Policy analysis involves five steps: (1) identification of the objectives to be achieved, (2) deciding what alternatives are available, (3) judging how the alternatives relate to the objectives, (4) weighting the objectives, and (5) choosing the best alternative. If the objectives to be achieved are to reduce the incidence of white-collar crime at the lowest cost, avoid interference with legitimate business activities, be politically feasible, and support morality, then the following alternatives are available: (1) the rehabilitative strategy, which aims at changing the attitudes and values of white-collar criminals so the deviant behavior will not be repeated; (2) the punitive strategy, which criminalizes deviant white-collar behavior to make sanctions swift and severe; (3) the regulatory strategy, which seeks to control behavior through incentives and disincentives such as licensing and tax breaks; and (4) a laissez-faire strategy, which relies upon potential victims protecting themselves from damaging behavior and initiating civil suits when such damage does occur. If the goal scores for each alternative are multiplied by the weights and the products are totalled, then a policy emphasizing regulation received 12 points, laissez-faire 10, punitive 9, and rehabilitative 8. This analysis does not resolve the debate, however, because there is no agreement on the objectives, alternatives, and weights selected. Fifteen references are listed.