Source: http://www.justice.gov/usao/briefing_room/fin/id_theft.html
Timestamp: 2013-12-08 10:04:03
Document Index: 630923133

Matched Legal Cases: ['§1349', '§1028', '§1029', '§1344', '§1029', '§1028']

Home » Priority Areas » Financial Fraud » Identity Theft
for the District of Maryland In Mark Twain’s iconic novel Huckleberry Finn, young Huck briefly joins forces with two con artists masquerading as a king and a duke. While misrepresenting their identities, the con men hatch a variety of fraud schemes that require them to come up with stories to convince victims that their false identities are legitimate and their nefarious intentions are good. The fraudulent schemes bring the perpetrators face to face with victims and leave them vulnerable to detection. One of the unfortunate consequences of modern technology is that it allows modern-day successors of the king and the duke to perpetrate identity fraud schemes with far less personal risk. Stopping them requires a coordinated effort.
There are two primary categories of identity theft victims: the victims whose identities are used fraudulently by criminals, and victims who are induced to extend credit or grant benefits in reliance upon false representations. The victims whose identities are stolen usually are individuals, whereas the victims who suffer immediate financial losses often are corporations and government agencies. Individual victims find their good names, social security numbers or other identification numbers used as a means for the perpetrators to defraud corporate or government victims. Harm Caused by Identity Theft
According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, approximately five percent of all Americans over the age of 16 were victims of identity theft between 2007 and 2008. That figure is similar to private sector estimates, which range from 3.5 to 4.8 percent per year. Identity theft impacts all people of all income levels, and ages. Incidents of reported identity theft were twice as prevalent among the wealthiest households when compared with the poorest, and over fifty percent more likely among the young (those between the ages of 16 and 24) than seniors (aged 65 or above). Approximately half of identity theft victims had existing credit card accounts or other financial accounts compromised. These victims were generally quickly compensated by financial institutions with a minimum of effort on the part of the victim, with the financial institution bearing the direct losses. Although fewer individuals reported the opening of new accounts or other uses of their personal identity information, these individuals were significantly more likely personally to sustain losses, both direct and indirect. They also were more likely to report a significant emotional or other non-financial impact from the unauthorized use of their identities.
FY05 16 cases	34 defendants
FY06	30 cases	61 defendants
FY07	38 cases	65 defendants
FY08	43 cases	85 defendants
FY09	41 cases	74 defendants
FY10	40 cases	104 defendants
In most cases, identity theft organizations are identified and all appropriate targets are charged with conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. §1349, §1028(f) or §1029(b)(2), substantive fraud charges such as bank fraud (18 U.S.C. §1344) or access device fraud (18 U.S.C. §1029), and aggravated identity theft (18 U.S.C. §1028A). The aggravated identity theft statute, with its mandatory consecutive sentence of 24 months, is a valuable tool to prosecute cases that involve identify theft and ensure that they yield significantly higher sentences than other financial fraud cases. In 2009, for example, Maryland’s federal identity theft defendants were sentenced to an average sentence of 67 months, with 16 defendants sentenced to five years or more, and 4 defendants sentenced to ten years or more.