This article first reviews current corporate fining theory and practice, including recent proposals for noncash fines. The author concludes that fines as a sole strategy for deterring corporate crime are inadequate because they do not deter future corporate wrongs and frequently harm innocent third parties. An investigation of the statutory basis for corporate probation considers both the statutory language and legislative history of the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984. In examining corporate probation, the article divides it into two groups of conditions: invasive and noninvasive. Noninvasive conditions are those which are primarily restitutionary and which do not greatly interfere with corporate functioning. Although noninvasive conditions serve important reparative aims, they do not prevent future harms by rehabilitating the corporate entity. Invasive probation conditions, on the other hand, reform corporate structures to change patterns of organizational behavior. To do this, however, they must interfere, in varying degrees, with daily corporate procedures. Even when invasive probation conditions partially incapacitate the organization, these measures are appropriate in circumscribed cases. 236 footnotes.