Legislature(2005 - 2006)BUTROVICH 205
03/01/2005 08:30 AM Senate JUDICIARY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| SB87 | |
| Start | |
| SB87 | |
| SB95 | |
| SB104 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | SB 87 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 95 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 104 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SB 104-PERMANENT FUND DIVIDEND FRAUD
9:50:54 AM
MR. BRIAN HOVE, staff to Senator Seekins, introduced SB 104. SB
104 establishes a Permanent Fund Dividend (PFD) investigation
unit. SB 104 would make submission of a fraudulent PFD
application a class C felony. In 2004 the Department of Revenue
(DOR) examined over 1,600 fraud tips and audited over 1,700 PFD
applications suspected of being fraudulent. This resulted in
$1.4 million in denied or assessed dividends. There were three
federal indictments and one conviction for crimes involving PFD
fraud.
The most common PFD fraud offense involves persons who forge
signatures with the intent to receive a dividend to which they
are not entitled. SB 104 is not intended to capture cases where
spouses sign for each other. Current law (AS 11.46.500-510)
describes three separate degrees of forgery - the two most
serious offenses are punishable as class B and C felonies, but
are limited to cases involving various types of financial
instruments.
Forgery in the third degree covers instances where a person
intentionally makes a false statement on a written instrument
such as a PFD application. This offense is punishable as a class
A misdemeanor. The DOR's proposal to elevate PFD fraud from a
misdemeanor to a Class C felony is expected to provide a more
effective deterrent for theft. SB 104 aids in identifying and
curing instances of PFD fraud by codifying in statute a fraud
investigation unit within the DOR. This unit will assist the
Department of Law (DOL) in investigating instances of PFD fraud.
9:53:37 AM
SENATOR THERRIAULT said that Section 1 separates dividend fraud
out of the statute. By doing so it creates too many categories
of fraud. He suggested the committee rework the overall
structure.
9:55:50 AM
SENATOR FRENCH asked Senator Therriault if he was suggesting a
list of fraudulent activities and the punishment that relates to
them.
SENATOR THERRIAULT replied yes. It would make it more of a
standard format.
CHAIR SEEKINS agreed.
SENATOR THERRIAULT added that if one were looking for
falsification it would be all in one section.
9:57:01 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS announced that committee substitute version \Y was
before the committee as the working document. He asked Sharon
Barton to clarify the changes.
MS. SHARON BARTON, director, Permanent Fund Dividend Division
agreed that Senator Therriault's proposal had merit. To explain
the \Y draft, it made the language simpler. The PFD division was
looking at going after falsification written and orally. The
drafters trimmed three sections down to two and identified the
class C felony.
9:59:55 AM
CHAIR SEEKINS suggested SB 104 might have a title change since
it would be setting up new section of law.
SENATOR THERRIAULT disagreed saying it would be putting together
a framework.
CHAIR SEEKINS liked Senator Therriault's suggestion.
SENATOR FRENCH did as well.
CHAIR SEEKINS said he would ask his staff to meet with the
drafters to accommodate Senator Therriault's suggestion.
10:02:11 AM
SENATOR THERRIAULT said page 1, line 14, which is the section
title, would be lost in the new draft.
CHAIR SEEKINS offered it wouldn't impact the functionality. He
said he would refer the issue to the drafters and hold SB 104
over to the next committee meeting.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|