White-collar crime is an act of violence that affects the stability, structure and soundness of the United States economy and its investors in the financial industry that goes underrepresented in courts on a daily basis. This allows white-collar criminals to abuse the financial industry to earn an illegal profit and face little to no repercussions for their crimes. In today's fiscal world these crimes are as severe as some of the greatest violent crimes, but are tried as petty crimes and require a stronger set of sentencing guidelines in order to deter criminals from attempting to pawn investors' funds and stand by their legal fiduciary duty.

Sentencing guidelines today are easily swayed in favor of the accused because of their ability to purchase the best lawyers who know how to find these loopholes. These guidelines for how to discipline white-collar criminals for their actions are overly lenient. Crimes like such affect hundreds of people a day ruining their plans for retirement, funding their child's educations, or making maintaining their mortgage on their home nearly impossible and yet these criminals get minimal sentences in medium to minimal security prisons. Recent changes to legislation are also ignored by courts as well. According to Dana Liebelson, a writer for the Huffington Post, "Recommended sentences for economic crimes under the current rubric are no longer taken seriously some prosecutors and jurors suggest," (Liebelson). Legislatures need to consider the privilege white-collar criminals come from as they now can be in possession of over a billion dollars in cash and assets that they probably acquired illegally. They also probably have a highly valued education if they had already made it to the position they are in now, which tends to be the opposite of their targets. This allows white-collar criminals to have a huge advantage over their victims not only in the financial industry, but in a court of law while facing a jail sentence.

White-collar criminals are at a substantial advantage in a court room environment due to their background in business law and their ability to purchase the best of lawyers with the money they have already swindled from their victims. Most criminals orchestrating a white-collar crime come from an elevated position within a financial firm. In most cases they are CEOs, CFOs, or managers of accounting firms who posses a legal responsibility to do what is best for their clients and chose to stray away from their fiduciary duty. At this stage in the corporate ladder, officials are well trained in legal terminology and have a substantial income, both legal and illegal, that allows them to purchase the best defense lawyers to win them the best plea bargain and smallest sentence possible. Legislatures making sentencing guidelines for these criminals must take this into consideration if they want to decrease white-collar crime rates. Their financial status allows them to have a significant advantage in court which, in coordination with the current standards to sentence white-collar criminals, serves no purpose to deter people from executing such schemes. Writer for the New York Times Eric Lichtblau discusses how the current guidelines are completely misconstrued when pertaining to small scale cases of fraud as well. Lichtblau writes, "Imposing longer prison sentences for white-collar crimes was a central of the overhaul of business laws congress approved. But Justice department officials said that the set of proposals devised by the United States Sentencing Commission to comply with the bill would largely ignore smaller-scale cases of fraud," (Lichtblau) allowing wealthy constructors of white-collar crime to take advantage of investors on a smaller scale and hardly be punished if caught. This wealth status of white-collar criminals is of the utmost importance in creating legislation to deter crimes of this matter by taking away everything they've earned. If you take away the attribute and gain that matters most in these crimes, fewer managers in charge of investor portfolios will see a potential gain from committing white-collar based crimes.

Legislatures and politicians already support white-collar criminals through the luxury of their prison stay and the duration of their sentencing already. Prison life for white-collar criminals is a vacation for those serving for violent crimes; however, white-collar crimes have a larger impact on the United States economy and to a larger population of people rather than a violent crime. Some can even see white-collar crime as an act of terrorism because of the fear these crimes strike into every American who is concerned about the safety of their retirement funds and investment portfolios. White-collar criminals serve their sentences in places where they can live in an apartment sized cell with large windows and exquisite meals for prison life. On average a white-collar criminal can cut ten years off their sentence for being nonviolent, and usually end up in medium security prisons which is where the show Club Fed began, and where Bernie Madoff is currently serving his sentence. In an article written in DuJour Magazine author Lisa Depaulo discuses her experience visiting famous ex New York Police Commissioner Bernie Kerik. Depaulo describes her visit to the white-collar prison he was placed in stating, "We pulled up to a building in Western Maryland that looked like my high school. There wasn't a single guard out front. No one searched us. There wasn't even a metal detector," (Depaulo). This paints the picture how laissez-faire these prisons are to criminals that scammed and ruined the lives of hundreds if not thousands of people.  This principle needs to be changed. Sentencing guidelines need to be changed to place these offenders in maximum security prisons for a minimum of ten years before ever being considered for medium or minimum security prisons.

Current policy regarding how to sentence convicted white-collar criminals does exactly the opposite of heavily deter white-collar crime. Sentencing guidelines are created to deter criminals from committing crimes because of the consequences after being caught and convicted. However, investors today are fearful of the potential fraud in the stock exchange, or with anyone handling their investment portfolios, because of the historical events that have occurred involving the swindling of investment funds by those who fail to follow their fiduciary duty. In order to reestablish the in the faith and assurance in the investment sector of the economy, United States legislatures must reevaluate and establish stronger sentencing guidelines to deter more white-collar criminals.

White-collar crime has made history since the early twentieth century. Charles Ponzi was the first to invent such a form of fraud known as the Ponzi Scheme in 1920 in which he manipulated the conception of investors that believed they were being paid based off their returns made in the stock exchange, when in reality they were being paid using the capital of the most resent investor. After this became such a noticeably large issue for the federal government, programs such as the Securities and Exchange Commission were created to combat white-collar crime. Today these programs are still working hand over fist to put an end to these kinds of crimes, but the problem lies deeper than catching these crooks during the act. Lawmakers must consider how to prevent these crimes from ever occurring.

History tends to repeat itself when legislatures do not take significant action to prevent crime they do not fully understand from reoccurring. Jordan Belfort, known for the recent film depicting his criminal story Wolf of Wall Street, lived his life manipulating the stock exchange by purchasing a majority of a firm's shares on the market and using forceful selling tactics to sell these shares in an attempt to inflate the value of the shares and sell them for a profit which is a form of white-collar crime known as a pump-and-dump scheme. Belfort made a substantial profit abusing the system through insider information and intentionally controlling the value of shares and lived a life luxury filled with expensive houses, drugs, alcohol, and reckless debauchery. Evading the FBI and SEC for as long as he could, Belfort was eventually caught and served two years in prison. Despite making over two-hundred million dollars in illegitimate business liquidating shares, Belfort was only forced to turn over one-hundred and ten million dollars which was paid for by liquidating some of his vacation homes. Today Belfort makes a living giving motivational speeches to companies which he charges a twenty-thousand-dollar minimum rate for along with covering full travel expenses.

Another example of swindlers taking money through investment scams is the Wall street crook Bernie Madoff. Madoff grew up into the investment world working for his self made broker business, but when he saw an opportunity to capitalize on the less educated American public in the financial industry he built a systematic scam to make his own profit. Completely illegal and against any fiduciary responsible principle, Madoff created a Ponzi Scheme that proved to be beneficial for over thirty-five years conning his victims out of over sixty-five billion dollars. Today, according to writer for Business Insider Stephanie Yang, "Madoff was sentenced to one hundred and fifty years in prison for running the biggest fraudulent scheme in U.S. history. Even today only a few of his victims have since regained all of their losses" (Yang). Madoff should be forced to liquidate all assets in order to pay his restitution to the lives he ruined, including the big businesses and small time investors he conned over sixty-five billion dollars. Legislatures need to realize that searching for potential convicts is not enough to stop white-collar crime. Madoff lived a life of luxury profiting a total of twenty-billion dollars that he survived on for decades before getting caught and serving out the reminder of his natural life in a white-collar prison where he can still work on his tennis game and sleep in a comfy bed. The SEC, FBI, and federal government need to realize that stricter legal policy is the best way to counter fight white-collar crime so programs like the one created by Bernie Madoff never have a positive opportunity cost of ever taking off.

 Today we see much more complex forms of white-collar crime. With anticrime forces such as the FBI, SEC, and teams of forensic accountants analyzing money flow within the stock exchange. Despite white-collar crime not having substantial repercussions for committing the crime, it is becoming harder to get away with executing white-collar crime successfully. These forces are where the United States government plays its cards to deter white collar crime from occurring.

The federal government's main tool for catching white-collar criminals is organization known as The Federal Bauru of Investigation. The FBI is known for their ability to catch violent criminals, fugitives, and terrorists but they also play a quintessential role in catching white-collar criminals. Through their use of harassment tactics to push white-collar criminals into leaving behind a piece of evidence that can be used to prove they are guilty, ability to sway people within a crime ring to admit that illegal financial activity is taking place, or by orchestrating raids to seize evidence to convict white-collar criminals the FBI has the capability to take any criminal down if given the right chance. The opportunity for someone to avoid the FBI however still exists. Careful execution of illegal transactions and covering up money trails can allow for criminals to dodge the careful eyes of the FBI which points back to finding a way to prevent criminals from ever beginning their illegal actions.

Another force the federal government uses to catch white-collar criminals is the Securities and Exchange Commission. Also known as the SEC, this white-collar crime catching program analyzes money flow within the stock exchange and financial industry. The SEC also works hand in hand with the FBI to analyze the personal asset growth of those who are suspected to be white-collar criminals in an attempt to catch those handling personal funds breaking any form of fiduciary responsibility to clients. The biggest downfall the SEC possesses however is their inability to keep strong control on money leaving the country for offshore accounts. Criminals often send money to foreign countries such as Swiss banks or the Netherlands in order to avoid government supervision of asset flow within the United States; however, if caught sending illegally earned money into foreign countries, white-collar criminals can be sentenced for several counts of money laundering. Dealing with foreign banks and legal affairs when it comes to tracking criminals is filled with red tape especially when criminals are paying banks to keep their transactions hidden from the SEC's inspection which was the case with Jordan Belfort. Although the government is attempting to stop criminals from being able to get away with their schemes for long, people still swindle their way around being caught and manage to earn enough money illegally to buy themselves an easy jail sentence. This is the main reason why sentencing guidelines must change to place these crooks in maximum security penitentiaries rather than medium or minimum security prisons.

Also used by both the FBI and SEC, forensic accountants are the primary tool used to identify white-collar criminals. Forensically specified accountants track the flow of money belonging to high profile targets in order to identify potential money laundering, illegal transactions, or income that cannot be legally explained. Forensic accountants certainly do play a significant role in catching potential white-collar criminals, but just like the FBI and SEC foreign affairs and complex accounting formulas favor on the side of the criminals. Once a white-collar criminal sends money to a foreign financial industry there are very few things forensic accountants can do to monitor the flow of money due to foreign policy red tape causing the trail to run cold. Along with this problem, accounting formulas used to track white-collar criminals can become so complex they possess large margins for error if not precise in every calculation. If a forensic accountant miscalculates a single equation they can completely overlook a guilty criminal who now appears to be innocent on paper. These complications in the legal process hinder the ability of the federal government to catch white-collar criminals which yet again leads to the conclusion that in order to stop white-collar crime legislatures must create policy that deters potential crooks from ever wanting to commit such crimes.

The only guaranteed way to stop white-collar crime rates from rising even further is to deter criminals from ever wanting to commit the crime. By increasing the severity of white-criminal sentencing guidelines, those in charge of individuals' investment portfolios will be more likely to stand behind their fiduciary duty that they are legally bound to. As potential criminals realize that they can lose everything they own, be locked away in prison, and be incapable of using money to buy their way out of a situation, then and only then will the financial industry see an increase in trust from global investors. 

Sentencing guidelines need to focus on why the crime was committed in the first place. In the case of white-collar crimes, criminal financial advisors, CEOs, and CFO's all have the power to abuse investors funds and trust in order to make significant profits through malpractice. This is what legislatures need to consider most when creating sentencing guidelines. If sentencing guidelines attack the purpose why these crimes are committed, then white-collar crime rates are bound to decrease.

One of the greatest determining factors that should be used in sentencing convicted white-collar criminals is their positon within a financial corporate industry, be it legally sound or not, and their personal assets within the corporate industry. If a criminal on the standing facing a jury is a CEO or a CFO they should receive a stronger sentence than an accountant caught in the same crime ring because they are the ones responsible for orchestrating the crime in most cases. If sentencing guidelines are toughest against these people, then those in charge of countless investment portfolios will be more likely to follow their fiduciary duty to their clients or face a lengthy sentence in a maximum security prison and risk losing a large majority of their personal assets within and outside of the corporation. This is the most important way legislation can prevent white-collar crime orchestration from ever occurring. Striking fear into those in power within the financial industry will keep portfolio managers from disobeying fiduciary duties.

The entire purpose of white-collar crime is to swindle money from those who are less educated in the financial industry in order to make an illegal profit. Since this is the case, sentencing guidelines should make it mandatory that all assets obtained during the process of this scheme are liquidated in order to pay restitution to the victims plus a substantial fine paid for inconveniencing investors and government officials. If people in charge of personal investment portfolios knew that illegal activity could immediately result in the loss of everything they own, then the amount of white-collar crime orchestrated will drop substantially. When people realize that crime in the financial industry is treated so harshly taking away everything they worked for, crime rates will drop, and investors will regain trust in banks and investment advisors.

Emphasizing what had been said before, white-collar medium security prison sentencings need reevaluation. Rewarding dangerously smart criminals who conned investors out of millions of dollars with medium security prison sentences is outrageous. Legislatures need to deter more white collar crime by setting a better example for their seriousness to put an end to it by sentencing convicts to maximum security prisons rather than live out a sentence in prisons that have tennis courts and swimming pools. What good are legislatures doing to prevent white-collar crime if they are allowing convicts to live a life similar to the one they were living before being caught in the act? With this in mind, why are prison systems taking ten plus years off of sentences for being nonviolent when their crimes were already nonviolent to begin with? Are legislatures under the assumption that medium and minimal security prisons are going to create a new violent mindset in these criminals? All of these questions need to run through the mind of legislatures and jurors when sentencing white-collar criminals in order to deter those in power from ever wanting to commit such crimes on the financial industry and its investors.

Taking these ideas into consideration, sentencing guidelines are in a desperate need of reevaluation. The federal government's use of its police forces to catch white-collar criminals can only work to a certain extent to catch those who become lazy and leave behind a trail of evidence. These criminals know that if they can con enough money before they are caught they can purchase the best lawyers in order to earn them a light sentence in a minimum security prison. Guidelines must focus on the soul purpose why these crimes are committed, money. If legislatures make sentencing guidelines based upon position in a corporation, personal asset growth, and degree of severity on society, white-collar criminals should be forced to turn over a majority of their assets and serve time in a maximum security prison. If this was true today white-collar crime would decrease because no Wall Street banker wants to be placed in prison with common street thugs arrested for assault, murder, or armed robbery. Hopefully in the near future, legislatures will see that strengthening sentencing guidelines for white-collar crimes will decrease the number of white-collar crimes committed due to the fear of losing the money they just conned and being placed in a maximum security prison. 

