Full title  An act to improve enforcement of mortgage fraud, securities fraud and commodities fraud, financial institution fraud, and other frauds related to Federal assistance and relief programs, for the recovery of funds lost to these frauds, and for other purposes.

Acronym          FERA
Enacted by the       111th United States Congress
Effective May 20, 2009
Citations
Public Law       111-21
Stat.         123 Stat. 1617

Codification
Title(s) amended   18, 31
U.S.C. sections created         18 USC §27
U.S.C. section(s) amended  18 USC §20
18 USC §1014
18 USC §1031(a)
18 USC §1348
18 USC §1956(c)
18 USC §1957(f)
31 USC §3729
31 USC §3730(h)
31 USC §3731(b)
31 USC §3732
31 USC §3733

Legislative history

Introduced in the Senate as S. 386 by Patrick Leahy (D-VT) on February 5, 2009

Committee consideration by: Judiciary

Passed the Senate on April 28, 2009 (92-4)

Passed the House on May 6, 2009 (367-59) with amendment

Senate agreed to House amendment on May 14, 2009 (unanimous consent) with further amendment

House agreed to Senate amendment on May 18, 2009 (338-52)

Signed into law by President Barack Obama on May 20, 2009

v t e

The Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009, or FERA, Pub.L. 111-21, S. 386, 123 Stat. 1617, enacted May 20, 2009, is a public law in the United States enacted in 2009. The law enhanced criminal enforcement of federal fraud laws, especially regarding financial institutions, mortgage fraud, and securities fraud or commodities fraud.
 
Wikisource has original text related to this article:

Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009

Legislative history
 
U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont, a Democrat and the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, sponsored the bill.
 
On April 27, 2009, the Senate invoked cloture on the bill as amended (S. 386) on an 84–4 vote, with eleven not voting. Only four Senators voted no, all Republicans (Tom Coburn, Jim DeMint, James Inhofe, and Jon Kyl).[1] On April 28, the Senate passed the bill on a 92–4 vote, with three not voting; the same Senators who voted against cloture voted against the bill.
 
On May 6, the United States House of Representatives passed the bill with its own amendment on a 367–59 vote, with six Representatives not voting and one Representative, Democrat Alan Grayson of Florida, case a present vote. All 250 Democrats casting votes, as well as 117 Republicans, voted yes; all of the 59 no votes were cast by Republicans.
 
The Senate then added an amendment to the House's amendment. The House accepted the final version of the bill on a 338–52 vote on May 18, with 43 Representatives not voting. All 224 Democrats casting votes, as well as 114 Republicans, voted yes. Fifty-two Republicans voted no.

President Barack Obama signed the legislation into law on May 20 along with the Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009, a bill concerned with mortgage foreclosure prevention.
 
Amendments to fraud statutes
 
The Act changes the definition of a financial institution for the purposes of Federal criminal law to include mortgage lending businesses, which are defined as “organizations which finance or refinance any debt secured by an interest in real estate, including private mortgage companies and any subsidiaries of such organizations, and whose activities affect interstate or foreign commerce.” 18 U.S.C. § 1014, which makes it a federal offense to falsify loan documents submitted to a broad range of financial institutions, is amended to include mortgage lending businesses in that range, and for good measure also includes any other person “that makes in whole or in part a federally related mortgage loan”.
 
The crime of major fraud against the United States (18 U.S.C. § 1031), which previously covered only fraud in government procurement and contracts for services, is amended to include a wider range of government involvement, including grants under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, transactions under the Troubled Assets Relief Program, and any “other form of Federal assistance”.[7] FERA amends the definition of securities fraud, 18 U.S.C. § 1348, to include fraud related to commodities futures and options in addition to the existing category of registered securities under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
 
Finally, the Act defines proceeds in the money laundering statute (18 U.S.C. § 1956) as “any property derived from or obtained or retained, directly or indirectly, through some form of unlawful activity, including the gross receipts of such activity”.[9] Previously, the term was left undefined, and was interpreted by the United States Supreme Court in United States v. Santos by a plurality of the justices as excluding gross receipts.[10][11] A "Sense of the Congress" section suggests that senior prosecutors, such as a United States Attorney or superior, should be involved before certain kinds of money-laundering cases are instigated, and directs the Attorney General to deliver a yearly report on such cases for the next four years.