SB 874 amends Florida’s forgery statute to expressly include gift certificates within the list of items that can be the subject of forgery. Under the bill, a person who falsely makes, alters, forges, or counterfeits a gift certificate with the intent to injure or defraud another person would commit a third-degree felony. The bill ties gift certificates to the existing forgery framework in section 831.01, Florida Statutes, rather than creating a separate standalone offense.
The measure defines the conduct by reference to gift certificates as defined in section 501.95, and it would take effect on October 1, 2025. In practical terms, the bill expands criminal liability to cover fraudulent manipulation of gift certificates in the same way Florida already treats forgery of other financial or transactional instruments such as checks, notes, receipts, and transportation tickets.
Impact
The bill would amend section 831.01, Florida Statutes, to add gift certificates to the category of documents and instruments protected by Florida’s forgery law. This would give prosecutors a clearer statutory basis to charge forgery involving gift certificates as a third-degree felony, punishable under Florida’s general felony sentencing provisions. The affected parties include individuals accused of gift certificate fraud, retailers and consumers who use gift certificates, and law enforcement and prosecutors responsible for enforcing forgery laws.
Sentiment
No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate or opposition in the available materials. Based on the bill text alone, the proposal appears straightforward and enforcement-oriented, with an apparent policy goal of closing a gap in the forgery statute. The absence of recorded controversy suggests the bill may be relatively noncontroversial, though that cannot be confirmed from the available record.
Contention
The main potential point of contention is whether gift certificates should be treated the same as the traditional instruments already listed in the forgery statute, since the bill expands criminal exposure to a broader consumer transaction item. Another possible issue is whether existing fraud, theft, or forgery provisions already cover the conduct sufficiently, making the amendment unnecessary. No specific objections, supporters, or competing viewpoints are documented in the provided committee or vote history.