18 U.S.C. 1018 (Whoever, being a public officer or other person authorized by any law of the United States to make or give a certificate or other writing, knowingly makes and delivers as true such a certificate or writing, containing any statement which he knows to be false, in a case where the punishment thereof is not elsewhere expressly provided by law, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.). (June 25, 1948, c. 645, 62 Stat. 753; Sept. 13, 1994, Pub.L. 103-322, Title XXXIII, 330016(1)(G), 108 Stat. 2147.) 1994 Amendments. Pub.L. 103-322, 330016(1)(G), substituted under this title for not more than $500.

Note: It is possible to deliver as true a writing known to contain a false statement without exhibiting moral turpitude. For example, assume a car was burglarized , and the thieves stole a daypack containing (1) a $200 camera, and (2) a half-used tube of toothpaste, and the victim made an insurance claim listing the camera, but not the toothpaste. This would be a violation of this this statute on the state level (knowingly making a false insurance claim) by underrepresenting the loss. Someone else might knowingly make an irrelevant false statement out of laziness (not wanting to take the effort to evaluate the toothpaste) or slight generosity (feeling collecting for the camera was enough). None of these instances would involve moral turpitude. By analogy to theft, there would be no intent to permanently deprive the owner, or by analogy to fraud, no intent to defraud anyone of anything of value. More research is needed to examine the elements to see if this kind of innocuous conduct fits within the plain language of this statute. Then it is necessary to examine reported decisions and other sources of information to determine whether someone was actually prosecuted for this offense based on non-moral turpitude conduct.