You are here

Justice News

Department of Justice
U.S. Attorney’s Office
Central District of Illinois

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Thursday, November 10, 2016

Former U.S. Representative Aaron Schock Indicted for Fraud, Theft of Government Funds, False Statements and Filing False Income Tax Returns

SPRINGFIELD, Ill. – A federal grand jury returned an indictment today charging former U.S. Representative Aaron Schock with allegedly defrauding the federal government and his campaign committees and covering it up with false and fraudulent statements, claims and invoices.

“I appreciate the time and attention that the grand juries have given this matter, to thoroughly review the facts and the evidence and to reach this decision,” said U.S. Attorney Jim Lewis, Central District of Illinois. “These charges allege that Mr. Schock deliberately and repeatedly violated federal law, to his personal and financial advantage. Mr. Schock held public office at the time of the alleged offenses, but public office does not exempt him or anyone else from accountability for alleged intentional misuse of public funds and campaign funds.”

According to allegations in the 24-count indictment, from as early as 2008, and continuing to at least October 2015, Schock, 35, of Peoria, engaged in a scheme to defraud the government, his campaign committees, and others for his direct personal benefit and for the benefit of others. Schock allegedly repeatedly submitted and caused false and fraudulent claims, invoices, and vouchers to be submitted to the U.S. House of Representatives (House) for payment from his Member’s Representational Allowance and from funds of his campaign committees: Schock for Congress (SFC); Schock Victory Committee (SVC); and GOP Generation Y Fund (Gen Y).

Schock allegedly generated income to himself, which resulted in a loss of more than $100,000 to the government, Schock’s campaign committees, and others. In addition, Schock is charged with filing false federal income tax returns for tax years 2010 through 2015, for failure to report additional income he received.

Several of the alleged instances of fraud from the indictment are summarized below:

  • From as early as 2008 and continuing to about October 2014, Schock received total mileage payments from the House and his campaign committees of approximately $138,663, for official and campaign-related travel. Assuming all of the miles driven on Schock’s vehicles were official and campaign-related, and no personal miles were driven during this time period, Schock allegedly caused the House and his campaign committees to reimburse him for approximately 150,000 miles more than the vehicles were actually driven.
  • In July 2014, Schock caused Schock for Congress to purchase a new 2015 Chevrolet Tahoe for him at a total cost of $73,896. Schock then caused the Tahoe to be titled in his name. To accomplish the purchase, Schock caused SFC to purchase his used 2010 Tahoe from him for $31,621. He then caused SFC to trade in the 2010 Tahoe with a $26,000 used car or trade-in allowance, and wrote a SFC check to the dealership for $73,896, thus causing a loss to SFC. As part of the scheme, and to conceal and cover it up, Schock allegedly caused SFC to file a false report with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) that the entire $73,896 payment was for a transportation expense of SFC rather than the purchase of a vehicle for Schock’s exclusive use. Schock allegedly made no effort to reimburse SFC for his personal use of the 2015 Tahoe.
  • Schock allegedly caused the House to fraudulently reimburse him $29,021 for his September 2014 purchase of camera equipment. The equipment was for his use and the use of a congressional and campaign staff member who was also his personal photographer and videographer. In November 2014, Schock allegedly instructed the staff member to create and submit a false invoice for ‘multimedia services’ to Schock’s congressional office. After various changes to the invoice, it was submitted to the House, which authorized payment of $29,021 to the staff member. The funds were deposited in the staff member’s bank account and were later used by the staff member to make direct payments to Schock’s personal credit card account for the camera equipment purchase.
  • In late 2013, Schock allegedly accused a former staffer of inappropriately accessing a friend’s social media account and falsely advised the former staffer that the FBI and Capitol Police were investigating the matter. As a result of Schock’s accusation and false representation, the former staffer retained a lawyer and incurred legal fees of more than $10,000, which were paid by the former staffer’s father. Schock later acknowledged that his allegation of a law enforcement investigation of the matter was false and after being confronted by the former staffer’s father, agreed to reimburse the former staffer’s father for $7,500 of the legal fees. In February 2014, Schock allegedly wrote a check for $7,500 payable to the former staffer’s father. In April 2014, Schock had his political director issue a check from Gen Y to him in the amount of $7,500, which was falsely reported to the FEC as payment to a Washington D.C. attorney for legal fees incurred by Gen Y. In addition, Schock allegedly caused Gen Y to pay legal expenses that he personally incurred, and to file additional false reports with the FEC that the payment was for Gen Y’s legal fees.
  • In November 2014, Schock hired an Illinois decorator, who in 2010 had decorated Schock’s Peoria apartment and Cannon congressional office, to redecorate and provide furnishings for his Rayburn congressional office at a cost of approximately $40,000, including a $5,000 chandelier. Schock allegedly caused vouchers and claims to be submitted to the House totaling $25,000 to be paid to the decorator. In the submission of the vouchers and claims, Schock allegedly made false representations that the claims were, “for services to assist the member in setting up our district and DC offices” and, “includes using materials from our district and rearranging/designing/structuring the space to best suit the member and staff’s needs.” In addition, Schock caused his three campaign committees to pay a total of approximately $8,263 in additional costs for carpentry, paint, and travel and lodging expenses for the decorator/designer, who provided no product or service to these committees.

A summons will be issued to Schock by the U.S. Clerk of the Court for a date when Schock is to appear in federal court in Springfield for initial appearance and arraignment.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Timothy A. Bass and First Assistant U.S. Attorney Patrick D. Hansen are prosecuting the case on behalf of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of Illinois. The charges are being investigated by the FBI, Springfield Division; IRS Criminal Investigations; U.S. Postal Inspection Service, Chicago Division; FDIC Office of Inspector General; and the Illinois State Police. These agencies participate in the Central District of Illinois’ U.S. Attorney’s Office’s Public Corruption Task Force.

U.S. Attorney Lewis thanked the investigative agencies and commended their respective agents who he said, “have worked long, hard and well to present this matter fairly.”

Members of the public are reminded that an indictment is merely an accusation; the defendant is presumed innocent unless proven guilty. 

If convicted, the maximum statutory penalty for each offense charged is prescribed by Congress and is provided here for informational purposes, as sentencing is determined by the court based on the advisory Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors. The table below lists the counts charged in the indictment and the maximum statutory penalty for each respective charge.

 

Number of Counts

Charge

Maximum Statutory Penalty

Nine

Wire Fraud

20 years in prison

Five

Falsification of Federal Election Commission Filings

20 years in prison

One

Mail Fraud

20 years in prison

One

Theft of Government Funds

10 years in prison

Two

False Statements

5 years in prison

Six

Filing False Federal Income Tax Returns

3 years in prison

 

 

Topic: 
Public Corruption
Tax
Updated November 10, 2016