18 U.S.C. 287 False Claims: Elements, Penalties & Defenses

Submitting a false claim for money or approval to a federal agency is a felony under 18 U.S.C. 287, and a conviction can bring up to five years in federal prison for each claim, fines of $250,000 for an individual or $500,000 for an organization, mandatory restitution, and separate civil penalties that triple the government’s loss. The statute reaches inflated contractor invoices, Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement requests, grant applications, and any other request for federal funds or approval the defendant knew was false when submitted. Prosecution under 18 U.S.C. 287 for false claims is one of the more aggressively pursued areas of federal white-collar enforcement, and it frequently runs in parallel with civil recovery actions.

What the Government Has To Prove

A conviction under Section 287 requires two elements: that you submitted a claim to a federal department or agency for payment or approval, and that you knew the claim was false when you submitted it.¹ The government does not have to prove it actually paid the claim. Submission alone is the crime.

The knowledge element is broader than deliberate deceit. Deliberate ignorance or reckless disregard for whether a claim is truthful will satisfy the standard. A contractor who signs off on invoices without checking whether the underlying work was performed can be prosecuted just as readily as one who fabricates invoices outright.

Courts read the word “claim” expansively. The Supreme Court held in United States v. Neifert-White Co. that the statute protects federal funds “regardless of the particular form, or function, of the governmental instrumentality upon which such claims were made.”² That sweep is why invoices, healthcare reimbursement requests, grant applications, and claims only indirectly tied to federal funding can all trigger charges.

Criminal Penalties

The statutory maximum is five years in federal prison per violation.¹ When a defendant submitted multiple false claims, each can be charged as a separate count, and the court has discretion to run sentences consecutively. Under the general federal fines statute, financial penalties reach $250,000 for an individual and $500,000 for an organization.³ For false claims connected to Department of Defense contracts, the maximum fine climbs to $1,000,000.

How Judges Calculate the Sentence

Federal judges use the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, and fraud offenses are governed by Section 2B1.1.⁴ The base level rises with the total dollar amount of the fraud, so loss figures drive recommended prison time more than almost anything else. Using fictitious entities, shell companies, offshore accounts, or other especially elaborate methods to execute or conceal the scheme triggers a two-level enhancement for sophisticated means. Organizing or leading the scheme, rather than playing a minor role, pushes the sentence further up.

Restitution Is Mandatory

Under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act, the court must order full restitution to the government for the value of property lost. If the fraud caused bodily injury, the defendant also pays for medical care, therapy, rehabilitation, and lost income.⁵ The judge has no discretion to waive restitution based on the defendant’s finances.

Debarment From Federal Contracts

A fraud conviction tied to a government contract is grounds for debarment under the Federal Acquisition Regulation, and so is any offense indicating a lack of business integrity that bears on present responsibility as a contractor.⁶ For any business that lives on federal work, debarment often outweighs the fine.

Civil Penalties Under the False Claims Act

Criminal charges are not the only exposure. The False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. 3729, allows the government to recover three times the amount it lost plus a civil penalty for every individual false claim.⁷ As of 2025, per-claim penalties range from $14,308 to $28,619, and they attach whether or not the government paid.⁸ A pattern of hundreds of small claims can generate an enormous penalty total before the trebled damages are added.

There is one narrow reduction. If a person self-reports the fraud within 30 days of learning about it, cooperates fully, and reports before any government investigation has begun, the court can cut damages from triple to double.⁷ Meeting all three conditions is uncommon in practice.

Smaller matters may be handled under the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act, 31 U.S.C. 3801-3812. The statutory base penalty of $5,000 per false claim or statement has been inflation-adjusted to $14,308 per violation.⁸ These cases move through agency officials and administrative law judges rather than federal court, which makes them faster for the government to pursue.

How Long the Government Has to Bring Charges

Criminal charges under Section 287 must be brought within five years of the offense under the general federal criminal statute of limitations, 18 U.S.C. 3282. Because false claims schemes usually involve repeated submissions, the clock runs separately for each claim. Someone who submitted false invoices monthly for three years can face counts reaching back to the earliest submission still inside the five-year window.

Civil exposure runs longer. A False Claims Act suit can be filed up to six years after the violation, or up to three years after the government knew or should have known about it, whichever is later, with an outer cap of ten years. Even when criminal prosecution is time-barred, civil recovery often is not.

Defenses That Attack the Knowledge Element

Because the statute requires that the defendant knew the claim was false, the most effective defenses target that mental state.

Good faith belief. A defendant who genuinely believed the claim was accurate did not act knowingly, even if that belief turned out to be wrong or unreasonable. The Ninth Circuit’s model instruction states that “a defendant who acts on a good faith misunderstanding as to the requirements of the law does not act willfully even if the understanding of the law is wrong or unreasonable,” and the government carries the burden of disproving good faith beyond a reasonable doubt. Many Section 287 cases turn on this point.⁹
Advice of counsel. A defendant who consulted an attorney before submitting the claim, disclosed all relevant facts, received specific guidance that the conduct was lawful, and actually relied on that guidance can argue criminal intent was absent. Raising the defense waives attorney-client privilege on the subject, opening emails, memos, and lawyer testimony to prosecutors. A defendant who was selective in what they told the lawyer will see the defense collapse.
No falsity. If the claim was accurate, or the alleged inaccuracy involved a reasonable reading of ambiguous billing rules or contract terms, there is no false claim. Federal reimbursement and contracting rules are complex, and a good-faith dispute over billing codes or eligibility is not fraud.

Disagreeing with the underlying law, or believing the government owed you the money anyway, is not a defense. Courts hold consistently that everyone must obey the law whether they agree with it or not.⁹

How Section 287 Compares to Section 1001

Section 287 is sometimes confused with 18 U.S.C. 1001, the general false statements statute. Section 287 targets false claims for payment or approval directed at the federal government. Section 1001 is broader, covering any materially false statement, concealment, or fraudulent document in a matter within federal jurisdiction, whether money is involved or not.¹⁰ Lying to a federal agent during an interview, for instance, violates Section 1001 even though nothing was billed. Both carry a five-year maximum. Prosecutors often charge both statutes on the same conduct because a false claim usually involves false statements. Materiality is explicit in Section 1001 but not in Section 287, so a Section 287 charge can be easier for the government when the falsity is obvious but its materiality would be contested.

When Criminal and Civil Cases Run Together

False claims investigations often move on two tracks at once. A defendant can face a criminal prosecution under Section 287 while simultaneously defending a False Claims Act civil suit brought by the government or a qui tam whistleblower. The two proceedings use different burdens of proof, beyond a reasonable doubt for criminal and preponderance of the evidence for civil, which means an acquittal in the criminal case does not end civil liability.

The parallel structure creates real strategic pressure. A civil deposition answer can surface in the criminal case, and a criminal plea can establish facts in the civil suit. Defense attorneys handling federal fraud matters coordinate across both tracks, and in some cases an early civil settlement reduces overall exposure. Counsel can also evaluate whether compliance failures contributed to the conduct and recommend corrections that may affect both the sentence and the civil outcome.

1
Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 U.S. Code 287 – False, Fictitious or Fraudulent Claims
2
Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center. United States v. Neifert-White Co., 390 U.S. 228 (1968)
3
Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 U.S. Code 3571 – Sentence of Fine
4
United States Sentencing Commission. 2001 Federal Sentencing Guideline Manual 2B1.1
5
Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 U.S. Code 3663A – Mandatory Restitution to Victims of Certain Crimes
6
Acquisition.GOV. FAR 9.406-2 Causes for Debarment
7
Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 31 U.S. Code 3729 – False Claims
8
Federal Register. Civil Monetary Penalties Inflation Adjustments for 2025
9
Ninth Circuit District & Bankruptcy Courts. Willfully – Defined
10
Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 U.S. Code 1001 – Statements or Entries Generally