Illinois Compiled Statutes
305 ILCS 5/8A-3 (2026)
Vendor Fraud and Kickbacks
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IL-ILGAilga.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
(305 ILCS 5/8A-3)
(from Ch. 23, par. 8A-3)
Sec. 8A-3.
Vendor Fraud and Kickbacks.
(a) Any person, firm, corporation,
association, agency, institution or other legal entity that willfully, by
means of a false statement or representation, or by concealment of any material
fact or by other fraudulent scheme or device on behalf of himself or others,
obtains or attempts to obtain benefits or payments under this Code to which
he or it is not entitled, or in a greater amount than that to which he or
it is entitled, is guilty of a violation of this Article and shall be punished
as provided in Section 8A-6.
(b) A person shall be guilty of a violation of this Article and shall
be punished as provided in Section 8A-6 if he solicits or receives any
remuneration, including any kickback,
bribe, or rebate, directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash or in kind:
(1) in return for referring an individual to a person for the
furnishing or arranging for the furnishing of any item or service for which
payment may be made in whole or in part under this Code; or
(2) in return for purchasing, leasing, ordering, or arranging for or
recommending purchasing, leasing, or ordering any good, facility, service
or item for which payment may be made in whole or in part under this Code.
(c) A person shall be guilty of a violation of this Article and shall
be punished as provided in Section 8A-6 if he offers or pays any
remuneration, including any kickback,
bribe, or rebate, directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash or
in kind to any person to induce such person:
(1) to refer an individual to a person for the furnishing or arranging
for the furnishing of any item or service for which payment may be made in
whole or in part under this Code; or
(2) to purchase, lease, order, or arrange for or recommend purchasing,
leasing, or ordering any good, facility, service, or item for which payment
may be made in whole or in part under this Code.
(d) Subsections (b) and (c) shall not apply to:
(1) a discount or other reduction in price obtained by a provider of
services or other entity under this Code if the reduction in price is
properly disclosed and appropriately reflected in the costs claimed or
charges made by the provider or entity under this Code;
(2) any amount paid by an employer to an employee who has a bona fide
employment relationship with such employer for employment in the provision
of covered items or services; or
(3) any amount
paid to or received by a physician for professional
services rendered if a physician, pursuant to a bona fide contract with
a health maintenance organization, as defined by the Health
Maintenance Organization Act, has referred a patient to another physician
for rendering professional services not covered by the health maintenance
organization.
(Source: P.A. 85-818.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2004–2025 · leading case: Randy Cohen v. Am. Sec. Ins., C, 735 F.3d 601 (7th Cir. 2013).
Randy Cohen v. Am. Sec. Ins., C, 735 F.3d 601 (7th Cir. 2013). “See 225 ILCS 85/23 (West 2002) (making, it unlawful for a pharmacist or pharmacy to offer a kickback to hospitals, doctors, and anyone else authorized to prescribe drugs for steering business to that pharmacist or pharmacy); 305 ILCS 5/8A-3 (West 2002) (criminalizing any…”
People v. Gutman, 2011 IL 110338 (Ill. 2011). “OPINION ¶1 Following a bench trial in the circuit court of Cook County, defendant, Irit Gutman, was convicted of theft (720 ILCS 5/16-1 (West 2000)), vendor fraud (305 ILCS 5/8A-3 (West 2000)), and money laundering (720 ILCS 5/29B-1 (West 2000)).”
People v. Gutman, 959 N.E.2d 621 (Ill. 2011). “¶ 1 Following a bench trial in the circuit court of Cook County, defendant, Irit Gutman, was convicted of theft (720 ILCS 5/16-1 (West 2000)), vendor fraud (305 ILCS 5/8A-3 (West 2000)), and money laundering (720 ILCS 5/29B-1 (West 2000)).”
People v. Universal Pub. Transp., Inc., 2012 IL App (1st) 073303-B (Ill. App. Ct. 2012). “The court sentenced UPT to one-year conditional discharge and ordered it to pay $2,966,187.38 in restitution and $200,000 in fines.”
People v. Thomas, 2025 IL App (1st) 232035 (Ill. App. Ct. 2025). “However, obtaining payments in excess of what one is entitled to from a government program is a different crime—a violation of section 8A-3 of the Illinois Public Aid Code, under which defendants were separately charged with vendor fraud (see 305 ILCS 5/8A-3 (West 2016)) (making…”
People v. Universal Pub. Transp., Inc. (Ill. App. Ct. 2010). “On appeal, UPT presents the following issues for our review: (1) whether UPT was proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of vendor fraud, money laundering, and theft; (2) whether UPT's convictions must be reversed as legally inconsistent where the trial court acquitted the…”
People v. Gutman (Ill. App. Ct. 2010). “305 ILCS 5/8A-3 (West 2000). Therefore, since the “proceeds” or "profits" Gutman derived from her financial transactions with the State do not have to be proved to establish a violation of the vendor fraud statute, this court can use UPT’s receipts of $2.”
Johnson v. Matrix Fin. Servs. Corp. (Ill. App. Ct. 2004). “See 225 ILCS 85/23 (West 2002) (making it unlawful for a pharmacist or pharmacy to offer a kickback to hospitals, doctors, and anyone else authorized to prescribe drugs for steering business to that pharmacist or pharmacy); 305 ILCS 5/8A-3 (West 2002) (criminalizing any kickback…”
— 305 ILCS 5/8A-3(a) — 2 cases
People v. Thomas, 2025 IL App (1st) 232035 (Ill. App. Ct. 2025). “However, obtaining payments in excess of what one is entitled to from a government program is a different crime—a violation of section 8A-3 of the Illinois Public Aid Code, under which defendants were separately charged with vendor fraud (see 305 ILCS 5/8A-3 (West 2016)) (making…”
People v. Gutman (Ill. App. Ct. 2010). “305 ILCS 5/8A-3 (West 2000). Therefore, since the “proceeds” or "profits" Gutman derived from her financial transactions with the State do not have to be proved to establish a violation of the vendor fraud statute, this court can use UPT’s receipts of $2.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.
|