BIA

CRIME OF MORAL TURPITUDE - MISUSE OF SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER
The offense of misuse of a social security number, in violation of 42 U.S.C. 408(a)(7)(B), may or may not be considered a crime of moral turpitude. For example, use of the card to open a checking account would not appear to be fraudulent, and thus not a CMT. The statute should therefore be considered divisible. Sale of fraudulent immigration documents is clearly CMT. Matter of Flores, 17 I. & N. Dec. 225, 1980 WL 121870 (BIA 1980). Use or possession of a false social security document with specific intent to defraud is a CMT. Matter of Serna, 20 I. & N. Dec. 579, 581 (BIA 1992). Knowing possession of false immigration documents, however, is not a CMT. Matter of Serna, 20 I. & N. Dec. 579, 581 (BIA 1992). See Matter of Adetiba, 20 I. & N. Dec. 506 (BIA 1992) which is (erroneously) argued by the Service to have ruled that 408(a)(7)(B) is a CIMT, and the Ninth Circuits decision in Beltran-Tirado v. INS, 213 F.3d 1179 (9th Cir. 2000), that found it is not.

Lower Courts of Second Circuit

SAFE HAVEN - AGGRAVATED FELONY - FRAUD OFFENSES -- INTRODUCING MISBRANDED DRUG INTO INTERSTATE COMMERCE
Zhang v. United States, ___ F.Supp.2d ___, 2005 WL 3086840, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 28404 (E.D. N.Y. Nov. 18, 2005) (introducing a drug that had been misbranded with the intent to defraud and mislead, into interstate commerce, in violation of 21 U.S.C. 331(a), did not constitute a fraud offense aggravated felony under INA 101(a)(43)(M)(i), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(M)(i)).

Sixth Circuit

CRIME OF MORAL TURPITUDE - FRAUD OFFENSES - FALSE STATEMENT TO GOVERNMENT AGENT
Kellerman v. Holder, 592 F.3d 700 (6th Cir. Jan. 25, 2010) (applying divisible statute analysis to 18 U.S.C. 371, 1001 [conspiracy to commit crime or defraud United States; false or fraudulent statement to government agent], presumably accepting argument that a conviction for these offenses might not necessarily involve moral turpitude).

Ninth Circuit

AGGRAVATED FELONY - FRAUD OFFENSE - FALSE STATEMENT TO GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL
Li v. Ashcroft, 389 F.3d 892 (9th Cir. Nov. 19. 2004) (conviction of making a false statement to a United States official, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1001, is divisible with respect to the fraud offense aggravated felony defined in INA 101(a)(43)(M)(i), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(M)(i), since it does not require proof of any monetary loss and so does not automatically satisfy the element of this aggravated felony definition requiring a loss to the victim(s) in excess of $10,000, so the record of conviction must be examined to determine whether the conviction falls within the definition).

AGGRAVATED FELONY - FRAUD OFFENSE - FALSE CLAIM AGAINST THE UNITED STATES
Li v. Ashcroft, 389 F.3d 892, 897 (9th Cir. Nov. 19. 2004) (conviction of making a false claim against the United States, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 287, is divisible with respect to the fraud offense aggravated felony defined in INA 101(a)(43)(M)(i), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(M)(i), since even though it does require some intended loss, "no particular amount of intended loss is required," and so does not automatically satisfy the element of this aggravated felony definition requiring a loss to the victim(s) in excess of $10,000, so the record of conviction must be examined to determine whether the conviction falls within the definition).

AGGRAVATED FELONY - FRAUD OFFENSE - CONSPIRACY TO DEFRAUD THE UNITED STATES
Li v. Ashcroft, 389 F.3d 892 (9th Cir. Nov. 19. 2004) (conviction of conspiracy to defraud the United States, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 371, is divisible with respect to the fraud offense aggravated felony defined in INA 101(a)(43)(M)(i), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(M)(i), since it does not require proof of any monetary loss and so does not automatically satisfy the element of this aggravated felony definition requiring a loss to the victim(s) in excess of $10,000, so the record of conviction must be examined to determine whether the conviction falls within the definition).

Other

SOCIAL SECURITY FRAUD
Under 408(a)(7) of the Social Security Act, a person is subject to criminal penalties if he or she: (1) willfully, knowingly, and with an intent to deceive uses a social security number on the basis of false information furnished to the SSA (408 (a)(7)(A));  (2) falsely represents, with an intent to deceive, a number to be the social security number assigned to him or her or to another person (408(a)(7)(B )); or  (3) knowingly altered a social security card issued by the SSA, bought or sold a card that was, or was purported to be, a card so issued, counterfeited a social security card, or possessed a social security card or counterfeit social security card with an intent to sell or alter it (408(a)(7)(C)). The Social Security trust fund accumulates billions of dollars in taxes from undocumented workers who wont ever get benefits, and it is the government that it is defrauded. How does having an employer send money in under a fake  SSN harm the government? Thanks to Bruce Nestor

AGGRAVATED FELONY - FRAUD OFFENSE - FOOD STAMP FRAUD
"Food Stamp Fraud," despite what its name sounds like, may be neither an Aggravated Felony nor a Crime of Moral Turpitude.  In some jurisdictions, the elements of the offense do not include any of the key elements that define common law fraud; instead, the offense is basically a strict-liability regulatory offense.