Bet Michael Cohen is wishing he known of this “if you paid the banks back and they didn’t come after you it isn’t fraud” legal exemption. Might have saved him some time in jail for paying Stormy with the home improvement loan he got out.
I mean it's a ridiculous position to hold that none of this stuff matters, and it falls down completely if we compare it to a more common form of loan that people take out - the mortgage. We'll waive things like fees for this as a trivial amount and to make the sums less complicated (and assume the lenders are less involved of the purpose of the loan than real-life ones are).
Let's say I want a mortgage to buy a house. The house is worth 1.1m and I have 100k in the bank so need to cover a flat million . My prospective lender offers me a high interest rate on this as my LTV rate is so low.
Now I approach a different lender and tell them the house I want is worth 10m and I have 9m deposit in the bank. The rate I get is much lower on my 1m loan as my LTV is 90%.
I take the money and eventually pay back the lender as agreed, who is never aware they were exposed to an increased risk from the loan due to my falsely inflated asset reporting (and if they repossessed the collateral it would be worth less than they expected too).
Is that just good business acumen, or is it fraud?