Calculator Methodology

Published by The Click Lab Agency LLC. Last reviewed September 2026. Not legal advice.

This page documents every formula, statutory reference, and assumption used in the whistleblower award calculator. Understanding the methodology helps you assess how reliable the estimate is for your situation and what variables the calculator cannot model.

Step 1: Statutory Award Ranges by Program

Each whistleblower program establishes a mandatory award range as a percentage of sanctions collected. The calculator applies these statutory ranges as its foundation:

Step 2: Threshold Check

The SEC, CFTC, and IRS programs require minimum sanctions or disputed amounts before the mandatory award range applies. The calculator checks these thresholds:

Step 3: Adjustment Factors

Within the statutory range, agencies exercise discretion based on factors that increase or decrease the award percentage. The calculator models these adjustments based on the contribution and cooperation inputs:

Contribution level: High contribution (original, specific, credible tip that was the primary basis for enforcement) trends toward the upper end of the range. Medium contribution (significant but partial) reduces the estimate by approximately 5 percentage points. Low contribution (helpful but not primary basis) reduces it by approximately 10 percentage points.

Cooperation level: Full cooperation throughout the investigation (providing documents, participating in interviews, assisting enforcement) trends toward the upper bound. Partial cooperation reduces the estimate by approximately 2 percentage points. Limited cooperation (minimal beyond the initial tip) reduces it by approximately 5 percentage points.

These adjustments reflect the factors the agencies themselves have identified as award-enhancing or award-reducing in their published rules and award orders. SEC factors are codified at 17 C.F.R. §240.21F-6. IRS factors are codified at 26 C.F.R. §301.7623-4. IRS Notice 2008-4 is the earlier notice; the regulation is the rule the calculator is approximating. The percentage-point shifts are our summary of those factors, not a weight the agencies publish.

Step 4: Collected versus ordered, and the FCA intervention split

Every program pays on money actually collected. SEC and CFTC awards are paid from the Investor Protection Fund or the CFTC Customer Protection Fund as a percentage of sanctions collected in the covered action and any related action; a judgment that is never paid produces no award. IRS awards under §7623 are paid only from “collected proceeds,” and only after the taxpayer’s appeal rights are exhausted, which is why IRS awards routinely take five to ten years. The calculator therefore asks for the amount likely to be collected, not the amount ordered or the size of the fraud. For the False Claims Act, the calculator asks whether the Department of Justice intervened, because 31 U.S.C. §3730(d) sets different bands: 15–25% of the proceeds if the government proceeds with the action, 25–30% if the relator proceeds alone. In either case the relator’s share is computed on the government’s recovery after trebling and penalties as finally settled or adjudicated.

Step 5: The IRS discretionary track

Where the amount in dispute is $2 million or less (or the taxpayer is an individual with gross income of $200,000 or less), a claim falls outside §7623(b) and into the discretionary program under §7623(a). Awards there are capped at 15% of collected proceeds and $10 million, and the IRS may decline to pay anything. The calculator reports a $0-to-cap range for those cases rather than applying the mandatory band. Under §7623(b)(2), a mandatory-track award is also reduced to a maximum of 10% where the information came principally from public sources such as court filings or news reports.

Step 6: Rule 21F-6 factors and their analogues

The contribution and cooperation adjustments approximate the factors the SEC codified at 17 C.F.R. §240.21F-6. Factors that may increase an award: the significance of the information to the success of the action; the degree of assistance provided; the law-enforcement interest in deterring the type of violation; and participation in the company’s internal compliance systems. Factors that may decrease it: culpability in the violation; unreasonable reporting delay; and interference with internal compliance and reporting. The CFTC mirrors these at 17 C.F.R. §165.9. The IRS applies positive and negative factors at 26 C.F.R. §301.7623-4, including a reduction where the whistleblower “planned and initiated” the underlying conduct. The Department of Justice’s relator-share guidelines for FCA cases, described on its False Claims Act page, weigh similar considerations, along with whether the relator’s complaint was the first filed and whether the allegations were already publicly disclosed, both of which can bar a relator entirely under §3730(b) and (e).

Known Limitations

Sources

Changelog

Found an error? Contact us with the page URL and the specific issue; corrections are reviewed within five business days.