FederalWire Fraud
Strategic federal defense against wire fraud charges involving electronic communications, internet transactions, and interstate financial transfers.
Federal Wire Fraud Charges Under 18 U.S.C. § 1343
Wire fraud is a serious federal crime that involves using interstate wire communications to execute or attempt to execute a scheme to defraud another party of money or property. Under 18 U.S.C. § 1343, the federal wire fraud statute, prosecutors can charge individuals who use electronic communications to further fraudulent activities. Wire fraud is one of the most commonly prosecuted federal offenses and can result in substantial prison sentences, significant fines, and mandatory restitution to victims.
If you are under investigation or facing wire fraud charges in New York, New Jersey, or anywhere in the United States, you need experienced federal criminal defense representation immediately. At the Law Offices of Matthew Cohan, we defend clients charged under 18 U.S.C. § 1343 in the Southern, Eastern, and Northern Districts of New York, as well as the District of New Jersey. Our firm provides aggressive representation both before and after charges are filed, protecting your rights and fighting for the best possible outcome.
What Is Federal Wire Fraud Under 18 U.S.C. § 1343?
Federal wire fraud occurs when someone uses interstate wire, radio, or television communications as part of a scheme to defraud or obtain money or property through false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises. "Wire communication" includes any transmission by wire, radio, television, or electronic means that crosses state lines or international borders, including telephone calls, emails, text messages, instant messages, faxes, and internet transmissions.
The wire fraud statute is remarkably broad and mirrors the mail fraud statute in virtually all respects except that it requires the use of wire communications rather than the postal service or private carriers. Like mail fraud, wire fraud does not require that the fraudulent scheme succeed or that anyone actually lose money. The crime is complete when someone uses interstate wire communications in furtherance of a fraudulent scheme, regardless of whether the fraud was ultimately successful.
Originally enacted in 1952 to address telephone fraud schemes, the wire fraud statute has evolved to cover all forms of electronic communication. In today's digital age, virtually all business communications and financial transactions involve interstate wire communications, making wire fraud charges extremely common in federal prosecutions.
To secure a conviction for wire fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1343, the prosecution must prove the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
1. A Scheme to Defraud
The defendant must have devised or intended to devise a scheme or artifice to defraud, or a scheme to obtain money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises.
What Constitutes a Scheme to Defraud:
A scheme to defraud is any plan, design, or artifice intended to deprive another person or entity of money, property, or the intangible right of honest services. The scheme must involve material false statements or material omissions. A statement or omission is "material" if it has a natural tendency to influence, or is capable of influencing, the decision of the victim.
The government does not need to prove that the scheme was successful or that anyone actually lost money. Even an attempted fraud that never comes to fruition can satisfy this element. The focus is on the defendant's intent to deceive, not on whether the deception succeeded.
Honest Services Fraud: Under 18 U.S.C. § 1346, the definition of "scheme or artifice to defraud" includes schemes to deprive another of the intangible right of honest services. Although the Supreme Court narrowed this provision in Skilling v. United States (2010), limiting it primarily to bribery and kickback schemes, honest services fraud remains a powerful tool for prosecuting public corruption and breaches of fiduciary duty by private sector employees.
1. A Scheme to Defraud
The defendant must have devised or intended to devise a scheme or artifice to defraud, or a scheme to obtain money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises.
What Constitutes a Scheme to Defraud:
A scheme to defraud is any plan, design, or artifice intended to deprive another person or entity of money, property, or the intangible right of honest services. The scheme must involve material false statements or material omissions. A statement or omission is "material" if it has a natural tendency to influence, or is capable of influencing, the decision of the victim.
The government does not need to prove that the scheme was successful or that anyone actually lost money. Even an attempted fraud that never comes to fruition can satisfy this element. The focus is on the defendant's intent to deceive, not on whether the deception succeeded.
Honest Services Fraud: Under 18 U.S.C. § 1346, the definition of "scheme or artifice to defraud" includes schemes to deprive another of the intangible right of honest services. Although the Supreme Court narrowed this provision in Skilling v. United States (2010), limiting it primarily to bribery and kickback schemes, honest services fraud remains a powerful tool for prosecuting public corruption and breaches of fiduciary duty by private sector employees.
2. Materiality of False Statements
The false statements or omissions must be material to the scheme. Courts have held that a misrepresentation is material if it has the natural tendency to influence or is capable of influencing the person to whom it is addressed. Immaterial statements, such as sales puffery or minor inaccuracies that would not affect a reasonable person's decision, do not satisfy this element.
3. Intent to Defraud
The defendant must have acted with specific intent to deceive or defraud. Wire fraud is a specific intent crime, meaning the government must prove that the defendant knowingly made false statements or omissions with the purpose of deceiving the victim. Negligence, mistake, or even recklessness is insufficient. The defendant must have subjectively intended to defraud.
4. Use of Interstate Wire Communications
The defendant must have transmitted, or caused to be transmitted, some signal or communication by wire, radio, or television in interstate or foreign commerce for the purpose of executing or attempting to execute the fraudulent scheme.
What Satisfies the "Wire Communication" Element:
The wire communication does not need to contain fraudulent content itself. It is sufficient that the communication was in furtherance of the scheme and was reasonably foreseeable as part of the scheme. Courts apply the "use in furtherance" test, which requires only that the wire communication be incident to an essential part of the scheme or a step in the plot.
Interstate Requirement: The communication must cross state lines or international borders. However, this requirement is easily satisfied in modern cases because:
- Internet communications typically travel through servers in multiple states
- Email and text messages almost always cross state lines
- Even local telephone calls may route through out-of-state switching equipment
- Most financial transactions involve interstate wire transfers
Causation by Third Parties: The defendant does not need to personally send the wire communication. If the defendant's fraudulent conduct causes an innocent third party to send a wire communication in furtherance of the scheme, this satisfies the element. For example, if a defendant submits a fraudulent application and the victim sends an email in response, the defendant has caused the use of wire communications.
Penalties for Federal Wire Fraud Under 18 U.S.C. § 1343
The penalties for federal wire fraud are severe and can result in lengthy prison sentences, substantial fines, and significant financial obligations.
Imprisonment
Standard Maximum: A conviction for wire fraud carries a maximum sentence of up to 20 years in federal prison for each count. Because each use of wire communications can constitute a separate offense, defendants charged with wire fraud often face multiple counts, resulting in the possibility of consecutive sentences totaling many decades.
Enhanced Maximum for Financial Institution Fraud: If the wire fraud affects a financial institution (banks, credit unions, savings and loan associations), the maximum sentence increases to 30 years in federal prison per count.
Enhanced Maximum for Disaster-Related Fraud: If the wire fraud involves any benefit authorized, transported, transmitted, transferred, disbursed, or paid in connection with a presidentially declared major disaster or emergency, the maximum sentence increases to 30 years in federal prison per count.
Enhanced Penalties for Telemarketing: If the wire fraud involves telemarketing or email marketing:
- An additional 5 years may be added to the sentence
- An additional 10 years may be added if the victims are age 55 or older, or if the defendant targeted individuals over age 55
Federal Sentencing Guidelines
While the statutory maximum provides the ceiling for sentencing, actual sentences are calculated using the United States Sentencing Guidelines. The guidelines determine a defendant's offense level based on multiple factors, with the amount of loss being the most significant:
Base Offense Level: The base offense level for fraud offenses under U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1 is 7.
Loss Amount Enhancements:
- Loss under $6,500: no increase
- Loss between $6,500 and $15,000: add 2 levels
- Loss between $15,000 and $40,000: add 4 levels
- Loss between $40,000 and $95,000: add 6 levels
- Loss amounts continue to add levels exponentially
- Loss over $550 million: add 30 levels
Other Common Enhancements:
- More than minimal planning: add 2 levels (almost always applied in wire fraud cases)
- Sophisticated means (offshore accounts, shell companies, false documents, encryption): add 2 levels
- Use of mass-marketing (emails, robocalls, mass solicitations): add 2 levels
- Violation of securities law or commodities law: add 2 levels
- Deriving more than $1 million in gross receipts from financial institution: add 2 levels
- Number of victims (10 or more victims adds 2 levels, 50+ adds 4 levels, etc.)
- Role in the offense (organizer or leader): add 2-4 levels
- Abuse of position of trust or use of special skill: add 2 levels
- Obstruction of justice: add 2 levels
These enhancements can stack dramatically, resulting in very high offense levels that correspond to lengthy prison sentences even for first-time offenders.
Fines
Individuals convicted of wire fraud face fines of up to $250,000 per count. Corporations face fines of up to $500,000 per count. However, under the alternative fines provision of 18 U.S.C. § 3571, courts may impose fines equal to twice the gross gain derived from the offense or twice the gross loss to victims, whichever is greater. In cases involving substantial fraud amounts, these alternative fines can reach millions of dollars.
Mandatory Restitution
Courts must order restitution requiring defendants to compensate victims for their actual losses. Restitution is mandatory in fraud cases under 18 U.S.C. § 3663A and must be paid in full before any fines are satisfied. Restitution obligations create federal liens on all assets and remain enforceable even after the defendant completes their prison sentence.
Forfeiture
Under 18 U.S.C. § 981 and § 982, defendants convicted of wire fraud may be required to forfeit property constituting or derived from proceeds of the fraud, as well as property used to commit or facilitate the offense. This can include real estate, vehicles, bank accounts, cryptocurrency holdings, and business assets.
Supervised Release
Following any term of imprisonment, defendants typically face a period of supervised release (federal probation) lasting three years or longer. During supervised release, defendants must comply with numerous conditions, including regular reporting to a probation officer, restrictions on travel and employment, prohibitions on internet use or access to financial accounts, and prohibitions on engaging in certain business activities.
Collateral Consequences
A federal wire fraud conviction carries significant collateral consequences beyond the criminal penalties:
- Permanent Criminal Record: A felony conviction appears on all background checks
- Professional Licenses: Loss of professional licenses for attorneys, accountants, financial advisors, real estate agents, securities brokers, and other regulated professions
- Employment: Difficulty obtaining employment, particularly in positions involving financial responsibility, fiduciary duties, or computer access
- Immigration Consequences: Non-citizens face deportation for crimes involving fraud or dishonesty
- Security Clearances: Loss of federal security clearances
- Firearms Rights: Loss of the right to possess firearms
- Reputation: Permanent damage to personal and professional reputation
Common Types of Wire Fraud Prosecutions
Federal wire fraud charges arise in a wide variety of contexts. Some of the most common types of wire fraud schemes prosecuted under 18 U.S.C. § 1343 include:
Investment and Securities Fraud
Investment fraud involves using wire communications to deceive investors about the nature, risks, or returns of investments. This includes Ponzi schemes, pyramid schemes, pump and dump schemes, promissory note fraud, advance fee fraud, and misrepresentations about the nature or value of investment opportunities.
Credit Card and Payment Fraud
Credit card fraud schemes involving stolen credit card information, fraudulent applications, account takeovers, or unauthorized charges frequently involve wire communications. This includes phishing schemes to obtain card information, online purchases with stolen cards, and card-not-present fraud.
Business Email Compromise (BEC)
Business email compromise schemes involve hackers gaining access to business email accounts and using them to request fraudulent wire transfers, redirect payments, or steal confidential information. BEC schemes have caused billions of dollars in losses and are a major focus of federal law enforcement.
Phishing and Identity Theft
Phishing schemes use deceptive emails or text messages to trick recipients into revealing personal information such as passwords, Social Security numbers, bank account details, or credit card numbers. The information is then used for identity theft, account takeovers, or financial fraud.
Healthcare and Insurance Fraud
Healthcare fraud includes billing for services not rendered, upcoding procedures, unbundling services, kickback schemes, and prescription fraud. When fraudulent claims or communications are transmitted electronically to insurance companies, Medicare, or Medicaid, wire fraud charges can be filed.
Mortgage and Real Estate Fraud
Mortgage fraud encompasses various schemes involving false statements in mortgage applications, inflated appraisals, straw buyers, equity skimming, and foreclosure rescue scams. When fraudulent information is transmitted electronically to lenders, title companies, or other parties, wire fraud charges result.
Romance and Online Dating Scams
Romance scams involve criminals creating fake online profiles to establish relationships with victims and then requesting money for various fabricated emergencies or expenses. These schemes typically involve extensive electronic communications and wire transfers.
Tech Support and Computer Fraud
Tech support scams involve criminals posing as technical support representatives to gain remote access to victims' computers, steal information, or convince victims to pay for unnecessary services.
Cryptocurrency and NFT Fraud
Fraud involving cryptocurrency, NFTs, decentralized finance (DeFi) platforms, and initial coin offerings (ICOs) has become increasingly common. These schemes inevitably involve interstate wire communications and can result in wire fraud charges.
Government Benefits Fraud
Schemes to obtain Social Security benefits, unemployment benefits, disaster relief, COVID-19 assistance (such as PPP loans or EIDL grants), or other government assistance through false representations typically involve electronic applications and can result in wire fraud charges.
Telemarketing Fraud
Fraudulent telemarketing schemes that prey on vulnerable victims, particularly elderly individuals, often involve phone calls combined with follow-up emails or electronic payment processing, resulting in wire fraud charges with enhanced penalties.
Relationship to Mail Fraud and Conspiracy
Wire fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1343) and mail fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1341) are parallel statutes with nearly identical elements, differing only in the means of communication used. Prosecutors frequently charge both mail fraud and wire fraud in the same case, particularly when a scheme involves both types of communication.
Federal prosecutors also commonly charge conspiracy to commit wire fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1349. Conspiracy charges carry the same maximum penalties as the underlying offense and allow prosecutors to reach defendants who agreed to participate in the scheme even if they did not personally commit wire fraud. Conspiracy charges also expand the scope of admissible evidence and allow for joint trials of multiple defendants.
Defenses to Federal Wire Fraud Charges
Defending against federal wire fraud charges requires sophisticated legal strategies, thorough investigation of the facts, and detailed understanding of fraud law. Common and effective defenses include:
Lack of Intent to Defraud
The government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant acted with specific intent to deceive or defraud. Demonstrating that the defendant acted in good faith, believed their representations were true, made honest business judgments, or held a good faith belief in the legitimacy of the transaction can negate the intent element. This is often the strongest defense in wire fraud cases.
No Material Misrepresentation
If the alleged false statements or omissions were not material (would not have influenced a reasonable person's decision), this defeats the fraud element. The defense may demonstrate that victims had access to accurate information, conducted independent due diligence, were sophisticated parties who understood the risks, or were not actually deceived by the alleged misrepresentations.
No Use of Wires in Furtherance of Scheme
The government must prove that the defendant used or caused the use of interstate wire communications for the purpose of executing the fraudulent scheme. If wire communications were merely incidental, occurred after the scheme was complete, served legitimate business purposes, or were not foreseeable as part of the scheme, they may not satisfy the statutory requirement.
No Scheme to Defraud
If the government cannot establish that a coherent fraudulent scheme existed, the charges must fail. The defense may demonstrate that business arrangements were legitimate, that no deception occurred, that representations were true when made, or that any losses resulted from market conditions, bad business decisions, changed circumstances, or other factors unrelated to fraud.
Insufficient Evidence
The prosecution bears the burden of proving every element beyond a reasonable doubt. Challenging the sufficiency and credibility of the government's evidence, including witness testimony, documents, expert opinions, and loss calculations, can create reasonable doubt and result in acquittal.
Understanding Prosecution Strategy: We know how federal prosecutors build wire fraud cases, what evidence they prioritize, how they present schemes to juries, and what weaknesses they attempt to conceal. This insider knowledge allows us to anticipate the government's approach and develop effective counter-strategies.
Challenging Electronic Evidence: Wire fraud cases typically involve voluminous electronic evidence including emails, text messages, financial records, and server logs. We know how to challenge the authenticity, interpretation, and context of electronic communications, and can retain qualified forensic experts when necessary.
Navigating Complex Financial Analysis: Wire fraud prosecutions often involve detailed financial analysis and loss calculations. We understand how to challenge the government's loss figures, which directly affect sentencing exposure, and can present alternative calculations that significantly reduce potential sentences.
Negotiating Pre-Indictment: Many wire fraud investigations last months or years before charges are filed. Our prosecutorial background enables us to engage effectively with prosecutors during the investigation stage, potentially preventing charges from being filed or negotiating favorable resolutions before indictment.
Jury Trial Experience: While many federal fraud cases resolve through plea agreements, some must go to trial. We have extensive trial experience presenting fraud cases to juries and understand how to explain complex electronic communications, financial transactions, and business arrangements in clear, persuasive ways that create reasonable doubt.
Sentencing Advocacy: Even if a conviction occurs, sentencing provides critical opportunities to minimize consequences. We understand federal sentencing guidelines for fraud offenses and know how to present mitigation evidence effectively, including cooperation, acceptance of responsibility, restitution efforts, and personal circumstances that may warrant downward departures from guideline ranges.
Sentencing Advocacy: Even if a conviction occurs, sentencing provides critical opportunities to minimize consequences. We understand federal sentencing guidelines for fraud offenses and know how to present mitigation evidence effectively, including cooperation, acceptance of responsibility, restitution efforts, and personal circumstances that may warrant downward departures from guideline ranges.
The Importance of Early Intervention
If you are under investigation for wire fraud, early intervention by experienced defense counsel is essential. Wire fraud investigations typically involve:
- Grand jury subpoenas for documents, emails, and financial records
- Search warrants executed at homes or businesses
- Seizure of computers, phones, and electronic devices
- Interviews with potential witnesses, customers, or business associates
- Review of emails, text messages, and other electronic communications
- Analysis by forensic accountants and computer forensic experts
- Cooperation from alleged victims or co-conspirators
- Undercover operations or controlled transactions
Early representation provides opportunities to:
- Prevent charges from being filed through pre-indictment negotiations
- Protect your rights during questioning by investigators (FBI, Secret Service, IRS-CI, Postal Inspectors)
- Ensure proper handling of electronic devices and preservation of potentially exculpatory evidence
- Address grand jury subpoenas strategically to minimize exposure
- Preserve attorney-client privilege and work product protection
- Explore cooperation options if appropriate and beneficial
Do not speak with FBI agents, Secret Service agents, or other federal investigators without legal representation. Statements made during investigative interviews can be used against you, and even innocent explanations can be misinterpreted or used to build the government's case. Additionally, lying to federal agents is itself a federal crime under 18 U.S.C. § 1001, which can result in additional charges.
Contact Our Federal Criminal Defense Firm
Federal wire fraud charges under 18 U.S.C. § 1343 are serious matters that require experienced, knowledgeable representation. At the Law Offices of Matthew Cohan, we provide comprehensive defense services to clients facing wire fraud investigations and charges throughout New York, New Jersey, and other federal jurisdictions.
Our firm combines detailed knowledge of federal fraud law, extensive experience in federal criminal defense, and insight from prosecutorial experience to provide effective advocacy. Whether you are under investigation, have been contacted by federal agents, or have been indicted for wire fraud, we can help protect your rights and fight for the best possible outcome.
Contact us today for a free, confidential consultation to discuss your case and begin building your defense. Time is critical in federal fraud cases. Call us or submit our online contact form. We are available to assist you in protecting your freedom, your assets, and your future.
Aggravated Identity Theft charges carry a Mandatory Minimum sentence that cannot be served concurrently.
Don’t wait. Speak with an experienced criminal defense lawyer today.
Contact Us
Kew Gardens, New York 11415
Smithtown, New York 11787