Exploring corporate violations through public data: A comparative analysis of financial offending in the UK and US

Journal of Criminal Justice, vol. 99, pp. 102431

Abstract

This article examines the value of using publicly available data to analyse financial violations and regulatory enforcement actions in the UK and the US, drawing on a first-of-its-kind open-source dataset – the Violation Tracker. Through descriptive analyses, the study explores longitudinal patterns of corporate offending, focusing on corporate characteristics and sectoral enforcement dynamics. The findings highlight jurisdictional differences: in the UK, anti-money laundering (AML) deficiencies and tax violations dominate, with a notable increase in AML deficiencies since 2020, particularly in real estate and business services. In contrast, the US landscape is characterized by widespread investor protection violations, particularly in the financial industry, and exhibit stable trends over time. In both countries, the financial industry receives high penalties compared to other industries. These patterns underscore the role of regulatory frameworks and enforcement priorities in shaping observable corporate compliance. This study illustrates what insights can and cannot be generated from open-source data for the analysis of financial violations. It also engages with theoretical frameworks such as life-course criminology, advancing the understanding of corporate crime trajectories over time. The research contributes to current debates on regulatory transparency, corporate accountability, and the methodological challenges of conducting robust empirical research using publicly available regulatory data. • Utilizes open-access Violation Tracker data to study corporate misconduct • Provides a descriptive, longitudinal analysis of financial violations in UK and US • Reveals distinct violation patterns: AML leads in UK, investor protection in US • Identifies patterns in violation type and penalty severity by corporate traits • Reflects on data gaps and implications for regulatory transparency

Authors 5

1. Frederike Oberheim corresponding Aachen Institute of Criminal Law and Criminology

   Leiden University · Netherlands Institute for the Study of Crime and Law Enforcement

   Affiliation as printed

   Institute of Criminal Law and Criminology, Leiden, the Netherlands

   Netherlands Institute for the Study of Crime and Law Enforcement, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

2. Jon Davies

   University of Manchester

   Affiliation as printed

   Department of Criminology, University of Manchester, Manchester, England, United Kingdom

3. Celine Giese

   University of Manchester

   Affiliation as printed

   Department of Criminology, University of Manchester, Manchester, England, United Kingdom

4. Marieke H. A. Kluin Aachen Institute of Criminal Law and Criminology

   Leiden University

   Affiliation as printed

   Institute of Criminal Law and Criminology, Leiden, the Netherlands

5. Nicholas J Lord

   University of Manchester

   Affiliation as printed

   Department of Criminology, University of Manchester, Manchester, England, United Kingdom