Boeing 737 MAX deferred prosecution agreement (2021) and later developments

The 2021 deferred prosecution agreement

DOJ announced on 7 January 2021 that Boeing was charged with one count of conspiracy to defraud the United States and had entered a DPA in the Northern District of Texas ¹. DOJ said Boeing admitted that two of its 737 MAX Flight Technical Pilots learned of an important change to the MCAS flight control system in November 2016 and did not share it ¹. DOJ said they "concealed this information and deceived the FAA AEG about MCAS" ¹.

The DPA term was "three years" from the filing of the information ². Boeing agreed that "the facts described in the Statement of Facts are true and accurate" ². DOJ said Boeing's cooperation was "delayed and only began after the first six months" of the investigation ¹.

The two crashes

DOJ linked the case to Lion Air Flight 610 on 29 October 2018 and Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 on 10 March 2019 ¹. DOJ said all 189 people on board the first flight and all 157 on board the second died ¹. On 21 October 2022 the court found that certain family members and representatives are crime victims under the Crime Victims' Rights Act ³. Boeing was arraigned on 26 January 2023 and pleaded not guilty ³.

Breach and the rejected plea agreement

On 14 May 2024 DOJ told the court that "the Department determined that Boeing breached its obligations under the Deferred Prosecution Agreement" ³. On 7 July 2024 the parties reported an agreement in principle on a plea ³.

The proposed plea agreement filed in July 2024 had Boeing plead guilty to conspiracy to defraud the United States under 18 U.S.C. 371 ⁵. It set a fine of US$487.2 million with US$243.6 million credited, three years of probation, a three-year independent monitor and at least US$455 million in compliance spending ⁵.

On 5 December 2024 Judge Reed O'Connor rejected the plea agreement ⁴. He objected to a provision for choosing the monitor "in keeping with the Department's commitment to diversity and inclusion" ⁴. He wrote that "Marginalizing the Court in the selection and monitoring of the independent monitor" undermines public confidence ⁴.

The 2025 non-prosecution agreement

DOJ reported an agreement in principle on a non-prosecution agreement on 23 May 2025 and the agreement is dated 29 May 2025 ^3,6. Under it, Boeing admits the statement of facts and that the facts constitute a violation of 18 U.S.C. 371 ⁶. DOJ agreed to move to dismiss the information without prejudice ⁶.

The NPA sets a US$487.2 million penalty, credits US$243.6 million paid under the DPA and requires the remaining US$243.6 million after dismissal ⁶. It requires US$444.5 million for heirs and beneficiaries of the two flights and at least US$455 million in compliance, quality and safety programs ⁶. Boeing must retain an independent compliance consultant ⁶. The term is two years, extendable by up to one year ⁶.

Dismissal and appeals

On 6 November 2025 the court granted DOJ's motion and dismissed the information ³. As reported by David Shepardson of Reuters, Judge O'Connor said he disagreed that dismissal served the public interest but lacked authority to reject it, and said the deal "fails to secure the necessary accountability" ⁷.

On 13 November 2025 some families who opposed dismissal petitioned the Fifth Circuit for mandamus ³. On 31 March 2026 a panel found the challenge to the DPA moot, found no Crime Victims' Rights Act violation in the NPA process, said it lacked jurisdiction to review the dismissal and denied the petitions ³. On 22 May 2026 the court denied rehearing and rehearing en banc and issued an amended opinion ³. The mandate issued on 18 June 2026 ³.