Stolen Identity Refund Fraud Prevention Act of 2016

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 3832, the Stolen Identity Refund Fraud Prevention Act of 2016, as amended. While I support the legislation's underlying goal of deterring and preventing tax-related identity theft and tax fraud, I strongly oppose the bill's expansion of mandatory minimum sentencing.

Section 5 of the bill would expand the mandatory minimums found in Title 18 Section 1028A of the United States Code. This section of Title 18 imposes a mandatory minimum sentence of two years for ``aggravated identity theft.'' Under section 5 of this bill, a violation of section 7206(b) of the Internal Revenue Code would require a judge to impose a two year mandatory minimum regardless of the circumstances of the case. While a two year sentence may be appropriate for most individuals convicted under this bill, it should be left to the discretion of the sentencing judge to determine the exact sentence based on all the relevant facts and circumstances.

Research and evidence in the past few decades has demonstrated that mandatory minimums are ineffective deterrents, waste the taxpayers' money, force judges to impose irrational sentences, and discriminate against minorities, particularly with regards to drug offenses. Unfortunately, there are too many mandatory minimums in the federal code.

Mr. Speaker, if we expect to do anything about that problem, the first step has to be to stop passing new ones. The mandatory minimums in the code today did not get there all at once--they got there one at a time, each one part of a larger bill, which on balance might have been a good idea. Therefore, the only way to stop passing new mandatory minimums is to stop passing bills that contain mandatory minimums.

Therefore, I urge my colleagues to vote No on H.R. 3832.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source