We develop a model to analyze and to compare the corporate leniency programs in the EU and the USA. Both programs are based on the idea that strategic interactions between the team members can be used to increase expected fines by reducing fines for self-reporting firms. This is in sharp contrast to the well-known literature on the single violator case where self-reporting schemes can never lead to higher deterrence. Although the two programs share some common features, there are also important defferences that can be analyzed in our model with two self-reporting stages, heterogenous types with respect to the amount of evidence provided, and ex post asymmetric information.