INTRODUCTION II. BANK FRAUD STATUTE A. Purpose and Scope B. Elements 1. Knowledge 2. Executes or Attempts to Execute 3. Scheme or Artifice 4. To Defraud or Obtain Monies by False or Fraudulent Pretenses a. Defrauding a Financial Institution b. Employing False or Fraudulent Pretenses 5. Financial Institution C. Defenses 1. Custody or Control 2. Good Faith 3. Multiplicity of the Indictment D. Penalties III. THE FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS REFORM, RECOVERY, AND ENFORCEMENT ACT A. Purpose and Scope B. Civil Sanctions for Insider Fraud 1. Applicable Law in Civil Cases under FIRREA: Atherton v. FDIC 2. Federal Common Law Post-Atherton: "No-Duty " Rule 3. Federal Common Law Post-Atherton: Circuit Split on the D'Oench Doctrine C. Criminal Penalties under 12 U.S.C. [section] 1818(j) 1. Scope 2. Elements 3. Penalties D. Double Jeopardy 1. The Dual Functions of the FDIC 2. Hudson v. United States E. Recent Prosecutions and Settlements IV. THE BANK SECRECY ACT A. Purpose B. Title I: Record-Keeping Requirements 1. Additional Records to Be Retained by Banks 2. Additional Records to Be Retained by Brokers and Dealers in Securities 3. Additional Records to Be Retained by Casinos 4. Additional Records to Be Retained by Currency Dealers and Exchangers 5. Enforcement and Penalties C. Title 11: Reporting Requirements 1. Money Services Businesses 2. Currency Transaction Reports a. Domestic Currency Transactions b. Foreign Currency Transactions c. Transactions with Foreign Financial Agencies 3. International Transportation of Currency and Monetary Instruments Reports a. Elements of the Offense i. Legal Duty to File ii. Knowledge iii. Willful Violation of the Reporting Requirement b. Enforcement and Penalties c. Defenses i. Excessive Fines ii. Double Jeopardy 4. Structuring Transactions to Avoid Reporting Requirements a. Elements b. Enforcement and Penalties c. Defenses D. Recent Prosecutions and Settlements I. INTRODUCTION
This Article reviews the development and application of three federal criminal statutes that govern offenses by or against financial institutions. Section II analyzes the Bank Fraud Statute ("BFS"), (1) which concerns fraud against financial institutions. Section III reviews the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 ("FIRREA"), (2) which regulates the conduct of officers, directors, and third-party fiduciaries who fraudulently manage financial institutions. 2. Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989, Pub. L. No. 101-73, 103 Stat. 183 Section IV examines the Bank Secrecy Act ("BSA"), (3) which prohibits deceptive financial transactions designed to evade certain reporting requirements.
BANK FRAUD STATUTE
This Section examines the Bank Fraud Statute ("BFS"), 18 U.S.C. [section] 1344. (4) Specifically, this Section: addresses the purpose and scope of [section] 1344, delineates its statutory elements, discusses several defenses to a charge of bank fraud, and presents the sanctions for violating the statute.
Purpose and Scope
The purpose of the BFS is to protect the interests of the federal government as an insurer of financial institutions. (5) In Williams v. United States, (6) the Supreme Court provided the driving force behind the legislation, holding that the crime of making false statements to financial institutions under 18 U.S.C. [section] 1014 did not encompass a check fraud scheme known as check-kiting. (7) In response, Congress passed [section] 1344 primarily to give the government the ability to prosecute check-kiting and other increasingly sophisticated frauds targeting financial institutions. (8)
The BFS, as enhanced by the FIRREA (9) and the Crime Control Act of 1990, (10) has since become the basic provision for prosecuting bank fraud offenses. (11) The Fraud Section of the Department of Justice's Criminal Division has supervisory authority for prosecuting violations of the BFS. (12) Section 1344 is broadly written and criminalizes a variety of offenses against financial institutions, including check-kiting, (13) check forging, (14) false statements and nondisclosures on loan applications, (15) stolen checks, (16) unauthorized use of automated teller machines ("ATMs"), (17) credit card fraud, (18) student loan fraud, (19) bogus transactions between offshore "shell" banks and domestic banks, (20) automobile title fraud, (21) diversion of funds by bank employees, (22) submission of fraudulent credit card receipts, (23) false statements intended to induce check cashing, (24) and mortgage fraud. (25)
Despite its broad scope, [section] 1344 fails to cover all crimes relating to financial institutions. For example, money laundering, (26) bribery of bank officials, (27) fraud committed by a bank on its customers, (28) and certain schemes to pass bad checks (29) all fall outside of the scope of [section] 1344. Similarly, [section] 1344 does not reach "pigeon drop" schemes, (30) in which funds are legally withdrawn from an account by the customer and are no longer under the custody or control of the institution when the fraud occurs. (31)
The BFS provides for two distinct but overlapping offenses under [section] 1344( 1) and [section] 1344(2). An indictment that refers generally to [section] 1344 may refer to either clause. Because the clauses are treated independently, an act falling under either prong is criminal. (32) Although the elements necessary to obtain a conviction vary slightly for each clause, in general the government must show that the defendant: (i) knowingly, (ii) executed or attempted to execute, (iii) a scheme or artifice, (iv) to either (a) defraud, or (b) through false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, obtain the monies or other property of, (v) a financial institution. (33)
The knowledge element of the BFS imposes different standards for each subsection. Under [section] 1344(1) the government must prove the defendant had the intent to defraud a financial institution. (34) Such intent "cannot be inferred from the mere presence of a defendant at the scene of the crime or association with members of a criminal conspiracy." (35) However, intent can be adduced from the totality of the evidence, (36) including evidence of prior similar acts (37) and other circumstantial evidence. (38) Furthermore, a defendant's apparent "reckless indifference" for the truth (39) or "conscious avoidance" of the truth (40) can serve as evidence of actual knowledge.
The defendant need not conceal his actions from bank employees to satisfy the intent element (41) If the government proves the defendant had such fraudulent intent, it need not demonstrate that the defendant either received personal benefits (42) or contemplated harm to the bank. (43)
The knowledge element of [section] 1344(1) also does not require the government to prove that the defendant knowingly made direct misrepresentations to the financial institution. (44) Whether the defendant knew the financial institution was federally insured is irrelevant to establishing knowledge. (45) Instead, the question turns on what the defendant actually knew about the status of the accounts used. (46)
Under [section] 1344(2), the Supreme Court unanimously held in Loughrin v. United States that the government need not prove that a defendant intended to defraud a financial institution. (47) Rather, [section]...
Financial institutions fraud.
|Position:||I. Introduction into III. The Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act D. Double Jeopardy, p. 1117-1143 - Thirtieth Annual Survey of White Collar Crime|
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP
COPYRIGHT TV Trade Media, Inc.
COPYRIGHT GALE, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
COPYRIGHT GALE, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.