United States: 2015 Proposed Amendments To Fraud Sentencing Guidelines: A Good Start

Last Updated: February 6 2015
Article by Harry Sandick and Julia Stepanova

This month marks the 10-year anniversary of United States v. Booker,1 the landmark case that transformed the federal Sentencing Guidelines into advisory sentencing rules. In the years following Booker, observers have recognized that the Sentencing Guidelines for white-collar fraud cases are not working as "guidelines." The Guidelines often recommend sentences that are simply out of step with what most courts are willing to mete out.2 As a result, judges are frequently varying from the sentences recommended by the Guidelines, often substantially.3 This in turn often leads to significant disparities among defendants who have committed similar crimes and who have similar criminal records, a result that judges are instructed to avoid.4

The Guidelines cannot be said to provide useful guidance to district court judges if judges are varying from them at a high frequency and to a significant degree.5 For defendants, a plea offer from the government that is based on an extremely high Guidelines range creates what may be an undue incentive to proceed to trial: it is hard to accept a plea offer of 15 or 20 years. The existence of the high Guidelines range often forces the government to take harsher positions at sentencing than they know will be ordered, further depriving the district court of what might be useful insights about a particular case. In short, the fraud sentencing guidelines are broken. Since judges must give due credence to the Guidelines,6 the sentencing guideline framework needs to be fixed in order for the federal sentencing system to work.

On Jan. 9, 2015, the Sentencing Commission took a small but productive step in the right direction when it promulgated a series of proposed amendments to Section 2B1.1 of the Guidelines, which governs sentencing in fraud cases.7 While the individual impact of these revisions is small, together they amount to a welcome first step—perhaps a down payment on a more substantive revision in the future. A period of notice and comment will now begin, running through March 18, 2015, with a public hearing on the proposed amendments to be held on March 12, 2015. This article briefly reviews the proposed amendments.

1. Inflationary Adjustments. The fraud sentencing guidelines are driven first and foremost by the loss calculations made by the district court. This myopic focus on loss amount has been the subject of criticism.8 The loss table has not been amended since 1987 to take into account inflation, even though $1 in 1991 has the same buying power as $1.74 in 2014.9 The commission has proposed two possible adjustments based on inflation. Each adjustment is based on the Consumer Price Index, but the two proposals employ different rules for rounding.

The effect of both proposals is to significantly raise the level of loss required for a specific increase in levels. For example, the current Guidelines call for a 14-level increase when the loss amount is more than $400,000, while the proposals would require a loss amount of either $525,000 or $550,000 for a 14-level increase.10 Notably, at the end of this proposed amendment, the commission asks for comment about whether there should be "any other changes to the monetary tables, such as to promote proportionality or reduce complexity."11

2. Intended Loss.12 The commission proposed amendments to the definition of intended loss, which often drives the calculation of the Guidelines range in cases where there has been little or no actual loss. The commission also raised a number of issues for comment concerning how intended loss is calculated and how it is used in determining the Guidelines range. First, the commission asked whether intended loss should be limited to the amount that the defendant personally intended, or whether it should also include amounts intended by other participants in the offense.

Second, the commission asked whether courts should always use the greater of actual loss or intended loss (the existing rule) or whether intended loss should be limited in some fashion.13 This raises further questions about the proper sentence in cases where the actual loss was low or non-existent, but the intended loss was high. One solution may be to consider both facts, as opposed to only the higher number, during sentencing.

3. Victims. The current Guidelines provide for increases in offense level of 2, 4, or 6 levels if the offense involved 10, 50, or 250 victims (or more), respectively. The proposed amended Guidelines would limit these increases to 1, 2 or 3 levels, but add a possible enhancement for cases in which the offense caused a substantial financial hardship, a new term defined in a proposed application note.14 Although the desire to focus less on the "counting" of victims and more on the actual impact of the crime is commendable, the addition of newly defined terms in the Sentencing Guidelines seems like a step in the wrong direction given the high level of complexity already inherent in calculations under the Guidelines.

4. Sophisticated Means. Courts have long pondered the correct interpretation of this enhancement, which aims to address a legitimate issue of culpability but does so in a manner that is often less than intuitive.15 The proposed amendment is meant to clarify this provision. First, it would change the rule to require that the defendant himself engaged in the conduct that is deemed "sophisticated." The current rule, in contrast, applies the enhancement when the offense involves sophisticated means. Second, the proposed amendment removes the language suggesting that certain types of conduct inherently involve sophisticated means.

Some of these presumptively "sophisticated" means, such as the use of "offshore accounts," are often, in fact, quite simplistic. Third, the proposed amendment states that "[c]onduct that is common to offenses of the same kind ordinarily does not constitute sophisticated means."16 This attempt to draw distinctions between truly complex and unsophisticated offenses is a welcome revision, particularly in the white collar context.17

5. Fraud on the Market. The commission proposed a new amendment for securities offenses involving "fraud on the market" (i.e., offenses involving the fraudulent inflation or deflation in the value of a publicly traded security or commodity and the submission of false information to the Securities and Exchange Commission or another regulator). This amendment would base the Guideline on the gain to the defendant rather than the loss sustained by victims of the offense, but in no event would the enhancement under the loss table be less than a specified number of Guideline levels (somewhere between 14 and 22 levels). Here, the real content is in the issues identified by the commission, which recognize that these are serious cases but ones in which it can be difficult to measure gain and loss, thus leading both to under- and over-punishment.18 The notice and comment on these provisions figure to be worth following.

6. Relevant Conduct. The commission proposes to amend Section 1B1.3, which defines the relevant conduct for which a defendant is held responsible when determining the correct Guidelines range. While this provision applies to all of the Sentencing Guidelines, not only the fraud-related guidelines, it may have an impact on how loss amount is calculated. The amendments are quite extensive and their full extent is beyond the scope of this article.

One amendment that bears noting, however, is the addition of express language stating that relevant conduct committed by others is not to be imputed to a defendant unless he specifically agreed jointly to undertake that particular criminal activity. The fact that the conduct was committed in furtherance of jointly undertaken criminal activity is not sufficient, even if the acts of others were reasonably foreseeable to the defendant. The "issues for comment" draw attention to the question of whether the term "jointly undertaken criminal activity" should be beefed up, either to require a higher state of mind or to require a conviction for conspiracy.19

One cautionary note about the prospect of future amendment: remarks given by Judge Patti B. Saris, the commission's chair, at the Jan. 9, 2015, public meeting of the Sentencing Commission indicate that the commission believes that "the fraud guideline may not be fundamentally broken for most forms of fraud." She also states that most judges "are relatively satisfied with it for most types of fraud."20 It is hard to reconcile this conclusion with the fact that more than half of all fraud sentences in 2013 were outside of the recommended Guideline range. Regardless of the chair's comments, these are generally positive steps that should make sentencing more reasonable and the Guidelines more relevant. Hopefully, further steps will be taken in this direction.


1. United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005).

2. See United States v. Adelson, 441 F.Supp.2d 506 (S.D.N.Y. 2006); United States v. Ovid, No. 09-CR-216, 2010 WL 3940724 (E.D.N.Y. Oct. 1, 2010).

3. See United States v. McDonnell, No. 3:14-CR-00012 (E.D. Va. Jan. 6, 2015) (two-year sentence imposed after Guidelines recommended more than 10 years' imprisonment); United States v. Gupta, 904 F.Supp.2d 349 (S.D.N.Y. 2012) (two-year sentence imposed after district court determined a Guidelines range of six-and-a-half to eight years).

4. 18 U.S.C. §3553(a)(6) (2011). See Peter Lattman, "2 Defendants Sentenced in Insider Trading Case," N.Y. TIMES, Sept. 21, 2011, http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/09/21/2-defendants-sentenced-in-insider-trading-case/.

5. In fiscal year 2013, more than half of all fraud sentences were outside the Guideline range. U.S. Sentencing Commission, Statistical Information Packet for Fiscal Year 2013, Southern District of New York, Table 10, http://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-publications/federal-sentencingstatistics/state-district-circuit/2013/nys13.pdf. In the Southern District of New York, only 26.1 percent of fraud sentences were within the Guideline range. Id.

6. See Gall v. United States, 128 S. Ct. 586, 594 (2007).

7. In addition to fraud, Section 2B1.1 covers offenses involving theft, embezzlement, forgery, counterfeiting, insider trading, transactions in stolen goods, and simple property damage or destruction. U.S. SENTENCING GUIDELINE MANUAL, ch. 2, pt. D, introductory cmt. (2014).

8. Leah McGrath Goodman, "Nonsensical Sentences for White Collar Criminals," NEWSWEEK, June 26, 2014, http://www.newsweek.com/2014/07/04/nonsensical-sentences-whitecollar-criminals-256104.html#.U7FqSajPNNs.email (quoting Judge Jed S. Rakoff commenting that "the arithmetic behind the sentencing calculations is all hocus-pocus—it's nonsensical, and I mean that sincerely. It gives the illusion of something meaningful with no real value underneath.").

9. Proposed Amendments to the Sentencing Guidelines (Preliminary), Proposed Amendment: Inflationary Adjustments at 2 (Jan. 9, 2015), available at http://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/amendment-process/reader-friendly-amendments/20150109_PRELIM_RF_amendments.pdf.

10. Id. at 1-3. The proposed amendment would do likewise for a number of other loss-driven Guidelines calculations, including the loss tables for insider trading and tax fraud, and the fine tables for individual defendants in Section 5E1.2. The multipliers vary, but the goal is to reflect an inflationary adjustment.

11. Id. at 16.

12. The provisions relating to intended loss, victims, sophisticated means, and fraud on the market are packaged as a single proposed amendment on "economic crime." Proposed Amendments to the Sentencing Guidelines (Preliminary), Proposed Amendment: Economic Crime at 1.

13. Id. at 4.

14. Id. at 6.

15. See United States v. Lewis, 93 F.3d 1075 (2d Cir. 1996) (recognizing that the term "def[ies] precise definition" and is an "open-ended phrase" requiring judicial construction).

16. Proposed Amendments to the Sentencing Guidelines (Preliminary), Proposed Amendment: Economic Crime at 11-12.

17. A similar amendment should be promulgated for Section 2T1.1, which also states that "the use of...offshore financial accounts ordinarily indicates sophisticated means." U.S. SENTENCING GUIDELINES MANUAL §2T1.1, cmt. n.5 (2014). It is hard to think of anything less sophisticated than opening a bank account in an offshore tax haven and failing to report the income earned in that account.

18. Id. at 15-17.

19. Proposed Amendments to the Sentencing Guidelines (Preliminary), Proposed Amendment: Jointly Undertaken Criminal Activity at 2, 4, 10.

20. Chief Judge Patti B. Saris, Remarks at the Public Meeting of the United States Sentencing Commission 2 (Jan 9, 2015), available at http://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/amendment-process/public-hearings-and-meetings/20150109/Remarks.pdf.

Previously published in the New York Law Journal - January 2015

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of www.mondaq.com

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about Mondaq.com’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to unsubscribe@mondaq.com with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


From time to time Mondaq may send you emails promoting Mondaq services including new services. You may opt out of receiving such emails by clicking below.

*** If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of services offered by Mondaq you may opt out by clicking here .


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to webmaster@mondaq.com.

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to EditorialAdvisor@mondaq.com.

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at enquiries@mondaq.com.

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at problems@mondaq.com and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.