A device attached to an ATM can do more than interfere with a customer’s transaction. If it is designed to collect payment-card information without authorization, its use may lead to criminal charges under Tennessee law.
The availability of 3D-printing technology raises a particular legal question: Can someone face fraud or identity theft charges for making or possessing an ATM skimmer, even if no money was stolen?
Yes. Tennessee law permits criminal charges for certain conduct involving ATM skimmers, including unlawfully capturing payment-card information, possessing qualifying scanning equipment with criminal intent, and obtaining another person’s identifying information for an unlawful purpose. However, manufacturing a plastic component with a 3D printer does not automatically establish a criminal offense.
The applicable charge depends on what the person allegedly did, the purpose of the equipment, and whether prosecutors can prove the elements required by the relevant statute.
Is Using an ATM Skimmer Illegal in Tennessee?
Tennessee law expressly prohibits certain uses of equipment designed to collect payment-card information without authorization.
In 2025, lawmakers expanded Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-14-113, known as the Organized Retail Crime Prevention Act, to address payment-card skimming devices.
Under § 39-14-113(c)(9), a person commits an offense by knowingly using a device or apparatus to unlawfully capture, record, or transmit information stored on the magnetic strip or embedded chip of a credit card, debit card, or other payment device with the intent to defraud another person.
The statute expressly covers devices that can be attached to:
- Automated teller machines (ATMs)
- Point-of-sale terminals
- Fuel pumps
- Other payment-processing equipment
The amendment became effective July 1, 2025, under Public Chapter 89.
Before this amendment, other Tennessee laws already addressed conduct involving unauthorized card readers, identifying information, and payment-card fraud. The 2025 legislation expressly added certain skimming activity to the state’s organized retail crime statute.
For example, if someone knowingly installs and uses an unauthorized card-reading device on an ATM to capture customers’ payment information with the intent to defraud them, that conduct may satisfy § 39-14-113(c)(9).
However, a criminal conviction requires proof of the statutory elements. The discovery of an unfamiliar device does not establish who installed it, who operated it, or whether a particular person acted with fraudulent intent.
The amendment is documented in the Tennessee General Assembly’s Public Chapter 89 legislative record.
Does It Matter if an ATM Skimmer Was Made With a 3D Printer?
The use of a 3D printer does not independently establish criminal liability under Tennessee’s ATM-skimming provision.
A 3D printer can manufacture plastic housings, brackets, replacement components, and equipment prototypes. The technology itself has lawful uses.
However, a 3D-printed component can become relevant to a criminal investigation when authorities believe it was designed or adapted to conceal equipment used to collect payment-card information.
Consider two different situations.
A person creates a plastic card-reader housing for an authorized equipment prototype. The component is not used to capture payment information without permission, and there is no intent to commit a crime.
In a different situation, investigators allege that someone assembled a device containing payment-card reading electronics and knowingly used it on an ATM to collect card information with fraudulent intent.
Both situations involve manufactured components, but the legal circumstances are different.
Under Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-14-113(c)(9), the important questions concern the prohibited use of the device and the required intent to defraud.
Other state and federal statutes also address possession or production of certain equipment under specified circumstances.
Therefore, while possessing a 3D printer or manufacturing an ordinary plastic component does not automatically establish an ATM-skimming offense, the intended or actual use of equipment can become relevant under the applicable law.
Can Someone Be Charged for Possessing an ATM Skimmer Without Using It?
Yes. Tennessee law separately addresses possession of certain scanning devices and reencoders.
Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-14-150(k) creates offenses involving equipment that can read, store, or transfer information encoded on payment cards and certain identification documents.
The statute distinguishes between two types of conduct.
Using a scanning device or reencoder without permission
Under § 39-14-150(k)(2)(A), it is an offense to use a scanning device or reencoder without the permission of the holder of the card or license from which information is being scanned or reencoded, with intent to commit, aid, or abet a criminal offense.
The law defines a scanning device as equipment used to access, read, scan, obtain, memorize, or store information encoded on a payment card or qualifying identification document.
A reencoder transfers encoded information from one payment card or qualifying identification document to another card or electronic medium capable of allowing an authorized transaction.
Possessing equipment with criminal intent
Section 39-14-150(k)(2)(B) separately prohibits possessing equipment, software, materials, or other qualifying items designed or adapted for use as a scanning device or reencoder when accompanied by intent to commit, aid, or abet a criminal offense.
This means prosecutors do not necessarily have to prove that a person completed a fraudulent ATM withdrawal to pursue a charge under the possession provision.
However, they must establish that the equipment falls within the statute and that the accused possessed it with the required criminal intent.
The distinction matters because legitimate businesses and technology professionals may possess equipment capable of reading payment-card information.
Possession alone, without the additional statutory requirements, does not establish this offense.
A violation of § 39-14-150(k) is a Class A misdemeanor.
When Can ATM Skimming Become Identity Theft?
ATM skimming and identity theft are separate offenses, although the same investigation may involve allegations relating to both.
Under Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-14-150(b), identity theft involves knowingly obtaining, possessing, buying, or using another person’s personal identifying information with intent to commit an unlawful act and under the consent or lawful-authority conditions specified by the statute.
Personal identifying information is not limited to names and Social Security numbers.
Depending on the circumstances, it can include electronic identification numbers, access devices, and financial information capable of identifying an individual or enabling access to services.
For example, investigators may recover payment-card information associated with individuals who did not authorize the accused person to obtain or possess that information.
If prosecutors can prove that the accused knowingly possessed qualifying identifying information with the required unlawful intent and without consent or lawful authority, identity theft charges may be supported.
However, finding payment-card records on a device does not automatically establish that a particular person committed identity theft.
The prosecution must prove the accused person’s connection to the information and the required statutory elements.
Identity theft under § 39-14-150(b) is classified as a Class D felony.
For a broader explanation of the offense and potential defenses, see Davis & Hoss’s information about identity theft charges in Tennessee.
What if Someone Possesses Multiple People’s Stolen Card Information?
Tennessee law contains additional provisions that can become relevant when an investigation involves numerous payment-card records.
Two provisions are particularly important.
Possession of 10 or more fraudulently obtained access devices
Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-14-113(c)(10) addresses knowingly possessing, controlling, or having custody of 10 or more fraudulently obtained access devices, including qualifying gift cards, with intent to defraud another person.
For this provision, an access device may include an account number, card, code, personal identification number, or another qualifying means of account access.
The statute is not limited to physical cards.
This distinction matters because investigators may examine electronically stored payment information as well as recovered plastic cards.
The statutory threshold concerns 10 or more qualifying access devices, not 10 physical ATM skimmers.
Prosecutors must also prove that the devices were fraudulently obtained and that the accused possessed, controlled, or had custody of them with the required fraudulent intent.
Identity-theft trafficking involving five or more individuals
Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-14-150(c) addresses identity-theft trafficking.
The offense involves knowingly transferring or possessing another person’s identifying information for transfer, together with the statute’s requirements concerning intended or reasonably foreseeable unlawful use, consent, and lawful authority.
The statute is not limited to situations in which prosecutors can prove that the accused actually knew another person would use the information unlawfully. It also addresses circumstances in which the accused should have known of that unlawful use.
Under § 39-14-150(d), a factfinder may infer intent to transfer identifying information when the accused simultaneously possesses identifying information belonging to five or more different individuals.
Individuals who consented to the possession of their information are excluded when determining whether this inference is available.
The five-person provision does not automatically establish guilt. It permits an inference concerning intent to transfer information, and the remaining elements of the offense must still be established.
Identity-theft trafficking is classified as a Class C felony.
Can Using Stolen ATM Card Information Lead to Credit Card Fraud Charges?
Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-14-118 separately addresses illegal possession and fraudulent use of credit or debit cards.
Importantly, the statute also applies to information obtained from those cards.
Under subsection (a), illegal possession involves knowingly taking, exercising control over, or otherwise using a credit or debit card, or information from the card, while knowing the owner or issuer has not consented.
Subsection (b) addresses fraudulent use.
It applies when someone uses or allows the use of a card or its information to obtain property, credit, services, or something else of value while knowing that the card is forged, stolen, canceled, revoked, or otherwise being used without authorization. The statute also addresses expired cards used with fraudulent intent.
Consider an investigation in which someone allegedly collected payment-card information through an unauthorized ATM device.
The alleged collection of the information may raise questions under the ATM-skimming or identity-theft statutes.
If the information was subsequently used to obtain money or purchase goods without authorization, prosecutors may also examine the fraudulent-use provisions of § 39-14-118.
The criminal classification for fraudulent use depends on the statutory circumstances.
Under § 39-14-118(c)(1), fraudulent use is punished according to Tennessee’s theft-grading statute, based on the value of the property, credit, goods, or services obtained.
Subsection (c)(2) separately provides a Class A misdemeanor classification in specified circumstances where nothing of value was actually received or obtained. Its wording expressly references illegal possession or fraudulent use of a credit card.
The exact statutory provision should be examined when an allegation involves debit-card information.
The key distinction is that collecting payment information and using that information to obtain something of value are not the same act.
What Are the Penalties for ATM Skimmer Charges in Tennessee?
Tennessee does not assign one criminal classification to every offense involving an ATM skimmer.
The potential punishment depends on the statute charged, the conduct established, and any applicable sentencing provisions.
| Offense | Tennessee statute | Classification |
|---|---|---|
| Unlawful use or possession of qualifying scanning equipment with criminal intent | § 39-14-150(k) | Class A misdemeanor |
| Identity theft | § 39-14-150(b) | Class D felony |
| Identity-theft trafficking | § 39-14-150(c) | Class C felony |
| Organized retail crime involving payment-card skimming | § 39-14-113(c)(9) | Subject to theft-based grading and applicable statutory provisions |
| Fraudulent use of credit or debit card information | § 39-14-118 | Depends on value obtained and the applicable statutory provision |
Under Tennessee Code Annotated § 40-35-111, the general authorized punishment ranges include:
- Class A misdemeanor: Up to 11 months and 29 days of confinement and a fine of up to $2,500, unless otherwise provided by law.
- Class E felony: One to six years.
- Class D felony: Two to twelve years.
- Class C felony: Three to fifteen years.
These are the general statutory ranges for the offense classifications. They are not predictions of the sentence a particular defendant would receive.
An individual’s applicable sentencing range and punishment depend on the offense, criminal history, and other relevant statutory sentencing provisions.
Tennessee also amended organized retail crime penalties in 2026
Tennessee enacted additional changes to its organized retail crime laws through Public Chapter 1124, effective July 1, 2026.
The 2026 legislation expanded aspects of the organized retail crime statute and introduced a mandatory minimum incarceration provision for specified circumstances involving firearms, ammunition, firearm-related devices, or qualifying anti-theft devices used or possessed during the offense.
The law defines an anti-theft device in connection with equipment used to defeat or interfere with security measures intended to prevent or deter the theft of retail merchandise.
An ATM skimmer should not automatically be classified as an anti-theft device under this provision merely because it is an electronic device used in connection with a crime.
Whether the additional sentencing provision applies depends on the statutory definitions and the conduct established in the particular case.
The 2026 amendment also extended the aggregation period for certain merchandise-theft conduct from 90 to 180 days.
That change should not be confused with the separate statutory elements governing payment-card skimming.
The legislation and its July 1, 2026 effective date are identified in the Tennessee General Assembly’s Public Chapter 1124 legislative record.
Can property be forfeited?
Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-14-113(e) also contains forfeiture provisions addressing interests in property acquired or maintained through violations of the organized retail crime statute.
Whether forfeiture is available depends on the property involved and the applicable legal procedures.
Can Someone Face More Than One Criminal Charge?
An ATM-skimming investigation may involve allegations of several different acts.
For example, prosecutors may examine whether someone possessed scanning equipment, knowingly used that equipment to collect payment information, obtained another person’s identifying information, or used the information in unauthorized transactions.
Each offense has its own statutory requirements.
The fact that several statutes may be relevant does not automatically establish that every charge is supported.
Prosecutors must establish the elements of each offense they pursue.
When multiple offenses arise from related conduct, a criminal defense attorney can examine whether the charges have independently provable elements and whether proposed convictions or punishments comply with applicable constitutional and statutory protections.
This analysis can be particularly important in investigations involving multiple participants, recovered devices, or numerous financial transactions.
A person’s association with another individual does not, by itself, establish criminal responsibility for every act attributed to that individual.
Individuals facing allegations involving financial transactions, payment-card information, or related offenses can learn more about Davis & Hoss’s white collar crime defense services.
What Evidence Matters in an ATM Skimming Investigation?
ATM-skimming investigations can involve both physical equipment and electronically stored information.
The prosecution must connect the relevant evidence to the accused person and the elements of the offense charged.
Several categories of evidence may become important.
Physical devices and equipment
Investigators may recover payment-card readers, electronic components, storage devices, or modified ATM attachments.
The design and capabilities of the equipment may help establish whether it qualifies as a scanning device or another apparatus covered by Tennessee law.
However, the presence of equipment does not independently establish who possessed or used it with criminal intent.
Digital records and stored information
Electronic records may contain payment-card information, device logs, communications, or files relating to equipment design.
Questions can arise concerning who created the records, when they were created, who could access them, and whether they reliably connect the accused to the alleged conduct.
Surveillance footage
Video footage may be used to investigate whether someone approached, installed, removed, or interacted with equipment at an ATM.
The timing, quality, and content of recordings can affect their evidentiary significance.
A person’s presence near an ATM, without further evidence, does not establish all the elements of a skimming offense.
Evidence of knowledge and intent
Knowledge and criminal intent are essential elements of several statutes discussed in this article.
Communications, financial records, device activity, and other surrounding circumstances may become relevant to whether prosecutors can establish those elements.
Defense counsel can review the evidence, assess whether the accused person can be reliably connected to the alleged conduct, and examine whether searches or seizures complied with constitutional requirements.
Can ATM Skimming Lead to Federal Criminal Charges?
Yes. Some conduct involving unauthorized payment-card devices may also fall under federal criminal law.
One relevant statute is 18 U.S.C. § 1029, which addresses fraud and related activity involving access devices.
Section 1029(a)(4) specifically addresses knowingly producing, trafficking in, controlling, or possessing device-making equipment with intent to defraud, when the applicable interstate or foreign commerce requirement is satisfied.
Federal law defines device-making equipment in relation to equipment designed or primarily used to make access devices or counterfeit access devices.
Other provisions of § 1029 address different activities involving counterfeit or unauthorized access devices.
The government must prove the statutory elements of the particular federal offense charged.
The involvement of an ATM, a bank, or electronic equipment does not automatically establish every element required for federal prosecution.
The scope of the alleged conduct and the applicable jurisdictional requirements matter.
How a case is handled can depend on the specific charge and local court procedures.
For individuals facing investigations involving electronically stored financial information, understanding potential state and federal exposure is important.
Davis & Hoss provides representation involving federal cybercrime defense and related criminal allegations.
Can an ATM Skimming Case Be Prosecuted in Tennessee if the Accused Was Outside the State?
Tennessee’s identity-theft statute includes jurisdiction and venue provisions that may be relevant when conduct crosses state boundaries.
Under Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-14-150(j), an identity-theft prosecution may involve circumstances in which the accused was outside Tennessee while an alleged victim resided or was found within the state.
The statute also addresses venue in counties where an essential element of the offense occurred, including specified circumstances involving the alleged victim’s location.
This does not mean every out-of-state use of payment-card information automatically supports a Tennessee prosecution.
The statutory requirements and facts must establish the appropriate jurisdiction and venue.
What Should You Do if You Are Accused of ATM Skimming in Tennessee?
An accusation involving payment-card equipment or electronically stored financial information can raise questions that are difficult to resolve without reviewing the relevant evidence.
A person may be questioned about recovered devices, financial transactions, communications, or associations with other individuals.
If you learn that you are under investigation or have been charged with an offense involving ATM skimming, consider speaking with a criminal defense attorney before answering questions about the allegations.
You have constitutional rights, including protections against compelled self-incrimination and unreasonable searches and seizures.
An attorney can review the allegations, identify the statutes involved, evaluate the available evidence, and advise you about your rights.
Do not destroy, alter, or conceal potentially relevant evidence, including electronic files or devices. An attorney can advise you about lawful preservation and responses to investigative requests.
The distinction between possessing ordinary equipment and engaging in prohibited conduct with criminal intent can be central to the defense.
Frequently Asked Questions About ATM Skimmer Charges in Tennessee
Is possessing an ATM skimmer illegal in Tennessee?
Possession can constitute a criminal offense under § 39-14-150(k) when the equipment meets the statutory requirements and the accused possesses it with intent to commit, aid, or abet a criminal offense. Merely possessing a 3D printer or ordinary payment-card equipment does not independently establish the offense.
Can someone be charged if no money was stolen?
Yes. Certain offenses involving scanning equipment or identifying information do not require a completed fraudulent withdrawal. However, prosecutors must prove the statutory elements of the offense charged, including the relevant knowledge and intent requirements.
Is making an ATM skimmer with a 3D printer a felony?
Using a 3D printer does not automatically create felony liability. The applicable offense depends on the equipment, the person’s conduct, and the required criminal intent. Some relevant Tennessee offenses are misdemeanors, while others are felonies. Federal law may also apply to qualifying device-making equipment under specified circumstances.
Is ATM skimming a misdemeanor or felony in Tennessee?
It depends on the charge. A violation of Tennessee’s scanning-device provision under § 39-14-150(k) is a Class A misdemeanor. Identity theft under § 39-14-150(b) is a Class D felony, while identity-theft trafficking under subsection (c) is a Class C felony. Other conduct may be subject to theft-based classifications and additional statutory provisions.
Facing ATM Skimmer, Fraud, or Identity Theft Charges in Chattanooga?
ATM-skimming allegations can involve questions about electronic evidence, criminal intent, unauthorized access to financial information, and responsibility for recovered equipment.
The fact that an object was manufactured using a 3D printer does not establish that a crime occurred. Prosecutors must prove the elements of the offense charged, and the evidence connecting an accused person to the alleged conduct matters.
Davis & Hoss, PC represents individuals facing state and federal criminal allegations in Chattanooga and the surrounding Tennessee area.
If you are under investigation or have been charged with ATM skimming, identity theft, or payment-card fraud, contact Davis & Hoss to discuss your situation and available legal options.