

Whether you’re worried about a whistleblower inside your own company, or trying to understand how a case against you started, a few basics matter:

• A qui tam complaint is filed under seal, meaning your company typically won’t know about it right away — the government investigates quietly first
• The relator (whistleblower) must generally be an “original source” of the information, not someone repeating what’s already public
• Retaliating against an employee for raising concerns — through termination, demotion, or harassment — creates separate, independent legal exposure under the Act’s whistleblower protection provisions, on top of whatever the underlying FCA allegations are
• A relator’s attorney is financially incentivized to pursue the case; understanding that incentive structure is part of understanding the case against you

FAQs

The Difference Between the Civil False Claims Act and the Criminal False Claims Act

Most people facing a federal False Claims Act matter do not realize they are dealing with two entirely separate federal statutes. The civil False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3729, is the treble-damages and per-claim-penalty statute most people mean when they say “False Claims Act.” The criminal false claims statute, 18 U.S.C. § 287, is a different law with a different mental-state requirement, a different burden of proof, and a prison sentence attached.

The same underlying conduct can violate both at once, which is why understanding the distinction — and defending against both from day one — is the single most important thing you can do after the government comes calling.

Watson & Associates, LLC defends both. Our attorneys include former DOJ prosecutors who have brought these cases from the government’s side, and former federal procurement officials who have seen how a contract or claim is actually assembled. That dual experience is what lets us tell you, before you say a word to an agent, which statute you are actually facing and what each one would take to beat.

The Civil False Claims Act (31 U.S.C. § 3729): The Risks

• Treble damages: three times the government’s actual loss, not just the amount overbilled.
• Per-claim civil penalties — currently $14,308 to $28,619 per false claim after DOJ’s July 2025 inflation adjustment, and “per claim” often means per invoice, so penalties multiply fast.
• Proven by a preponderance of the evidence — the government only needs to show it is more likely than not that you knowingly submitted a false claim.
• “Knowingly” is broad: actual knowledge, deliberate ignorance, or reckless disregard of the truth — though the Supreme Court’s Schutte decision confirmed it is your subjective belief that matters, and that mere negligence or an honest mistake is not enough.
• A private whistleblower (qui tam relator) can sue you even if DOJ declines to intervene, and can recover 15–30% of whatever the government collects.
• Suspension and debarment from future federal contracting — often the most damaging consequence for a contractor, and it can move faster than the FCA case itself.

What It Takes to Defend a Civil False Claims Act Case Under 31 USC 3729?

A civil FCA case is won or lost on three elements the government must prove: falsity, scienter, and materiality. Experienced defense counsel attacks all three at once.

• Attack scienter under Schutte: show there was no actual knowledge, no deliberate ignorance, and no reckless disregard — that the conduct was, at worst, a good-faith interpretation or an honest mistake.
• Attack materiality under Escobar: show the alleged violation was not material to the government’s decision to pay — and the single strongest evidence of that is the government continuing to pay the same type of claim after it knew of the conduct.
• Raise the government-knowledge defense: if the government knew about and approved the underlying facts, the “knowing” submission of a false claim is logically impossible.
• Fight the damages math: challenge whether treble damages or single damages apply, whether the government actually suffered a loss, and whether per-claim penalties should be assessed per invoice at all.
• Negotiate before litigation: the overwhelming majority of civil FCA matters resolve by settlement, and the earlier counsel is engaged, the more leverage you have over penalty and damages exposure.

The Criminal False Claims Act (18 U.S.C. § 287): The Risks

• Up to five years in federal prison per count — and multiple false claims can mean consecutive sentences.
• Fines up to $250,000 for an individual or $500,000 for an organization, plus full restitution and forfeiture of proceeds.
• Proven beyond a reasonable doubt — a far higher bar than the civil standard, but one the government reaches through a grand jury indictment, not a civil complaint.
• A higher mental state than the civil statute: DOJ must prove you acted with specific intent to defraud, or with a consciousness that what you were doing was wrong — not merely reckless disregard.
• The same conduct is often charged alongside related statutes — conspiracy to defraud the United States (18 U.S.C. § 371), false statements (18 U.S.C. § 1001), and mail or wire fraud (18 U.S.C. §§ 1341, 1343) — each carrying its own sentence.
• A conviction follows the individual and the company far beyond the sentence: loss of licenses, exclusion from federal programs, and a permanent criminal record.

What It Takes to Defend a Criminal False Claims Act Case

Criminal defense is a different discipline from civil defense, and it must begin before an indictment, not after.

• Exploit the beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard: the government must prove specific intent to defraud, and a good-faith belief in the accuracy of the claim defeats that intent.
• Protect the Fifth Amendment: in a criminal investigation, silence cannot be used against you the way it can in a civil case — but the privilege must be asserted correctly and early.
• Respond to a target letter or grand jury subpoena through counsel, not directly — the goal is to shape the presentation of facts to the grand jury, not to talk your way into an indictment.
• Negotiate a declination or a civil resolution: the most valuable outcome in many criminal FCA matters is persuading DOJ to keep the case civil, or to decline prosecution entirely, before charges are ever filed.
• Coordinate the civil and criminal tracks together: statements made in a civil CID response can become criminal evidence, so one team must manage both with the criminal exposure in mind from the first day.

Civil False Claims Act vs. Criminal False Claims Act: At a Glance

Element	Civil FCA (31 U.S.C. § 3729)	Criminal FCA (18 U.S.C. § 287)
Who brings it	DOJ or a qui tam relator	A federal prosecutor (U.S. Attorney’s Office)
Burden of proof	Preponderance of the evidence	Beyond a reasonable doubt
Mental state	Knowingly (actual knowledge, deliberate ignorance, reckless disregard)	Specific intent to defraud / consciousness of wrongdoing
Penalties	Treble damages + $14,308–$28,619 per claim	Up to 5 years prison + $250k/$500k fine + restitution
Process	Civil complaint or CID investigation	Grand jury indictment
Key defenses	Scienter (Schutte), materiality (Escobar), government knowledge	Lack of specific intent, Fifth Amendment, declination

 

Other Federal False Claims Act FAQs: 

These are the questions our attorneys hear most often from general counsel, compliance officers, and contractors once they realize the False Claims Act is not one law but two — and that the answer to “civil or criminal” changes everything about their exposure.

Is There Really a Separate “Criminal” False Claims Act, or Is It All One Law?

They are two separate statutes. The civil False Claims Act is 31 U.S.C. § 3729, and it imposes treble damages and civil penalties. The criminal false claims statute is 18 U.S.C. § 287, and it makes it a felony to knowingly present a false, fictitious, or fraudulent claim against the United States.

The same conduct can violate both, but they are prosecuted under different rules, different burdens of proof, and different mental-state requirements. If someone tells you a False Claims Act matter is “just civil,” that statement is only true until a prosecutor decides otherwise.

What Is the Difference in the Burden of Proof Between Civil and Criminal FCA Cases?

In a civil FCA case, the government or relator must prove each element by a preponderance of the evidence — more likely than not. In a criminal case under 18 U.S.C. § 287, the government must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, the highest burden in the legal system.

That gap is real and strategically important: conduct that a jury might find “more likely than not” fraudulent in a civil case may still fall short of proof beyond a reasonable doubt in a criminal case. It is one reason the government so often prefers the civil track — and one reason you should never treat a civil demand as low-stakes.

Can the Government Hit Me With Treble Damages AND Criminal Charges for the Same Conduct?

Yes. There is no double-jeopardy bar that prevents the government from pursuing civil treble damages and criminal prosecution for the same underlying false claims, because the civil FCA’s penalties are treated as remedial rather than purely punitive. In practice, DOJ frequently runs civil and criminal investigations in parallel, with the same documents and witness statements feeding both tracks. This is exactly why a “civil” CID response must be prepared with criminal exposure in mind from the very first production.

What Does “Knowingly” Actually Require After the Supreme Court’s Schutte Decision?

In United States ex rel. Schutte v. SuperValu (2023), the Supreme Court confirmed that the FCA’s “knowingly” standard turns on your subjective belief at the time you submitted the claim — not on what an objectively reasonable person might have believed. Liability requires actual knowledge, deliberate ignorance, or reckless disregard of the truth.

The decision cuts both ways: it closed the door on the “objectively reasonable interpretation” defense, but it also confirmed that mere negligence, an honest mistake, or a good-faith disagreement about an ambiguous regulation is not enough for FCA liability. The fight is over what you actually knew and believed when the claim went out the door.

What Is “Materiality,” and Why Does the Escobar Case Matter to My Defense?

Materiality is the requirement that the false statement or omission actually mattered to the government’s decision to pay. In Universal Health Services v. Escobar (2016), the Supreme Court called materiality a “demanding” standard and held that a minor or insubstantial violation is not enough.

The most powerful materiality evidence is the government’s own conduct: if the government knew about the alleged violation and kept paying the same type of claim anyway, that is strong evidence the requirement was not material. Escobar is the single most useful defense tool in modern FCA litigation, and a page that never mentions it is leaving your strongest argument on the table.

What Is the “Government Knowledge” Defense, and When Does It Work?

The government-knowledge defense argues that the government knew about and approved the facts underlying the allegedly false claim, so the defendant could not have “knowingly” submitted a false claim. It is not a separate affirmative defense so much as a way of defeating the scienter element. It is strongest where the defendant can show the government was fully informed of the relevant facts — through audits, disclosures, or ongoing communications — and paid the claims anyway. After Escobar, government knowledge also feeds directly into the materiality analysis.

What Is the Difference Between Civil “Knowingly” and Criminal “Specific Intent to Defraud”  Under 18 USC 287?

The civil FCA’s “knowingly” reaches actual knowledge, deliberate ignorance, and reckless disregard — a broad net. The criminal statute, 18 U.S.C. 287, requires more: DOJ must prove you acted with specific intent to defraud, or with a consciousness that what you were doing was wrong. Reckless disregard alone generally will not support a criminal conviction.

That higher mental-state requirement is the heart of a criminal FCA defense, and it is why the same facts that might support civil liability can still fall short of a criminal charge.

What Are the Current Per-Claim False Claims Act Penalties in 2025/2026?

After DOJ’s July 2025 inflation adjustment, civil FCA penalties range from $14,308 to $28,619 per false claim for violations occurring after November 2, 2015 and assessed after July 3, 2025. Because “per claim” is often interpreted as per invoice or per line item, the aggregate penalty on a multi-year contract can reach into the millions even before treble damages are added. This is one reason the penalty figure on the current page — “roughly $13,000–$27,000” — should be updated.

If My Company Settles the Civil Case, Am I Protected From Criminal Charges Later?

No, not automatically. A civil settlement resolves the civil FCA claim, but unless the settlement expressly and lawfully resolves criminal exposure — which is rare and requires careful negotiation — a prosecutor can still pursue criminal charges under 18 U.S.C. § 287 or related fraud statutes for the same conduct. This is why a civil resolution should be negotiated by counsel who is simultaneously managing criminal exposure, so the settlement does not create admissions or produce documents that later become an indictment.

Can I Be Personally Prosecuted Under 18 U.S.C. § 287 Even If My Company Settles Civilly?

Yes. The criminal false claims statute reaches individuals — owners, executives, and employees who knowingly presented or caused a false claim — and a corporate civil settlement does not immunize the individuals involved.

In fact, DOJ’s 2025-era enforcement policy has placed renewed emphasis on individual accountability in corporate fraud cases. If you are an individual who touched the claims at issue, you need your own counsel, because company counsel represents the company, not you.

Call Our Federal False Claims Act Defense Attorneys Now

The False Claims Act is not one law, and “civil” is not a promise that the case will stay civil. Watson & Associates, LLC represents government contractors, healthcare providers, and companies nationwide in federal False Claims Act investigations and litigation — on both the civil and criminal sides.

Our attorneys include former DOJ prosecutors who have brought these cases from the inside, and former federal procurement officials who understand how a claim is actually built. If you have received a subpoena, a Civil Investigative Demand, a target letter, or any indication that a qui tam complaint has been filed against you, call our federal False Claims Act defense team today at 1.866.601.5518 for a free, confidential consultation, or complete the online case review form to have an attorney call you back.

Can a False Claims Act lawyer negotiate with the Department of Justice? Yes — and in the majority of civil FCA matters, negotiation is exactly where the case ends up, whether that’s a pre-suit resolution, a negotiated settlement amount, or a corporate integrity agreement in healthcare cases. DOJ attorneys have discretion over what they pursue and how, and experienced defense counsel can affect that discretion — by presenting facts that undercut materiality or scienter, by demonstrating an effective compliance response, or by negotiating penalty and damages exposure down from what was initially alleged. Negotiation doesn’t guarantee a specific number or outcome, but going in without counsel who does this regularly puts you at a structural disadvantage against a DOJ attorney who negotiates these cases full-time.

How does the investigation and indictment process actually work? It typically starts one of three ways: a whistleblower files a sealed qui tam complaint and DOJ investigates before deciding whether to intervene; DOJ or an Inspector General’s office opens an investigation directly, often via subpoena or CID; or a routine audit surfaces irregularities that get referred to DOJ. During the investigation phase, agents gather documents and witness interviews — this is civil in nature even when a criminal referral is possible in parallel.

If DOJ believes the conduct was knowing and intentional rather than merely erroneous, it can refer the matter for criminal charges, which run through a grand jury and require an indictment before trial. Not every civil FCA investigation becomes criminal — but the earlier you have counsel managing your response, the more influence you have over which direction it goes.

Will I go to jail for a False Claims Act violation? Most FCA matters are resolved civilly, with damages and penalties rather than criminal charges. Criminal exposure becomes real when DOJ concludes the conduct was intentional fraud rather than a compliance failure — which is exactly why how you and your company respond early on matters.

What if I already talked to investigators before calling a lawyer? It’s a common situation, and it doesn’t mean your case is lost. It does mean it’s more important, not less, to get counsel involved immediately to understand what was said and manage everything from this point forward.

How much does a False Claims Act defense cost, and is it worth it compared to the exposure? Given that per-claim penalties and treble damages can turn a moderate contract dispute into a seven-figure exposure, most clients find that experienced counsel pays for itself many times over — both in reduced exposure and in avoiding mistakes that extend the case. We can discuss fee structure directly once we understand your situation.

Does hiring a defense attorney make my company look guilty? No — it’s the opposite of how investigators actually read it. DOJ and OIG attorneys handle represented companies constantly; it’s the normal, expected response to a federal inquiry. What draws suspicion is inconsistent, unrepresented responses that create new problems — missed deadlines, incomplete productions, or a well-meaning employee saying something inaccurate in an informal interview.

Can my company be suspended or debarred from federal contracts because of an FCA matter? Yes, this is a real and separate risk from the monetary exposure — an agency’s suspension and debarment office can act on the same conduct at issue in an FCA case, sometimes before the FCA matter is even resolved. This is one of the most consequential and most overlooked pieces of a government contractor’s exposure, and it needs to be managed alongside the FCA matter, not after it.

What’s the difference between a subpoena and a Civil Investigative Demand (CID)? Both compel you to produce documents or testimony, but a CID is a tool specific to FCA investigations, issued directly by DOJ under 31 U.S.C. § 3733, often before a lawsuit is filed and sometimes before you know whether a qui tam complaint exists. A subpoena can come from a grand jury (signaling potential criminal exposure) or from an agency Inspector General in a civil context. Which one you received tells you something about where the investigation currently stands — which is exactly why it should be reviewed by counsel immediately, not answered on your own read of it.

Should my company self-disclose a potential violation before the government finds it? Sometimes — but it’s a strategic decision with real trade-offs, not a default best practice. Voluntary, timely, and complete self-disclosure can meaningfully reduce penalties and demonstrate good faith, particularly in the government contracting and healthcare compliance context. It can also create exposure you didn’t previously have if handled without a clear legal strategy. This is a decision to make with counsel who can weigh your specific facts, not before.

Can an individual — not just a company — be personally liable under the False Claims Act? Yes. Executives, managers, and even individual employees who knowingly participated in submitting false claims can face personal liability, separate from the company’s exposure. This is part of why individuals contacted directly by investigators, even in a company matter, should have their own counsel.

Talk to Our False Claims Act Defense Attorney Team

Our attorneys have represented government contractors and healthcare providers in False Claims Act investigations and litigation nationwide — from the first subpoena through settlement or trial. Read more about our False Claims Act practice →

Lines are open 24/7. Call 1-866-601-5518 now, or fill out the short form below and we’ll call you back — we keep it brief because we know you’re not looking to fill out paperwork right now; you’re looking for answers. Contact us online.

IMMEDIATELY REDUCE CHANCES OF JAIL TIME AND HUGE FINES. DOWNLOAD YOUR FREE COPY OF YOUR FALSE CLAIMS ACT DEFENSE CHECKLIST NOW.