How to Reduce Corruption

Section 1: Top 35 Countries with the Lowest Corruption Perception

Data Source: Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) 2023. Only countries with a population over 5 million people are included. CPI scores range from 0 (highly corrupt) to 100 (very clean). Data year: 2023.

Source: Transparency International, Corruption Perceptions Index 2023.

United States Rank and Explanation

In 2023, the United States ranked 24th globally (CPI Score: 69 out of 100) on the Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index when all countries are considered, and appears in the lower portion of the Top 35 list above. The United States' score reflects concerns including money in politics, lobbying practices perceived as corrupt, lack of transparency in campaign finance, selective enforcement of anti-corruption laws, and weaknesses in protecting whistleblowers.

In 2022, the CPI score for the United States was 69, indicating no improvement in the most recently published data. Strengthening campaign finance laws, expanding whistleblower protections, and increasing transparency in government contracting are commonly cited reforms needed to improve the U.S. ranking.

References and Data Sources:

Transparency International - Corruption Perceptions Index 2023: https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2023

Gallup Analytics - Corruption Data: https://www.gallup.com/analytics/318875/corruption.aspx

World Justice Project Rule of Law Index: https://worldjusticeproject.org/rule-of-law-index/

Corruption Perception by World Region

Note: Regional averages are approximate based on Transparency International CPI 2023 data. Individual country scores vary widely within regions.

Section 2: What Other Countries Have Done to Decrease Their Corruption Perception

The 8 Top Rated Countries with the Lowest Corruption Perception

Danmark (Denmark)

Danmark consistently achieves the world's lowest corruption perception through a combination of radical transparency, strong independent institutions, and deep cultural aversion to corruption. Key measures include:

The Danmark State Audit Institution (Rigsrevisionen) (www.rigsrevisionen.dk) conducts independent financial audits of all public authorities, with reports publicly available to citizens.

The Danmark Parliament passed the Public Administration Act (Forvaltningsloven), which mandates that all public decisions be documented, reasoned, and available for review.

Danmark operates an Open Government Data portal (www.opendata.dk) providing citizens with real-time access to government spending, contracts, and procurement.

The Danmark financial intelligence unit (SØIK/Hvidvasksekretariatet) (www.politi.dk) investigates financial crime and money laundering. Civil servant training programs run by the Agency for Public Finance and Management (www.politi.dk) instill ethics and conflict-of-interest standards from the start of government employment. Danmark's Freedom of Information Act (Offentlighedsloven) gives any citizen the right to access virtually all government documents. (www.fm.dk)

Suomi (Finland)

Suomi's anti-corruption framework is built on institutional independence, comprehensive asset disclosure, and a culture of public service accountability. Key programs and laws include:

The National Bureau of Investigation (NBI / Keskusrikospoliisi) (www.poliisi.fi) maintains a dedicated financial crime unit that investigates corruption and bribery.

Suomi's Act on the Openness of Government Activities (Laki viranomaisten toiminnan julkisuudesta) requires nearly all government documents to be public by default.

The Office of the Chancellor of Justice (www.okv.fi) provides independent oversight of government officials' compliance with law.

Suomi's Anti-Corruption Coordinator within the Ministry of Justice (oikeusministerio.fi) coordinates national anti-corruption strategy.

The Ethics Committee for Public Service advises on conflicts of interest and post-employment restrictions for senior officials.

Suomi's public procurement law mandates electronic tendering and public reporting of all contracts above threshold values through the HILMA portal (www.hankintailmoitukset.fi).

New Zealand

New Zealand has maintained its position among the world's least corrupt countries through a uniquely integrated approach combining legislative reforms, independent oversight, and community engagement. Key initiatives include:

The New Zealand Serious Fraud Office (www.sfo.govt.nz) investigates and prosecutes serious financial crimes, including public sector corruption and bribery.

The State Services Commission (now Te Kawa Mataaho, www.publicservice.govt.nz) sets standards for ethics and conduct across the public service.

New Zealand's Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act enables citizens to request and receive council documents and decisions.

The Crimes Act 1961 and Secret Commissions Act 1910 provide comprehensive criminal sanctions for bribery at all government levels.

The New Zealand Treasury operates an online fiscal transparency portal (www.treasury.govt.nz) allowing public access to all government budgets and expenditures.

The Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security (www.igis.govt.nz) independently reviews security agencies to prevent abuse of power.

Norge (Norway)

Norge's low corruption perception stems from rigorous management of its oil wealth through the Government Pension Fund Global and a culture of institutional transparency.

Key mechanisms include:

The Government Pension Fund Global (Oljefondet), managed by Norge Bank Investment Management (www.nbim.no), operates under strict ethical guidelines and publicly excludes companies involved in corruption, weapons, or environmental violations.

The Norge National Authority for Investigation and Prosecution of Economic and Environmental Crime (Okorim) (www.politiet.no) is a specialized prosecutor for corruption and financial crimes.

Norge's Accounting Act and Transparency Act (Apenhetsloven) require large companies to report on human rights and ethical supply chain due diligence.

The Office of the Auditor General of Norge (Riksrevisjonen) (www.riksrevisjonen.no) is constitutionally independent and publishes all government audit results.

The Municipal Act mandates full transparency in municipal financial management and council deliberations.

Singapore

Singapore transformed from a corruption-riddled developing nation in the 1960s into one of the world's least corrupt societies through decisive institutional reforms and rigorous enforcement.

Key programs include:

The Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) (www.cpib.gov.sg), established in 1952 and strengthened after 1959, operates independently of the police and has authority to investigate all persons, including ministers.

The Prevention of Corruption Act provides wide-ranging authority to investigate and prosecute corruption, including presumptions of guilt for unexplained wealth.

Singapore's Civil Service College (www.csc.gov.sg) runs mandatory ethics training for all public officers emphasizing that public office is a public trust.

The Public Service Division (www.psd.gov.sg) sets competitive government salaries benchmarked to private sector equivalents, reducing financial incentives for corruption.

Singapore's government procurement portal (GeBIZ) (www.gebiz.gov.sg) requires all public tenders to be posted electronically and transparently.

Sverige (Sweden)

Sverige's anti-corruption model is built on the world's oldest freedom of information law and a deeply embedded principle of government transparency.

Key institutions and laws include:

Sverige's Freedom of the Press Act (1766), the world's oldest freedom of information law, gives any citizen or journalist the right to access virtually all government documents, including officials' tax returns.

The Sverige Anti-Corruption Institute (Institutet Mot Mutor, IMM) (www.institutetmotmutor.se) provides guidance to businesses and public bodies on preventing corruption and bribery.

The Sverige Prosecution Authority (Aklagarmyndigheten) (www.aklagare.se) has specialized prosecutors for corruption, financial crime, and bribery.

The Sverige Agency for Public Management (Statskontoret) (www.statskontoret.se) reviews government agencies for efficiency and compliance with legal standards.

Sverige's Riksdag (Parliament) requires all Members of Parliament to file public asset and income declarations reviewed by independent ethics committees.

Schweiz (Switzerland)

Schweiz's low corruption reflects its highly decentralized governance model, direct democracy mechanisms, and strong financial sector regulation.

Key programs and institutions include:

Schweiz's Federal Criminal Code (Articles 322ter-322octies) criminalizes active and passive bribery of domestic and foreign public officials.

The Schweiz Financial Market Supervisory Authority (FINMA) (www.finma.ch) rigorously supervises banks and financial intermediaries for money laundering and corruption-related financial flows.

Schweiz's Federal Act on Combating Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing (AMLA) places strict due diligence obligations on financial institutions.

The Federal Audit Office (www.efk.admin.ch) conducts independent audits of all federal agencies and publishes results publicly.

Schweiz's direct democracy institutions, including referenda and popular initiatives, allow citizens to directly challenge laws and government decisions, creating a powerful check on government misconduct.

The Federal Ethics Committee provides guidance to federal employees on conflicts of interest and gift acceptance.

Nederland (Netherlands)

The Nederland maintains low corruption through a combination of strong anti-money-laundering regulation, independent oversight bodies, and comprehensive integrity frameworks for public officials. Key measures include:

The Bureau Bevordering Integriteitsbeoordelingen door het Openbaar Bestuur (BIBOB) (www.justis.nl) is a unique Dutch screening system that allows government authorities to refuse licenses and contracts to businesses with links to organized crime or corruption.

The Nederland Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM) (www.afm.nl) and De Nederlandsche Bank (DNB) (www.afm.nl) jointly supervise financial institutions for money laundering and corrupt financial flows. (www.dnb.nl)

The House for Whistleblowers (Huis voor Klokkenluiders) (www.huisvoorklokkenluiders.nl) is an independent government body protecting and advising whistleblowers in public and private sectors.

The Nederland Integrity Agency for Public Administration promotes ethics training and integrity management for all government employees.

The Dutch Public Procurement Act implements strict transparency requirements for all government contracts, with awards publicly searchable on TenderNed (www.tenderned.nl).

Section 3: What the United States Can Do to Decrease Its Corruption Perception

Overview

Reducing the United States' Corruption Perception Index score requires a comprehensive, multi-sector approach addressing structural weaknesses in campaign finance, lobbying transparency, whistleblower protection, prosecutorial independence, and corporate accountability. The following describes in detail what each sector could do.

Government Agencies

The Department of Justice (DOJ) could establish a fully independent Public Integrity Section with ring-fenced funding and prosecutors insulated from political interference. The DOJ could increase prosecutions of white-collar corruption and public official bribery, and publish annual transparency reports on investigations and outcomes.

The Office of Government Ethics (OGE) could be empowered with subpoena authority to investigate conflicts of interest among executive branch officials, mandate real-time financial disclosure filings, and create a searchable public database of all official financial disclosures.

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) could receive enhanced funding to conduct unsolicited audits of all major federal programs and procurement contracts.

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) could strengthen its whistleblower reward program under Dodd-Frank and streamline award processes.

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) could be reformed with non-partisan commissioners who have equal enforcement authority and the ability to pursue campaign finance violations without a partisan deadlock.

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) could dedicate resources to investigating tax fraud connected to bribery and unexplained wealth of public officials.

All federal agencies could implement mandatory electronic procurement systems publishing all contract awards, bid evaluations, and contractor performance reviews in real-time.

Government Officials

All federal officials, including legislators, judges, and executive officials, could file annual financial disclosure statements that are publicly accessible in a searchable digital format.

Congress could enact a comprehensive cooling-off period of at least five years for senior officials and legislators before they may work as lobbyists or for companies they formerly regulated.

Members of Congress could be prohibited from trading individual stocks while in office, with blind trust requirements for existing holdings.

The judiciary could strengthen recusal standards to require automatic recusal when a judge has financial interests in parties appearing before them.

All officials could be required to document and publicly disclose all meetings with lobbyists and private interests seeking to influence legislation or regulation. Congressional ethics committees could be reconstituted with independent members drawn from outside Congress to investigate and discipline members.

Corporations

All publicly traded corporations could publicly disclose all political contributions, including dark money contributions made through affiliated nonprofit organizations, in real-time filings with the SEC.

Corporations could implement and certify compliance with robust anti-bribery and anti-corruption programs meeting DOJ Evaluation of Corporate Compliance Programs standards (www.justice.gov).

Corporate boards could include independent directors with responsibility for overseeing anti-corruption compliance programs.

Corporations receiving federal contracts above one hundred thousand dollars could certify compliance with the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) and domestic anti-bribery laws. Major federal contractors could publish detailed reports on government lobbying expenditures, political contributions, and regulatory interactions.

The SEC could require mandatory pay ratio disclosures to identify compensation structures that may create incentives for corrupt behavior.

Whistleblower protection policies could be adopted internally by all corporations employing federal contractors, with anonymous reporting mechanisms certified by independent third parties.

Private Citizens and Civil Society

Private citizens could use Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) processes to request and publish government records, supported by organizations like MuckRock (www.muckrock.com) that assist with FOIA submissions.

Investigative journalism organizations such as ProPublica (www.propublica.org), the Center for Public Integrity (www.propublica.org), and ICIJ (www.propublica.org) could be supported through public funding and philanthropic grants to maintain independent watchdog reporting. (publicintegrity.org) (www.icij.org)

Civil society organizations including Common Cause (www.commoncause.org), the Brennan Center for Justice (www.commoncause.org), and Transparency International USA (www.commoncause.org) could continue advocating for legislative reform and educating citizens about corruption risks. (www.brennancenter.org) (www.transparency.org)

Universities and law schools could develop and publish research on corruption trends and policy effectiveness, with findings accessible to policymakers and the public.

Citizens could utilize resources such as OpenSecrets (www.opensecrets.org) to monitor campaign finance and lobbying activities and engage their elected representatives with data-driven advocacy.

Section 4: References

References for Section 2

Transparency International - Corruption Perceptions Index: (www.transparency.org)

Rigsrevisionen (Danmark State Audit): (www.rigsrevisionen.dk)

Danish Open Government Data: (www.opendata.dk)

Danish Agency for Finance and Management: (www.fm.dk)

Finnish National Bureau of Investigation: (www.poliisi.fi)

Finnish Office of the Chancellor of Justice: (www.okv.fi)

Finnish Ministry of Justice: (oikeusministerio.fi)

HILMA - Finnish Public Procurement Portal: (www.hankintailmoitukset.fi)

New Zealand Serious Fraud Office: (www.sfo.govt.nz)

New Zealand Public Service Commission: (www.publicservice.govt.nz)

New Zealand Treasury: (www.treasury.govt.nz)

Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security (NZ): (www.igis.govt.nz)

Norges Bank Investment Management: (www.nbim.no)

Norwegian Riksrevisjonen (Auditor General): (www.riksrevisjonen.no)

Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (Singapore): (www.cpib.gov.sg)

Singapore Civil Service College: (www.csc.gov.sg)

Singapore GeBIZ (Government Procurement): (www.gebiz.gov.sg)

Institutet Mot Mutor (Sverige): (www.institutetmotmutor.se)

Swedish Prosecution Authority: (www.aklagare.se)

Swedish Agency for Public Management: (www.statskontoret.se)

Swiss FINMA: (www.finma.ch)

Swiss Federal Audit Office: (www.efk.admin.ch)

Dutch BIBOB Bureau: (www.justis.nl)

Nederland Authority for Financial Markets: (www.afm.nl)

Dutch House for Whistleblowers: (www.huisvoorklokkenluiders.nl)

TenderNed (Nederland Procurement): (www.tenderned.nl)

References for Section 3

U.S. Department of Justice: (www.justice.gov)

Office of Government Ethics: (www.oge.gov)

Government Accountability Office: (www.gao.gov)

SEC Whistleblower Program: (www.sec.gov)

Federal Election Commission: (www.fec.gov)

DOJ Corporate Compliance Evaluation: (www.justice.gov)

OpenSecrets - Campaign Finance Data: (www.opensecrets.org)

MuckRock - FOIA Assistance: (www.muckrock.com)

ProPublica - Investigative Journalism: (www.propublica.org)

Center for Public Integrity: (publicintegrity.org)

ICIJ - International Consortium of Investigative Journalists: (www.icij.org)

Common Cause: (www.commoncause.org)

Brennan Center for Justice: (www.brennancenter.org)

Transparency International USA: (www.transparency.org)

Section 5: U.S. Organizations Advocating to Improve Corruption

Section 6: Individuals Advocating to Improve Corruption

Frequently Asked Questions

How does the United States rank globally on corruption perception?

The United States ranked 24th globally on the Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index in 2023, with a CPI score of 69 out of 100. This score has shown no improvement from 2022, placing the U.S. in the lower portion of the top 35 least corrupt nations.

What are the main factors driving corruption concerns in the United States?

Key concerns include money in politics, lobbying practices perceived as corrupt, lack of transparency in campaign finance, selective enforcement of anti-corruption laws, and weak whistleblower protections. These systemic issues contribute to declining public trust in government institutions.

What reforms are most commonly recommended to reduce corruption in the U.S.?

Experts most commonly recommend strengthening campaign finance laws, expanding whistleblower protections, and increasing transparency in government contracting. These reforms are modeled on practices already proven effective in top-ranked countries like Denmark and Finland.

What has Denmark done to achieve the world's lowest corruption perception?

Denmark combines radical transparency, strong independent institutions, and a cultural aversion to corruption. Key tools include the independent State Audit Institution (Rigsrevisionen), a Freedom of Information Act, an Open Government Data portal, and mandatory ethics training for all civil servants.

How does Finland maintain one of the lowest corruption rates in the world?

Finland's anti-corruption framework relies on institutional independence, comprehensive asset disclosure, and public service accountability. A dedicated financial crime unit within the National Bureau of Investigation, combined with a law requiring nearly all government documents to be public by default, form the backbone of this system.

Where can citizens find reliable data on global and U.S. corruption levels?

Reliable data sources include the Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index at transparency.org, Gallup Analytics corruption data, and the World Justice Project Rule of Law Index at worldjusticeproject.org. These sources provide both country-level scores and regional comparisons updated annually.

About the Author

Ronald Bonfilio has devoted his career to public service spanning more than five decades. His service began with the U.S. Army from 1966 to 1968, where he conducted medical laboratory research at Fort Detrick and at the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research. He subsequently held a distinguished series of federal positions, including roles with the National Cancer Institute, the National Institutes of Health, the U.S. Agency for International Development (Vietnam), the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, and the U.S. State Department (Iraq), where he served as a Senior Economic Advisor and Agricultural Advisor. He also served 15 years with the U.S. Government Accountability Office as a Program Analyst and Auditor.

Ronald Bonfilio holds a degree in Economics from the University of Maryland, and degrees in Chemistry and a Master of Business Administration from the University of Massachusetts. He is a former Certified Public Accountant.