(a) In determining an appropriate amount of civil penalties and
assessments, the ALJ and the authority head, upon appeal, should
evaluate any circumstances that mitigate or aggravate the violation and
should articulate in their opinions the reasons that support the
penalties and assessments they impose. Because of the intangible costs
of fraud, the expense of investigating such conduct, and the need to
deter others who might be similarly tempted, ordinarily double damages
and a significant civil penalty should be imposed.
(b) Although not exhaustive, the following factors are among those
that may influence the ALJ and the authority head in determining the
amount of penalties and assessments to impose with respect to the
misconduct (i.e., the false, fictitious, or fraudulent claims or
statements) charged in the complaint:
(1) The number of false, fictitious, or fraudulent claims or
statements;
(2) The time period over which such claims or statements were made;
(3) The degree of the defendant's culpability with respect to the
misconduct;
(4) The amount of money or the value of the property, services, or
benefit falsely claimed;
(5) The value of the Government's actual loss as a result of the
misconduct, including forseeable consequential damages and the costs of
investigation;
(6) The relationship of the amount imposed as civil penalties to the
amount of the Government's loss;
(7) The potential or actual impact of the misconduct upon national
defense, public health or safety, or public confidence in the management
of Government programs and operations, including particularly the impact
on the intended beneficiaries of such programs;
(8) Whether the defendant has engaged in a pattern of the same or
similar misconduct;
(9) Whether the defendant attempted to conceal the misconduct;
(10) The degree to which the defendant has involved others in the
misconduct or in concealing it;
(11) Where the misconduct of employees or agents is imputed to the
defendant, the extent to which the defendant's practices fostered or
attempted to preclude such misconduct;
(12) Whether the defendant cooperated in or obstructed an
investigation of the misconduct;
(13) Whether the defendant assisted in identifying and prosecuting
other wrongdoers;
(14) The complexity of the program or transaction, and the degree of
the defendant's sophistication with respect to it, including the extent
of the defendant's prior participation in the program or in similar
transactions;
(15) Whether the defendant has been found, in any criminal, civil,
or administrative proceeding to have engaged in similar misconduct or to
have dealt dishonestly with the Government of the United States or of a
State, directly or indirectly; and
(16) The need to deter the defendant and others from engaging in the
same or similar misconduct.
(c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit the ALJ or
the authority head from considering any other factors that in any given
case may mitigate or aggravate the offense for which penalties and
assessments are imposed.
