If it is a corporation that invests in the economy, and employs many workers, the authorities have no interest in bringing about its collapse. Thus, following the last financial crisis in the United States, in 2008, an accounting firm called Arthur Andersen, one of the largest in the United States, was prosecuted and convicted, and at the end of the day went bankrupt, leaving all of its 75,000 employees without a livelihood (although it was eventually acquitted by the Supreme Court). This is due, among other things, to the fact that a convicted company in the United States cannot sign contracts with the government and its affiliates.
In the bill to amend the structure of discretion, one of the proposed amendments is to deviate from the scope of punishment even when it comes to exceptional personal circumstances that constitute an "additional punitive burden" on the defendant (explanatory notes at p. 1079). It is possible to consider the risk of the continued existence of the corporation in this framework, although in my opinion, it is possible to take advantage of this opportunity of a proposal to amend the structure of discretion, in order to establish specific provisions regarding corporations.
In addition, there are those who claim that imposing a fine as a single punishment sends a message that reduces the severity attributed to the acts, since it is a "price" for offenses committed by corporations, which, due to the limitations I discussed above, is sometimes not perceived as particularly significant (see John C. Coffee, "No Sole to Damn, No Body to Kick": An Unscandalized Inquiry into the Problems of Corporate Punishment, 79 Mich L. Rev 386 (1981)). ). Thus, in Securities & Exchange Commission v. Bank of America, 653 F. Supp. 2d 507, 508 (S.D.N.Y. 2009) - where a judge refused to accept a plea bargain that included only an element of a fine, even though it was a fine of $33 million. These were offenses related to the economic crisis in the United States in 2008.