Sponsors (12)
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Last progress June 6, 2025 (8 months ago)
Introduced on June 6, 2025 by Vince Fong
Requires a quick change to federal sentencing rules for access-device fraud: the Sentencing Commission must raise the guideline baseline by four levels (with at least an offense level of 14) and treat any unauthorized charges made with 10 or more counterfeit or unauthorized access devices as “loss.” It also orders the Attorney General, working with DHS, to deliver a report within 90 days describing how federal, state, and local law enforcement coordinate to prevent, investigate, prosecute, and sentence access‑device fraud, and to recommend best practices and any legislative fixes.
Require the United States Sentencing Commission to revise section 2B1.1(b)(11) of the Sentencing Guidelines Manual so that the baseline increase described in that paragraph is an increase by 4 levels.
Require that if the resulting offense level after the baseline increase in section 2B1.1(b)(11) is less than level 14, the offense level shall be increased to level 14.
Require revision of the notes related to the application of subsection (b) of section 2B1.1 to state that in any case involving 10 or more counterfeit access devices or unauthorized access devices, “loss” includes any unauthorized charges made with any such counterfeit access device or unauthorized access device in any amount.
Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment, the Attorney General, in coordination with the Secretary of Homeland Security, must submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report on coordinated efforts of DHS, DOJ, and State and local law enforcement to prevent, investigate, prosecute, and sentence fraud offenses involving the use of access devices.
The report must include an assessment of cooperative operations of Federal and State law enforcement agencies to identify and prosecute fraud involving the use of access devices under specified subsections of 18 U.S.C. 1029.
Who is affected and how:
Defendants prosecuted for access‑device fraud: The guideline change raises the baseline offense level and sets a minimum offense level of 14 after the increase. That will generally raise recommended sentencing ranges for qualifying offenders, increasing potential penalties and likely influencing plea bargaining and judicial sentencing decisions.
Federal prosecutors and defense counsel: Prosecutors gain a higher guideline starting point in federal cases involving access‑device fraud (especially those involving 10+ counterfeit/unauthorized devices), which may change charging, plea, and sentencing strategies. Defense counsel must adjust mitigation and sentencing advocacy.
Federal judiciary and probation officers: Courts and probation officers will apply the revised guideline calculations in presentence reports and sentencing hearings; workload could increase if guideline disputes rise or if recategorizations require re‑calculation of ranges.
United States Sentencing Commission: Must act on a compressed 30‑day timetable to promulgate guideline text and commentary changes, which is an administrative and legal workload spike and may require expedited internal processes.
State and local law enforcement and prosecutors: While not required to change state law, these actors are subjects of the DOJ/DHS report and may be identified for improved coordination, training, or resource needs; the report could lead to future federal legislative or funding proposals that affect state/local practice.
Victims and consumers: The change expands what counts as “loss” in multi‑device schemes, potentially increasing restitution calculations and recognition of harm; this could benefit victims seeking restitution or formal recognition of losses tied to widespread small unauthorized charges.
Criminal-justice reform stakeholders: The sentencing increase may raise concerns about harsher penalties, potential disproportionate impacts, or sentencing fairness, prompting debate among reform advocates, victims’ groups, and enforcement authorities.
Overall effect: The bill directly raises federal guideline severity for a class of fraud, and it orders a near-term cross‑agency review of coordination and gaps. It is administrative and procedural (guideline amendment and reporting) rather than a funding or program‑creation measure, but it has tangible downstream effects on charging, plea bargaining, sentencing, and potentially restitution practices.