The NSW Offence of Possess Equipment to Produce Identification Information

New South Wales Police Financial Crimes Squad detectives charged two men with four counts each of possess equipment to produce identification information on Tuesday, 13 October 2026, following Strike Force Dawport being established in April 2026, to investigate a rise in card skimming and fraud offences being committed across the Sydney metropolitan area.

This uptick had involved card skimming devices being installed on ATMs to enable the capture of debit and credit card details of customers using the machines. The details were then used to manufacture counterfeit cards, which then permitted the crooks to simply access related bank accounts and make cash withdrawals in a regular manner using automatic teller machines.

Strike Force Dawport detectives, with the assistance of Raptor Squad officers, executed a warrant on Dharug land at a premises in the Sydney northern suburb of Macquarie Park. Officers seized skimming devices, installation equipment and more than $40,000 in cash. Two men, aged 56 and 64, were arrested and taken to Gladesville police station for charging.

Along with possess equipment to produce ID information, the men were charged with two counts of attempt unauthorised computer function with intention to commit a serious indictable offence. The 64-year-old was also charged with one count of knowingly deal with the proceeds of crime. And both men were refused bail, prior to appearing in Burwood Local Court the following day.

Possessing equipment to produce fake IDs

The two middle aged men are both facing four counts of possessing equipment to produce identification information under section 192L of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW). A person found guilty of this offence is liable to up to 3 years imprisonment.

In order for the prosecution to find these men guilty of this offence, it must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that they possessed any type of equipment, material or any other thing capable of making a document or other thing containing identification information, and that they intended to use this information to commit or facilitate an indictable offence.

The definition of identification information is set out in section 192I of the Crimes Act, and it refers to information about a person, who can be alive or deceased, real or fictious, as well as being an individual or a body corporate. Further, this information must be capable of being used, either by itself or in conjunction with other information, to identify or to purportedly identify that person.

The section then provides a list of what such information can comprise, which includes a name or address, a date or place of birth, marital status, a relative’s identity or similar information, a driver licence or driver licence number, a passport or passport number, biometric data, a voice print, or a credit or debit card, the card’s number or the data stored or encrypted on the card.

NSW legislation does not provide a definition as to equipment that might be captured under section 192L. But the description of what can apply, “any equipment, material or other thing” capable of being used to make “identification documents or things” is so broad as to capture not only skimming equipment, but printing, scanning and other manual or electronic equipment.

Section 192M of the Crimes Act also sets out that in relation to this crime, a person “intends to commit an indictable offence even if committing the offence concerned is impossible or the offence concerned is to be committed at a later time”. And further, this section makes certain that the mere attempt to possess equipment to produce identification information is not a crime in itself.

Fighting the charge

Common ways to defeat the charge include putting the prosecution to proof that the defendant was actually in possession of the identification information and/or intended to in fact intended to facilitate an indictable offence.

In the case at hand, a defendant could indeed maintain the position they were unaware of any equipment being present on the premises.

Further arguments that can be raised in defence against a section 192L charge are that the equipment that has been seized by NSW police was incapable of producing identification information, as well as that the accused lacked any intent to possess such equipment to commit fraud crimes.

In addition to this, there are a number of legal defences available to the charge, including duress and mental illness.

In the event a legal defence is raised by the evidence, the prosecution must then prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defence does not apply to the facts in the case.

A defendant is entitled to an acquittal if the prosecution is unable to do this.

Fraud, identity and forgery offences

The section 192L offence of possess equipment to produce identification information was inserted into the Crimes Act, as part of the Crimes Amendment (Fraud, Identity and Forgery Offences) Bill 2009. This bill inserted part 4AA through to part 4AE into the Crimes Act to respond to fraud, identity offences, money laundering, criminal destruction and damage and transport service offences.

Then NSW Labor attorney general John Hatzistergos explained in his November 2009 second reading speech on the bill that the new laws updated fraud, identity and forgery crimes in response to three reports produced by the multijurisdictional Model Criminal Law Officers Committee of the Standing Committee of Attorneys General on Theft and Fraud, Credit Card Skimming and Identity Crime.

The section 192L offence is contained in part 4AB of the Crimes Act. It sits alongside other offences, such as the section 192J offence of dealing with identification information, which carries up to 10 years prison time, as well as the section 192K offence of possessing identification information, which carries 7 years inside.

“One example of the old offences we are repealing is forging or uttering any East India bond, an offence from the eighteenth century when the East India Company issued bonds to finance its activity,” explained Hatzistergos, who today holds the position of chief commissioner of the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC).

“Not surprisingly, no person has been convicted under this section for many years,” the then NSW chief lawmaker added. “The bill removes this and many other out-of-date provisions and replaces them with simple and modern offences that can keep pace with modern criminal conduct.”

Image of ATM from Shutterstock

Image ID 2582841781