18 U.S.C. § 666

Theft or bribery concerning programs receiving Federal funds

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 18 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Whoever, if the circumstance described in subsection (b) of this section exists—(1) being an agent of an organization, or of a State, local, or Indian tribal government, or any agency thereof—(A) embezzles, steals, obtains by fraud, or otherwise without authority knowingly converts to the use of any person other than the rightful owner or intentionally misapplies, property that—(i) is valued at $5,000 or more, and(ii) is owned by, or is under the care, custody, or control of such organization, government, or agency; or(B) corruptly solicits or demands for the benefit of any person, or accepts or agrees to accept, anything of value from any person, intending to be influenced or rewarded in connection with any business, transaction, or series of transactions of such organization, government, or agency involving any thing of value of $5,000 or more; or(2) corruptly gives, offers, or agrees to give anything of value to any person, with intent to influence or reward an agent of an organization or of a State, local or Indian tribal government, or any agency thereof, in connection with any business, transaction, or series of transactions of such organization, government, or agency involving anything of value of $5,000 or more;shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.(b) The circumstance referred to in subsection (a) of this section is that the organization, government, or agency receives, in any one year period, benefits in excess of $10,000 under a Federal program involving a grant, contract, subsidy, loan, guarantee, insurance, or other form of Federal assistance.(c) This section does not apply to bona fide salary, wages, fees, or other compensation paid, or expenses paid or reimbursed, in the usual course of business.(d) As used in this section—(1) the term “agent” means a person authorized to act on behalf of another person or a government and, in the case of an organization or government, includes a servant or employee, and a partner, director, officer, manager, and representative;(2) the term “government agency” means a subdivision of the executive, legislative, judicial, or other branch of government, including a department, independent establishment, commission, administration, authority, board, and bureau, and a corporation or other legal entity established, and subject to control, by a government or governments for the execution of a governmental or intergovernmental program;(3) the term “local” means of or pertaining to a political subdivision within a State;(4) the term “State” includes a State of the United States, the District of Columbia, and any commonwealth, territory, or possession of the United States; and(5) the term “in any one-year period” means a continuous period that commences no earlier than twelve months before the commission of the offense or that ends no later than twelve months after the commission of the offense. Such period may include time both before and after the commission of the offense.(Added Pub. L. 98–473, title II, § 1104(a), Oct. 12, 1984, 98 Stat. 2143; amended Pub. L. 99–646, § 59(a), Nov. 10, 1986, 100 Stat. 3612; Pub. L. 101–647, title XII, §§ 1205(d), 1209, Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4831, 4832; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330003(c), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2140.)Editorial NotesAmendments

1994—Subsec. (d)(3) to (5). Pub. L. 103–322 struck out “and” at end of par. (3), substituted “; and” for the period at end of par. (4), and redesignated second par. (4) defining “in any one-year period” as (5).

1990—Subsec. (d)(4). Pub. L. 101–647, § 1209, added par. (4) defining “in any one-year period”.

Pub. L. 101–647, § 1205(d), added par. (4) defining “State”.

1986—Pub. L. 99–646, in amending section generally, made specific reference to applicability of section to agent of Indian tribal government or agency thereof, inserted provision that section does not apply to bona fide salary, wages, fees, or other compensation paid, or expenses paid or reimbursed, in usual course of business, struck out definition of term “organization”, and otherwise revised structure of section.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 1,091 cases (158 in the last 5 years), 1986–2026 · leading case: United States v. Martinez-Maldonado, 722 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2013).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

United States v. Martinez-Maldonado, 722 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2013). · cites it 35× “This case presents multiple issues of substantial importance, including a question of first impression in this circuit on the interpretation of the federal program bribery statute, 18 U.S.C. § 666 . Defendants are a Puerto Rico legislator and a Commonwealth businessman who were…”

United States v. Ng Lap Seng, 934 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2019). · cites it 32× “General 3 Specifically, Lorenzo pleaded guilty to (1) conspiratorial and substantive bribery in violation of the FCPA; (2) receiving and paying bribes and gratuities in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 666 (a)(1)(B), (a)(2); and (3) money laundering, tax fraud, and failure to file…”

United States v. Albert Louis Lipscomb, Cross-Appellee, 299 F.3d 303 (5th Cir. 2002). · cites it 19× “WIENER, Circuit Judge: Albert Lipscomb, a former member of the Dallas City Council, appeals his convictions for conspiracy and program bribery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 666 (“§ 666”). Whether he raises a constitutional challenge to his convictions, and, if so, how we should…”

United States v. Robert Suarez, 263 F.3d 468 (6th Cir. 2001). · cites it 22× “Robert Suarez, a former police officer, was convicted by a jury of two violations of 18 U.S.C. § 666 (a)(1)(A) for converting police evidence and victim restitution money *472 to his own benefit.”

United States v. Whitfield, 590 F.3d 325 (5th Cir. 2009). · cites it 15× “§§ 1341 , 1343, 1346, *336 and 2; and federal program bribery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 666 . Additionally, Minor was convicted of racketeering in violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), 18 U.”

United States v. Brigido Marmolejo, Jr. & Mario Salinas, 89 F.3d 1185 (5th Cir. 1996). · cites it 30× “§ 1962 (d), two counts of bribery in relation to a program receiving more than $10,000 in federal funds, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 666 (a)(1)(B) and 18 U.S.C. § 2 , aiding and abetting money laundering, in violation of 18 U.”

United States v. Raymond Shoemaker, 746 F.3d 614 (5th Cir. 2014). · cites it 23× “§ 371 : Count One charged conspiracy to violate 18 U.S.C. § 666 by bribing *619 Chandler and Shoemaker, and Count Four charged conspiracy to violate 42 U.”

United States v. McNair, 605 F.3d 1152 (11th Cir. 2010). · cites it 11× “Counts 2-31, 33-49, 52-74, 76-77, and 79-89 charged one or more defendants with substantive bribery offenses (or aiding and abetting bribery) under 18 U.S.C. § 666 . For the most part, these substantive bribery offenses were the overt acts charged in the conspiracy counts.”

United States v. Schmitz, 634 F.3d 1247 (11th Cir. 2011). · cites it 14× “§ 1341 , and four counts of theft concerning a program receiving federal funds, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 666 (a)(1)(A). The theory of prosecution underlying all the charges was that Schmitz abused her position as state legislator to obtain employment with the Community…”

United States v. Sunia, 643 F. Supp. 2d 51 (D.D.C. 2009). · cites it 13× “Counts Two and Three charge both defendants with these offenses directly pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 666 (a)(1)(A) and 18 U.S.C. § 666 (a)(2).”

United States v. Bahel, 662 F.3d 610 (2d Cir. 2011). · cites it 15× “§§ 1341 , 1343, 1346; one count of corrupt receipt of things of value with intent to be rewarded with respect to official business in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 666 ; and one count of conspiracy in violation of 18 U.”

United States v. Ganim, 510 F.3d 134 (2d Cir. 2007). · cites it 13× “§§ 1341 & 1346; bribery involving programs receiving federal funds in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 666 (a)(1)(B); conspiracy to commit bribery in violation of 18 U.”

Show all 1,091 citing cases →

— 18 U.S.C. § 666(a)(1) — 1 case

United States v. Daniel Van Pelt, 448 F. App'x 301 (3rd Cir. 2011).

— 18 U.S.C. § 666(a)(1)(A) — 7 cases

United States v. Tonya Robinson (7th Cir. 2025).

United States v. Albert Smith (7th Cir. 2025).

United States v. Tonya Robinson (7th Cir. 2026).

United States v. Albert Smith (7th Cir. 2026).

— 18 U.S.C. § 666(a)(1)(B) — 3 cases

United States v. Wayne Bryant, 655 F.3d 232 (3rd Cir. 2011).

United States v. Dennis Elwell, 515 F. App'x 155 (3rd Cir. 2013).

United States v. Jones, 676 F. Supp. 2d 500 (W.D. Tex. 2009).

— 18 U.S.C. § 666(a)(1)(b) — 1 case

State Ex Rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Morgan, 2016 OK 85 (Okla. 2016).

— 18 U.S.C. § 666(a)(2) — 1 case

United States v. Theodore Suhl, 885 F.3d 1106 (8th Cir. 2018).

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.