What is the Relator’s Share?

How Much Does a Whistleblower Get Paid? The Relator's Share Explained

A successful False Claims Act case can return money to the government and, in many cases, provide a percentage of that recovery to the whistleblower who brought the case. That percentage is called the relator's share.

The relator's share is not a bonus paid by the defendant directly to the whistleblower. It is a statutory share of the proceeds of the action or settlement. The federal rule appears in 31 U.S.C. § 3730(d). In broad terms, the share depends on whether the government intervenes, whether the whistleblower substantially contributed to the case, whether any statutory limits apply, and how the facts line up with the Department of Justice's relator's share guidelines.

Gallagher & Lipshutz represents whistleblowers in qui tam and False Claims Act matters. This page explains how the federal relator's share works, what the Department of Justice considers when negotiating or recommending a percentage, how Nevada law compares, and why the first decisions a whistleblower makes can affect both the case and the eventual reward.

What Is a Relator's Share?

A relator's share is the portion of the government's recovery that goes to the private whistleblower who files a qui tam case. In a federal False Claims Act case, the relator files the lawsuit in the name of the United States and provides the Department of Justice with a written disclosure of substantially all material evidence and information the relator possesses. The complaint is filed under seal and is not served on the defendant until the court orders service. That process is part of the False Claims Act structure that allows the government to investigate before the defendant is notified.

The purpose of the relator's share is practical. Fraud against the government is often hidden inside billing systems, contracts, medical records, certifications, or internal communications. The government may not know what happened unless someone inside or close to the conduct explains it. The relator's share creates an incentive for people with meaningful information to report fraud and assist the government in recovering public money.

A relator's share is different from ordinary damages in a personal lawsuit. The relator is not receiving compensation because the defendant harmed the relator personally, although a separate retaliation claim may provide personal remedies if the employer retaliated. The relator's share is tied to the government's recovery. For that reason, the value of a whistleblower reward depends on the strength of the fraud case, the amount recovered, the relator's contribution, and any statutory limits.

Federal False Claims Act Percentages

Under 31 U.S.C. § 3730(d)(1), if the government proceeds with the action, the relator generally receives at least 15% and not more than 25% of the proceeds of the action or settlement. The exact percentage depends on the extent to which the relator substantially contributed to the prosecution of the action.

If the government does not proceed with the action and the relator pursues or settles the case, 31 U.S.C. § 3730(d)(2) generally provides a higher range: not less than 25% and not more than 30% of the proceeds of the action or settlement. That higher range reflects the added burden and risk of litigating a declined case.

Those ranges answer the basic search question, “what percentage do whistleblowers get?” But they do not determine the exact number. A case that settles after extensive government investigation, with the relator providing substantial first-hand assistance, may be evaluated differently from a case in which the government already knew most of the facts or the relator had little role after filing. The percentage is usually negotiated with the government. If the relator and government cannot agree, the court may decide the amount within the statutory range.

The statute also allows a successful relator to recover reasonable expenses that the court finds were necessarily incurred, plus reasonable attorneys' fees and costs, awarded against the defendant. That fee-shifting provision is separate from the percentage share and is one reason a relator should not evaluate a case solely by asking, “how much do whistleblowers get paid?” The better question is how the law applies to the facts, the evidence, and the role the relator can play.

The DOJ Relator's Share Guidelines

The Department of Justice published internal Relator's Share Guidelines on December 10, 1996. These guidelines are not a separate statute and are not binding law. They are internal criteria used by Department of Justice attorneys when trying to reach agreement with a relator or when proposing a relator's share to a court. Courts have looked to them in cases such as United States ex rel. Shea v. Verizon Communications, Inc., 844 F. Supp. 2d 78 (D.D.C. 2012) and United States ex rel. Williams v. Williams, No. 2:15-cv-00054-RJS, (D. Utah May 01, 2023).

The guidelines start from the idea that, in an intervened case, 15% should be viewed as the minimum award and starting point. The analysis then asks whether factors support increasing the percentage and whether other factors support reducing it. In a declined case, the same practical questions often matter, although the statutory range begins at 25%.

The following factor lists are reproduced from the Department of Justice Relator's Share Guidelines.

These factors show why the relator's share is not determined only by filing first. Prompt reporting, credible first-hand information, a careful written disclosure, cooperation during the investigation, and support from experienced qui tam counsel can matter. So can mistakes. Serving the defendant while the case is under seal, publicizing the sealed case, delaying too long, or filing based mostly on public information can affect the share and may create broader risks for the case.

Statutory Limits and Special Situations

The federal False Claims Act includes limits that can reduce or eliminate a relator's share in specific situations. If the court finds that the action is based primarily on public disclosure of allegations or transactions in a criminal, civil, or administrative hearing, in a congressional, administrative, or Government Accounting Office report, hearing, audit, or investigation, or from the news media, and the information was not provided by the relator, the court may award no more than 10% of the proceeds under 31 U.S.C. § 3730(d)(1). That is separate from the public disclosure bar and original-source rules in 31 U.S.C. § 3730(e)(4).

If the court finds that the relator planned and initiated the violation, the court may reduce the relator's share to the extent it considers appropriate. If the relator is convicted of criminal conduct arising from the relator's role in the violation, the relator must be dismissed from the civil action and receives no share of the proceeds. These rules are fact-specific, but they are important. A person involved in misconduct should speak with counsel before making assumptions about eligibility, exposure, or reward.

The first-to-file rule can also affect whether a relator has a viable case at all. Under 31 U.S.C. § 3730(b)(5), once a person brings a qui tam action, no other person may intervene or bring a related action based on the facts underlying the pending action. That is one reason timing matters. It is also why a person considering a case should not delay while trying to investigate every detail alone. At the same time, speed should not replace careful preparation. A qui tam complaint must satisfy pleading rules, and the relator must provide a written disclosure of substantially all material evidence and information. The strongest whistleblower cases are usually not the fastest filings. They are timely, well-documented, lawfully investigated, and carefully presented.

How and When Does a Whistleblower Get Paid?

A whistleblower is usually paid only after money is recovered. In an intervened case, that typically means after settlement proceeds are collected or after a judgment is paid. In a declined case, payment generally depends on the relator's successful litigation or settlement of the claim. A filed case alone does not create a payment right.

The timing varies. A 2021 Harvard study of more than 5,000 False Claims Act whistleblower lawsuits filed from 1994 to 2012 found that, in that sample, the average whistleblower received the reward four years after filing, and 75% received the money within five years. False Claims Act cases can remain under seal while the government investigates. The statute provides for an initial 60-day seal period, but the government may ask the court for extensions for good cause. In significant healthcare, defense, procurement, grant, or contracting matters, investigations can take months or years. The length of the investigation does not necessarily signal whether the case is strong or weak.

After a recovery, the relator's share may still need to be negotiated or decided. In many cases, the relator and government reach agreement. In others, the court must determine the percentage. Relator-share disputes can involve the DOJ guidelines, the relator's contribution, the size of the recovery, the government's knowledge, and whether the relator's conduct helped or hindered the case.

Whistleblowers should also understand that the reward is not the only legal issue. Reporting fraud can create employment risks, confidentiality concerns, evidence-handling questions, and retaliation issues. The False Claims Act includes anti-retaliation protections, but a relator should still be careful about what is reported, how evidence is preserved, and who is told about the case.

Nevada False Claims Act Relator Shares

Nevada has its own false claims statute, NRS Chapter 357, for certain fraud involving Nevada state or local government money. The Nevada False Claims Act uses a similar qui tam model, but the statutory details are not identical to federal law.

Under NRS 357.210, a Nevada private plaintiff may receive a percentage of the recovery if the case succeeds. When the Nevada Attorney General or a designee intervenes at the outset, the private plaintiff generally may receive 15% to 25% of the recovery, depending on the plaintiff's contribution. If the Attorney General or designee does not initially proceed and the private plaintiff pursues the case, the recovery range is generally 25% to 30%. Nevada law also includes provisions allowing a court to reduce a recovery in certain circumstances.

Some cases involve both federal and state money. Medicaid fraud, for example, may involve federal funds, Nevada funds, or both. A relator may need to consider the federal False Claims Act, the Nevada False Claims Act, and the practical relationship between the Department of Justice, the Nevada Attorney General, and the relevant agencies. The same evidence may matter under both laws, but the filing, seal, intervention, and recovery rules should be evaluated carefully.

Frequently Asked Questions

How does a whistleblower get paid?

In a False Claims Act case, a whistleblower is paid from the proceeds of the action or settlement if the case succeeds and money is recovered. The court or the parties determine the relator's share under 31 U.S.C. § 3730(d). A filed case alone does not guarantee payment.

How long does it take for a whistleblower to get paid?

There is no fixed timeline. Qui tam cases are filed under seal while the government investigates, and complex investigations can take a long time. Payment generally happens only after a settlement or judgment produces proceeds and the relator's share is resolved.

How much can a whistleblower get in a qui tam case?

Under the federal False Claims Act, the usual range is 15% to 25% when the government proceeds with the case and 25% to 30% when the government does not proceed and the relator successfully pursues the case. Specific facts can affect those ranges, including public disclosures, the relator's role, and whether the relator contributed substantially to the result.

Do whistleblowers pay taxes on awards?

Whistleblower awards can have tax consequences. The rules depend on the type of payment, fee arrangements, expenses, and the relator's tax situation. Gallagher & Lipshutz does not provide tax advice, and a successful relator should consult a qualified tax professional before making tax decisions.

Gallagher & Lipshutz represents whistleblowers in federal and Nevada False Claims Act matters. To discuss a potential case, contact our Las Vegas whistleblower attorneys or call (702) 381-3770. You may also reach the firm through our contact page.