PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 81 · Passed House without amendment · Aug 1, 2012
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Stopping Tax Offenders and Prosecuting Identity Theft Act of 2012 or the STOP Identity Theft Act of 2012 - Calls for the Attorney General to: (1) make use of all existing resources of the Department of Justice (DOJ), including task forces, to bring more perpetrators of tax return identity theft to justice; and (2) take into account the need to concentrate efforts in areas of the country where the crime is most frequently reported, to coordinate with state and local authorities to prosecute and prevent such crime, and to protect vulnerable groups from becoming victims or otherwise being used in the offense.
Amends the federal criminal code to: (1) define "means of identification" to mean any name or number used to identify a specific person (currently, any specific individual); and (2) make tax fraud a predicate offense for aggravated identity theft.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Attorney General to include in the first annual DOJ performance report made more than nine months after the date of this Act's enactment information as to progress in implementing this Act regarding: (1) information readily available to DOJ about trends in the incidence of tax return identity theft, (2) the effectiveness of statutory tools in aiding DOJ in prosecuting it, (3) recommendations on additional statutory tools that would aid in removing barriers to effective prosecution, and (4) the status of implementing DOJ's March 2010 audit report on DOJ efforts to combat identity theft.
People & committees
Rep. Wasserman Schultz, Debbie [D-FL-20] · D–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR 7/31/2012 H5510-5511)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR 7/31/2012 H5510-5511)
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H5619)
At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Mr. Smith (TX) objected to the vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. Further proceedings on the motion were postponed. The point of no quorum was withdrawn.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 4362.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5510-5514)
Mr. Smith (TX) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 460.
Reported by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 112-639.
Reported by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 112-639.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security Discharged.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.4362 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.4362 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.4362 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.4362 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.