A traditional deterrence framework of criminology as it applies to corporate offenders is discussed and evaluated in terms of its strengths and weaknesses, and the available empirical evidence. The authors argue that the rational choice approach allows the expansion of the deterrence-based model of decision making in order to deal with the unique characteristics of corporate offenders and their criminal acts. Costs of corporate crime considered in this model include formal and informal sanctions, and loss of self-respect; moral beliefs and the perceived legitimacy of the rules and rule enforcers are also considered. The model incorporates the perceived costs of rule compliance and perceived benefits of rule violation to the offender. The model discusses characteristics of the criminal event and specifies the relationships among explanatory variables. The authors suggest a way to test empirically the rational choice model of corporate crime. 1 figure, 11 notes, and 66 references