That the concept of white collar crime is difficult to define attests to the complex and varied nature of such crime, as well as to the extent of such crimes and to the ineffectiveness of prosecution and sanctioning systems. Options for the modification of law to cover white collar offenses are limited and problematic. A clause in the general part of the criminal code is not feasible because it would interfere with the rule prohibiting analogies. Attempts to outlaw white collar crimes in the special part of the code or to control these through administrative law are possibilities fraught with difficulties. For example, West German law has not permitted penalties for corporate persons because it has been considered impossible to transfer the guilt concept to corporate individuals. Furthermore, there is some question whether the behavior of corporate persons could be best controlled through criminal law or through civil law and fines. Obtaining proof of white collar crimes is also a major problem, which could be overcome by measures requiring executives to report illegalities that become known to them in the course of business. The question of suitable penalties for white collar is linked to the problem of criminalizing white collar offenses. In general, however, existing penalties are inadequate. Many believe that prison terms for individual offenders might have a deterrent function, while others favor penalties in the form of fines for the corporate entity. It is concluded that miracle therapies for control of white collar crime do not exist. Despite changes in civil and administrative law, control in these areas has not been effective. But criminal law solutions are a last resort that would involve special interpretation of existing criminal law rather than creation of all-inclusive new laws. This approach sacrifices clarity of law for the sake of realizing individual justice. Extensive notes are supplied.