It has been held that a Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation questionnaire signed by a bank officer is a report of the bank within the scope of the false entry statute, and a false answer thereto would constitute a false entry. See Crenshaw v. United States, 116 F.2d 737 (6th Cir. 1940), cert. denied, 312 U.S. 703 (1941), reh'g granted and order vacated, 314 U.S. 702 (1941). The statute is violated if a bank officer causes minutes of a fictitious meeting to be entered into the bank's records. See United States v. Steffen, 641 F.2d 591 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 452 U.S. 943 (1981). Also, minute books of an ostensible committee of the board of directors are books as contemplated by the statute, and a false entry indicating that loans had been approved is punishable. See Lewis v. United States, 22 F.2d 760 (8th Cir. 1927). Likewise it is a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1005 to document a loan for one party when in f act the proceeds of the loan went to another party. See United States v. Luke, 701 F.2d 1104, 1108 (4th Cir. 1983). see generally FIF Manual at 170.
Acts that fall within the prohibitions of 18 U.S.C. § 1001 and 18 U.S.C. § 1005 should be charged under the latter, more specific, statute. United States v. Beer, 518 F.2d 168 (5th Cir. 1975).
[cited in JM 9-40.000]