The federal government’s latest trucking fraud push is moving beyond paperwork problems and into driver qualifications, CDL schools, state licensing systems, and federal investigations. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said in September that removing what he called “fraudsters” from trucking could improve highway safety and make competition fairer for carriers following the rules.
His remarks came shortly after DOT announced a broader enforcement effort involving the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice, and other federal partners. That wording needs an important qualifier.
“Fraudsters” is Duffy’s characterization. A school, driver, or carrier being investigated does not by itself establish criminal wrongdoing. Proposed removal from an FMCSA registry, administrative license action, and a criminal conviction are also very different outcomes.
The immediate focus of this trucking fraud news is narrower than the many scams that affect trucking companies every day. Federal agencies are concentrating heavily on commercial driver licensing and entry-level driver training, including suspected false training records and improperly issued credentials.
What Did Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy Announce?
Duffy’s central argument is that stricter enforcement can serve two goals at once: improve safety and remove unfair competition from participants that do not follow licensing and training requirements. Speaking in a video posted September 10, Duffy argued that compliant, often family-owned trucking companies have had to compete with operators he described as fraudulent. He also connected the enforcement effort with the economic health of the trucking profession.
Those comments were a policy statement, not a new regulation. They reflect a broader DOT strategy already underway. In late August, DOT said it was coordinating with DHS, DOJ and federal law-enforcement partners to investigate suspected fraud and criminal activity connected with the trucking industry. For commercial trucking, the practical significance is that licensing and training oversight is receiving much more federal attention than it did before. That does not mean every CDL holder or training provider caught in a review has violated the law. Different cases can result in corrective action, administrative removal, license cancellation or, when supported by evidence and applicable law, criminal investigation.
What Types of Trucking Fraud Are Federal Agencies Targeting?
The current crackdown is focused heavily on CDL fraud and entry-level driver training. In July, FMCSA said it had identified approximately 75 entry-level driver training schools suspected of fraudulent activity. The agency listed possible conduct including falsifying training records, using improper driver certifications and failing to provide required training to CDL applicants. FMCSA brought DHS Homeland Security Investigations into those investigations. The key word is suspected. Those schools were identified for investigation; the announcement did not establish that every provider had already been convicted of fraud. Federal attention has since expanded. Land Line reported that FMCSA carried out hundreds of investigations involving Entry-Level Driver Training providers and issued notices of proposed removal in numerous cases. The agency also launched additional audits involving CDL testing.
So when discussing fraudulent CDL schools, several types of alleged conduct may be involved:
Certifying training that was not actually completed
Falsifying training records
Using unqualified or unlicensed instructors
Failing to maintain required documentation
Providing training that does not meet federal or state standards
FMCSA’s Entry-Level Driver Training rules require covered applicants to complete training through a provider listed on the Training Provider Registry before taking applicable CDL skills or endorsement tests. That makes accurate training records an important part of the licensing system not simply school paperwork.
How Is the Federal Trucking Fraud Crackdown Being Enforced?
Several agencies play different roles.
FMCSA establishes federal CDL and Entry-Level Driver Training standards and manages the Training Provider Registry. Training providers must satisfy federal requirements for curriculum, instructors, vehicles, facilities and recordkeeping to remain listed.
State driver licensing agencies actually administer CDL programs and issue licenses. FMCSA sets minimum federal standards, but states conduct the licensing process and may impose additional requirements.
DHS Homeland Security Investigations is supporting investigations involving suspected CDL-school fraud. DOT said the partnership is intended to expand investigative capacity when cases involve potential fraudulent or illegal activity.
The Department of Justice can become involved where suspected conduct develops into a federal criminal matter. DOT’s broader August enforcement announcement also referenced DOJ’s Joint Task Force Crossroads of America as part of the federal response.
The Training Provider Registry itself shows the scale of administrative activity. As of September 22, 2026, the live registry lists 9,959 training locations removed and 1,225 locations under review. Importantly, those are registry locations, and a removal does not automatically mean the provider was criminally convicted of fraud.
FMCSA’s own rules distinguish a notice of proposed removal from a completed removal. A provider receiving a proposed-removal notice generally has an opportunity to respond or take corrective action. If FMCSA ultimately removes the provider, training conducted after the effective removal date is considered invalid. That distinction matters. “Under review,” “proposed for removal,” “removed from the registry,” “CDL revoked,” and “convicted of fraud” should not be treated as interchangeable phrases.
Why Are CDL Training and Licensing Central to the Issue?
Driving an 80,000-pound commercial vehicle is not the same as driving the family sedan. FMCSA says operating a commercial motor vehicle requires a higher level of knowledge, experience, skill and physical ability than operating a noncommercial vehicle. CDL applicants must satisfy applicable knowledge and skills-testing standards before receiving a commercial driver’s license. Entry-level training adds another layer.
Federal ELDT requirements apply to many first-time Class A and Class B applicants, drivers upgrading from Class B to Class A and applicants seeking certain endorsements for the first time. Their training provider must report completion electronically through FMCSA’s Training Provider Registry before the driver can proceed to applicable testing. That is why falsified training information creates a larger concern than an inaccurate school record. If a provider falsely certifies that a driver completed required instruction, the licensing system may show a qualification step as completed even though the underlying training did not occur as required. The same principle applies to testing.
States develop and administer CDL knowledge and skills tests, but those tests must satisfy minimum federal standards. FMCSA says applicants generally must correctly answer at least 80% of applicable knowledge-test questions and successfully demonstrate the required vehicle skills. Federal rules set the floor. States issue the actual licenses. Training providers document required training. When one part of that chain is unreliable, the integrity of the entire qualification process can be affected.
What Is Dalilah’s Law and How Does It Relate to the Crackdown?
Dalilah’s Law is a pending congressional proposal, not a requirement currently in force. The measure is H.R. 5688, an amended version of the Non-Domiciled CDL Integrity Act. It was renamed Dalilah’s Law in honor of Dalilah Coleman, who was seriously injured in a crash involving a tractor-trailer. The proposal overlaps with several areas already receiving federal enforcement attention.According to the current bill description and OOIDA’s advocacy materials, Dalilah’s Law would:
Codify English-language-proficiency enforcement so specified violations could result in an out-of-service order
Establish consequences for motor carriers that knowingly hire drivers who fail applicable English-proficiency requirements
Require states to review improperly issued non-domiciled CDLs without forcing properly qualified drivers to repeat certification unnecessarily
Strengthen standards for entry-level driver training providers
Those are proposed requirements. They should not be described as current law. The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee approved the amended H.R. 5688 on March 18, 2026, by a 35–26 vote. OOIDA renewed its push for passage in September, but the bill had still not received a full House floor vote. A September 11 update from the bill’s sponsor likewise described Dalilah’s Law as one of the committee’s measures for which significant legislative work remained. So as of September 22, 2026, Dalilah’s Law remains a legislative proposal. It is connected to the broader trucking fraud crackdown because it addresses some of the same issues CDL qualification, training-provider oversight and enforcement but it should not be confused with the actions DOT and FMCSA are already carrying out under existing authority.
What Does the Crackdown Mean for the Trucking Industry?
The federal response is putting greater scrutiny on how drivers enter the industry and how their qualifications are documented. For legitimate carriers, the immediate issue is less about learning an entirely new compliance system and more about making sure existing records and hiring practices hold up under increased oversight. That includes verifying CDL status, monitoring driver qualifications and ensuring any in-house or outside entry-level training provider used by the company meets current requirements. For CDL schools, the stakes are also clearer.
FMCSA can investigate providers, issue proposed-removal notices and ultimately remove providers that fail to maintain the qualifications necessary for the Training Provider Registry. What comes next will depend on two separate tracks. Federal agencies can continue administrative and investigative enforcement under current law. Congress, meanwhile, will decide whether proposals such as Dalilah’s Law become law and add or change statutory requirements. Duffy has framed the effort as a way to remove “fraudsters” and improve conditions for compliant truckers. Whether a particular school, driver or carrier actually committed fraud, however, still depends on the facts of the individual case and the outcome of the applicable administrative, civil or criminal process.
