How Stolen Personal Data Fuels Identity Fraud in Michigan
The Real Crime May Begin Before a Fake ID Exists
A Michigan driver's license disappears. Weeks later, an unfamiliar account appears, a government benefit is claimed in someone else's name, or a victim discovers that their personal information has been used in a transaction they never authorized.
These events do not automatically share the same cause. A lost card is not proof of identity theft, and identity theft does not always involve a counterfeit driver's license. But documented Michigan cases show why investigators need to examine the connection between personal information, fraudulent documents, impersonation, and financial crime.
On April 16, 2026, federal prosecutors announced that a Southfield man had pleaded guilty in a case involving Social Security numbers and driver's-license information belonging to more than 250 people, equipment used to manufacture identification documents, and fraud losses exceeding $550,000. The announcement described a business model built around creating and selling fake Social Security cards and driver's licenses in the names of real people.
A separate Michigan case involved a stolen identity, a forged power of attorney, and an attempt to obtain an unclaimed-property payment worth $579,551.99. Three defendants were sentenced after pleading guilty. In that case, a state identification-card offense was one of the charges against a defendant who attempted to impersonate the victim in person.
The cases establish that fraudulent identification and stolen personal information can play important roles in real criminal schemes. They do not establish that every counterfeit Michigan ID is produced with stolen data, or that most identity theft begins with a driver's license.
That distinction is the starting point for this investigation.
The central question is not simply how to spot a fake Michigan ID. It is what happens when information belonging to a real person becomes a tool for someone else's fraud—and how victims can respond before one incident becomes a longer chain of problems.
Primary sources: U.S. Department of Justice, April 16, 2026; Michigan Attorney General, April 3, 2026.
1. The Southfield Case: More Than 250 People's Information in One Fraud Investigation
The federal case against Jerome Antwan Andrews provides the clearest documented connection in this article between personal information and counterfeit identification.
According to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Michigan, Andrews admitted possessing Social Security numbers and driver's-license information belonging to more than 250 people. He also admitted possessing equipment used to make identification cards, including a card printer, embosser, laminator, and card cutter.
The government said Andrews' business model was to create and sell fake Social Security cards and driver's licenses in the names of real people. He pleaded guilty on April 16, 2026. The announcement stated that his conduct caused more than $550,000 in fraud losses. At the time of that release, the government said sentencing would take place before a federal district judge. This article does not assume a later sentencing outcome without a verified update.
The case matters for three reasons.
First, the identifying information was associated with real people, not merely invented identities. Second, fraudulent documents were part of the conduct admitted in the plea agreement. Third, the government linked the activity to financial fraud rather than describing it as an isolated document offense.
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| WHAT THE SOUTHFIELD CASE DOCUMENTS |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| People whose information was involved |
| More than 250 |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Information described |
| Social Security numbers and driver's-license information |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Equipment described |
| Card printer, embosser, laminator, and card cutter |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Admitted business model |
| Creating and selling fake Social Security cards and |
| driver's licenses in the names of real people |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Fraud losses cited in the DOJ announcement |
| More than $550,000 |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Procedural status in the cited announcement |
| Guilty plea; sentencing was still described as forthcoming |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
An unresolved discrepancy in the reported losses
The same federal announcement contains two financial figures that should not be casually combined.
The U.S. Attorney's Office said the conduct caused more than $550,000 in fraud losses. In the same release, the Department of Labor's Office of Inspector General said Andrews and his criminal associates stole more than $1.5 million by submitting hundreds of fraudulent claims to a pandemic-era unemployment program.
The public announcement does not provide enough detail to reconcile those figures. They may describe different scopes of conduct or different ways of measuring the losses, but the release does not spell out the relationship.
It would therefore be misleading to present $550,000 and $1.5 million as interchangeable estimates—or to add them together as if they were separate losses. The responsible conclusion is narrower: federal officials linked the case to substantial fraud, but the exact relationship between the two published amounts requires clarification from the underlying records or investigators.
That is not a minor editorial detail. Financial figures are often repeated across news reports without the context needed to understand what they measure.
2. A Different Michigan Case: Identity Theft and a $579,551.99 Claim
The second case shows how identity fraud can extend beyond a physical identification card.
According to Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel's office, Averill Dintaman and Daniel Nolan conspired in 2022 to steal a Michigan man's identity. They forged a durable power of attorney in an attempt to obtain an unclaimed-property check worth $579,551.99 in the victim's name.
The defendants then recruited Dwayne Johnson to pose as the victim in person at the Michigan Department of Treasury's Unclaimed Property Office to obtain a second copy of the check.
The three defendants pleaded guilty and were sentenced. The Attorney General's April 3, 2026 announcement states that Dintaman and Nolan received prison terms of three to 20 years, while Johnson received 12 months of probation. Johnson had pleaded guilty to identity theft, attempted false pretenses, and counterfeiting, forging, or using a state identification card to commit a felony, among other offenses listed in the release.
This case is relevant to the fake-ID discussion, but the evidence must be described accurately. The release does not establish that the entire scheme depended on a counterfeit driver's license or that the victim's license information was the original source of the identity theft. It documents the use of a stolen identity, forged legal paperwork, and an in-person impersonation attempt.
The lesson is broader than one document: an identity-fraud scheme can use several forms of deception to convince an institution that someone is entitled to act on another person's behalf.
3. How Stolen Personal Data Can Become an Identity-Fraud Tool
The two cases demonstrate different mechanisms. The Southfield case directly connected identifying information with the manufacture and sale of fraudulent documents. The unclaimed-property case showed how stolen identity information and forged paperwork could support an attempt to obtain a large payment.
They suggest a useful framework for understanding the risk without assuming that every case follows the same path.
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| A POSSIBLE IDENTITY-FRAUD CHAIN |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1. Personal information is obtained without authorization. |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 2. The information is used to impersonate a real person, |
| support a fraudulent document, or submit a false claim. |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 3. A business, agency, financial institution, or individual |
| becomes the target of the attempted fraud. |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 4. The activity may create financial losses or inaccurate |
| records associated with the victim. |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 5. The victim may need to report the misuse and challenge |
| the affected records or transactions. |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
This is a risk framework, not a claim that every identity-theft incident follows all five steps.
Personal information can be exposed in many ways: phishing, account compromise, stolen mail, physical document theft, or unauthorized access to a database. The public releases cited here do not establish one universal source for the information involved in the Southfield case.
It is also important to separate three concepts:
Identity theft: Someone obtains or uses another person's identifying information without authorization for a fraudulent purpose.
Counterfeit identification: A document is made or altered to misrepresent identity or authority.
Identity fraud: A broader category of deceptive activity that may involve false applications, impersonation, benefits, financial accounts, or other transactions.
These concepts can overlap, but they are not synonyms. A person may suffer identity theft without a counterfeit ID ever being made. A fake document may also be used without the identifying information of a specific victim.
For a victim, the practical concern is not proving the entire criminal supply chain. It is identifying what information has been compromised, what transactions or records have been affected, and which organizations can help stop or correct the misuse.
4. What Michigan's Identity-Theft Statistics Actually Tell Us
The Federal Trade Commission's Consumer Sentinel Network Data Book 2024 recorded 23,783 identity-theft reports from Michigan consumers. The report ranked Michigan 20th among states for identity-theft reports per 100,000 residents.
The same report recorded 117,326 total fraud and other reports from Michigan consumers and $204 million in reported fraud losses.
These numbers provide useful context, but they are not a count of fake Michigan driver's licenses.
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| FTC CONSUMER REPORTS: MICHIGAN, 2024 |
+----------------------------------------------+-------------------+
| Identity-theft reports | 23,783 |
+----------------------------------------------+-------------------+
| Total fraud and other reports | 117,326 |
+----------------------------------------------+-------------------+
| Reported fraud losses | $204 million |
+----------------------------------------------+-------------------+
| State rank for identity-theft reports | 20th |
| per 100,000 residents | |
+----------------------------------------------+-------------------+
Source: FTC — Consumer Sentinel Network Data Book 2024.
There are several limits to these figures.
First, FTC complaint data is based on reports submitted by consumers and contributing organizations, not a survey that measures every incident in the population. The FTC explains that the reports are not independently verified as a complete count of all fraud experienced by consumers.
Second, the identity-theft category includes different forms of misuse, such as credit-card identity theft, loans or leases, phone or utility accounts, and other identity theft. The data does not isolate counterfeit Michigan driver's licenses.
Third, consumers can report more than one type of identity theft. The number of reports should not automatically be treated as the number of unique victims or separate criminal schemes.
The data supports a responsible conclusion: identity theft is a significant reported consumer-protection issue in Michigan. It does not tell us what percentage of cases involve counterfeit IDs, stolen driver's-license numbers, or document-making operations.
That unanswered question matters. Without a specific dataset, it is not possible to state credibly how many fake Michigan IDs are made using stolen personal information.
5. Fake ID Shop, Fake ID Website, and the Online Counterfeit Market
Searches for fake ID shop, fake ID market, fake ID website, fake ID online, fake DL seller, fake DL website, and fake ID card seller reveal a category of online demand for fraudulent identification.
Other queries include order fake ID, order fake DL, buy fake DL online, order fake driver's license, and buy fake driver's license online. Some users also search for claims such as scannable fake ID seller, scannable fake ID website, or scannable fake driver's license online.
Those search terms are not evidence that any particular seller is legitimate, that a document will work as advertised, or that a transaction is safe. They are also not evidence that all sellers participate in identity theft.
The relevant consumer-protection issue is that an unverified site may request personal data under the pretext of producing a document. Depending on what the person submits, the exposure may include a full name, date of birth, address, photograph, existing identification details, payment data, or account credentials.
A transaction can therefore create a second risk independent of the promised document: the person seeking a fraudulent credential may disclose their real identifying information to an unknown operator.
Potential warning signs include:
A website asking for sensitive information without a credible, lawful reason.
Requests to submit scans of existing identity documents through an unverified channel.
Pressure to pay through methods that offer little recourse.
Claims that a document is guaranteed to pass every verification check.
Requests to install unknown software or open suspicious attachments.
Testimonials or social-media posts that cannot be independently verified.
Searches for fake ID 2026, fake ID 2027, or fake IDs Reddit do not remove these risks. Anonymous posts, reviews, and seller claims should not be treated as proof of legitimacy.
The Southfield case demonstrates that a document-related criminal operation can involve real people's information. It does not establish that a particular online storefront was involved, nor does it quantify how much identity theft is attributable to online counterfeit-ID sellers.
A careful article must keep those two points separate.
6. Michigan Fake ID Laws: The Conduct Matters More Than the Label
Searches such as Michigan fake ID laws, fake ID laws Michigan, Michigan counterfeit ID laws, Michigan forged ID laws, and counterfeit driver's license Michigan can refer to several distinct legal questions.
Was a document forged or altered? Was another person's identity used? Was the document presented to obtain money, benefits, or another advantage? Did the conduct form part of a separate fraud scheme?
The answers can affect which laws apply. A counterfeit credential, identity theft, forgery, and a financial offense should not be treated as a single interchangeable charge.
The 2026 unclaimed-property case illustrates this distinction. Michigan authorities reported guilty pleas to several offenses, including forgery-related charges, false pretenses, identity theft, and a state identification-card offense connected to an attempted felony. The case was prosecuted as a broader scheme, not merely as possession of a questionable card.
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| QUESTIONS THAT MATTER IN A MICHIGAN FAKE-ID CASE |
+--------------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Was the document forged or | Document-related offenses |
| altered? | may be relevant. |
+--------------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Was another person's identity | Identity-theft provisions |
| used without authorization? | may be relevant. |
+--------------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Was the document used to | Additional fraud or felony |
| facilitate another offense? | provisions may apply. |
+--------------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Was money, a benefit, or | The alleged intent, conduct, |
| property targeted? | and evidence matter. |
+--------------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
This table is a general framework, not a legal determination. Applicable charges and penalties depend on the facts, the statute, and the evidence. Anyone facing an accusation should seek advice from a qualified Michigan attorney.
For a victim, discovering that personal information appears in a fraudulent transaction does not automatically mean the victim committed the act. Preserve the evidence, report the suspected misuse, and challenge inaccurate records through the agency or organization responsible for them.
7. How to Identify a Fake Michigan ID Responsibly
Queries such as how to identify a fake Michigan ID, how to spot a fake Michigan driver's license, fake Michigan ID signs, and Michigan driver's license verification often come from businesses, organizations, and people who need to assess a credential.
A visual inspection alone cannot reliably establish every document's authenticity. A legitimate card can be damaged or worn, while a suspicious-looking feature may have an innocent explanation. Conversely, a document that appears convincing is not necessarily valid.
Organizations that must verify identification should use their official procedures, appropriate verification tools, and trained staff. They should not rely on one visual characteristic or an automated result as conclusive proof.
A responsible verification process should include:
Following the organization's written identification policy.
Confirming that the credential is appropriate for the transaction.
Using approved verification procedures or tools.
Escalating unresolved concerns to a trained supervisor.
Protecting personal information and limiting unnecessary copies.
Documenting incidents according to organizational policy and applicable law.
Verification also has limits. Determining whether a document is valid does not necessarily establish how the document was obtained, whether the person presenting it has stolen someone else's identity, or whether the victim's other information has been compromised.
That is why identity verification and identity-theft investigation should be treated as related but distinct tasks.
8. Lost or Stolen Michigan Driver's License: What to Do First
Searches for lost Michigan driver's license, lost Michigan driver license, lost MI driver's license, lost MI DL, and Michigan driver's license lost often reflect a straightforward need for a replacement.
The first task is to determine whether the card is merely missing or whether theft or misuse is suspected. If a license was stolen, Michigan's Department of State advises residents to report the theft to local law enforcement and apply for a duplicate credential. Residents may also request a driver-record alert.
Official instructions: Michigan Department of State — License, ID or Permit Replacement.
What a Michigan driver-record alert does
Michigan offers an identity-verification alert for a lost or stolen license. The alert signals law enforcement and Department of State staff to request sufficient proof of identity when the license number is used during a traffic stop or a Department of State transaction.
The state explicitly warns that the alert is not designed to prevent identity fraud or theft. It is a verification safeguard, not a guarantee that nobody can misuse the information.
According to the Department of State, it can take up to 30 days for an alert to appear on the record. Once added, it remains for seven years unless the person requests removal in writing or submits a new request to extend it.
Source: Michigan Department of State — Report Fraud.
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| LOST OR STOLEN MICHIGAN LICENSE: RESPONSE CHECKLIST |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| [ ] Establish whether theft or unauthorized use is suspected. |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| [ ] Report suspected theft to local law enforcement. |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| [ ] Apply for a replacement through the official state site. |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| [ ] Consider a driver-record alert if the license number |
| may be misused. |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| [ ] Check accounts and records if other personal data may |
| have been exposed. |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| [ ] Preserve report numbers, notices, correspondence, and |
| evidence of unauthorized activity. |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| [ ] Dispute fraudulent citations or records with the |
| agency or court responsible for them. |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
A replacement card does not automatically repair a fraudulent financial account, remove an inaccurate traffic citation, or secure an exposed email account. If the incident involves more than a missing piece of plastic, recovery needs to address each affected account or record.
9. Michigan Driver's License Replacement: Online Options, Fees, and Requirements
Michigan residents often search for replace Michigan driver's license, Michigan driver's license replacement, Michigan DMV license replacement, Michigan driver's license replacement online, and online driver's license replacement Michigan.
The agency responsible is the Michigan Department of State, although "Michigan DMV" is a common search phrase.
The state's published replacement information lists these duplicate-card fees:
+----------------------------------+----------------------------------+
| MICHIGAN REPLACEMENT FEES |
+----------------------------------+----------------------------------+
| Credential | Published replacement fee |
+----------------------------------+----------------------------------+
| Standard driver's license | $9 |
+----------------------------------+----------------------------------+
| Enhanced driver's license | $24 |
+----------------------------------+----------------------------------+
| Standard state ID | $10 |
+----------------------------------+----------------------------------+
| Enhanced state ID | $30 |
+----------------------------------+----------------------------------+
Sources: Michigan Department of State — License, ID or Permit Replacement and License and ID Information.
These are published duplicate or replacement fees, not a promise that every transaction will have no additional charge. Confirm the current amount and any payment-related fees on the official page before applying.
Can you replace a Michigan driver's license online?
Michigan allows eligible residents to replace a license, state ID, or permit online. The official process requires logging into the state's Online Services system and selecting the relevant replacement option.
Not every situation qualifies for online service. The Department of State says that if a resident has changed their address or requested a replacement license or ID within the previous 28 days, an office visit may be required to provide proof of identity.
Other circumstances can also require in-person service. Check the official eligibility instructions rather than relying on an unofficial site offering to handle the transaction.
What documents may be needed?
Searches for Michigan driver's license replacement requirements, Michigan driver license replacement documents, and documents needed to replace Michigan driver's license should lead to the official requirements for the credential and transaction.
The Department of State lists examples of acceptable proof of identity that may include a valid, unexpired passport, a certified copy of a U.S. birth certificate, a government-issued photo ID, or a valid U.S. military photo ID. Requirements vary, and more than one document may be required. The state says faxes and photocopies are not accepted for the specified proof-of-identity process.
Check the latest official instructions before visiting an office.
How long does a replacement take?
Searches for Michigan driver's license replacement processing time, how long does Michigan driver's license replacement take, and Michigan replacement driver's license not received reflect a common concern.
Instead of relying on a general estimate from an unofficial website, Michigan residents can use the Department of State's Online Services system to check credential mail status. The state says the system can show whether the credential has been processed, mailed, or returned by the U.S. Postal Service as undeliverable.
A delayed card is not, by itself, proof of identity theft. Check the transaction and delivery status first; investigate possible misuse if other warning signs appear.
10. Lost Michigan State ID, REAL ID, and Enhanced ID
Searches for lost Michigan state ID, lost Michigan ID, Michigan state ID replacement, Michigan ID replacement online, replace Michigan ID, and Michigan REAL ID replacement cover different credentials.
A standard state ID, a driver's license, a REAL ID-compliant credential, and an enhanced license or ID are not interchangeable terms. The correct replacement process depends on which document the resident holds and their eligibility for online or in-person service.
Michigan provides official replacement instructions for licenses, IDs, and permits through the Department of State replacement page.
The current published information lists replacement fees of $10 for a standard state ID and $30 for an enhanced state ID, with some eligibility-based exceptions described by the state. Residents should confirm the fee and the current requirements directly with the Department of State.
If the card was stolen, replacing it is only one part of the response. A new card does not automatically secure other documents or accounts that may have been exposed at the same time.
11. If Personal Data Was Stolen: A Practical Recovery Plan
When the risk extends beyond a missing credential, the response should focus on the information exposed and the records or accounts that may have been affected.
Michigan's Attorney General operates Michigan Identity Theft Support (MITS), which provides guidance and resources to residents dealing with identity theft. The state recommends identifying what information may have been compromised, contacting financial institutions where relevant, checking credit reports, considering a credit freeze, and filing an FTC Identity Theft Report or police report.
Official resources:
Prioritize the response
If a bank account or payment card is involved: Contact the financial institution promptly, report unauthorized activity, and follow its process for securing the account.
If email or another online account may be compromised: Change the password from a trusted device, secure the recovery email and phone number, and enable multifactor authentication where available.
If information could be used to open credit accounts: Review credit reports and consider a credit freeze with each of the three nationwide credit bureaus. A freeze can restrict access to a credit report and make it harder to open new credit accounts in the victim's name, but it does not prevent every form of identity theft.
If a fraudulent record or citation appears: Contact the agency, court, or organization responsible for that record. Explain that the activity is unauthorized and ask about the formal dispute process.
If the case is complex: Michigan Identity Theft Support may provide guidance, although it does not provide personal legal representation.
Preserve evidence from the beginning
Keep a written record of the steps taken. Record dates, agency names, phone numbers, report or file numbers, and the substance of conversations. Save notices and copies of relevant correspondence.
Do not send original identity documents unless an official process specifically requires them. Use verified agency contact details, and be wary of anyone who contacts you unexpectedly and asks for more personal information while claiming to help resolve the problem.
12. What This Investigation Can—and Cannot—Conclude
The reviewed evidence establishes several important facts.
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| FINDINGS SUPPORTED BY THE SOURCES |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| A Southfield defendant admitted possessing Social Security |
| numbers and driver's-license information for more than |
| 250 people, along with equipment used to make fake documents. |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Federal authorities linked the case to more than $550,000 |
| in fraud losses and separately cited over $1.5 million in |
| fraudulent pandemic-program claims by the defendant and |
| associates. The relationship between the figures is not |
| explained in the cited release. |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| A separate Michigan scheme involved a stolen identity, |
| forged legal paperwork, and an attempted $579,551.99 |
| unclaimed-property payment. |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| The FTC recorded 23,783 identity-theft reports from Michigan |
| consumers in 2024, but those reports are not a count of fake |
| Michigan driver's licenses. |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Michigan provides official replacement services and a |
| driver-record alert option for lost or stolen credentials. |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
The evidence does not establish the total number of fake Michigan driver's licenses in circulation. It does not establish what proportion of counterfeit IDs use stolen personal data, how many of the 250-plus people in the Southfield case suffered a direct loss, or how often a stolen license number is used to create a physical counterfeit credential.
Nor does it show that online fake ID sellers account for a measurable percentage of Michigan identity theft.
Answering those questions would require additional work: reviewing the underlying plea agreement and court filings, requesting clarification about the financial figures, examining additional Michigan cases, and seeking relevant data from state and federal agencies.
The Michigan Freedom of Information Act provides a mechanism for requesting many public records from state public bodies, subject to legal exemptions. Federal records may be available through the relevant federal disclosure process, subject to applicable rules and exemptions. Any further investigation should identify precisely which records exist and what they can actually establish.
This is the boundary between a responsible evidence-based article and an unsupported claim about the size of an entire criminal market.
Conclusion: Protect the Identity, Not Just the Card
The most revealing part of the Southfield case is not simply that fake documents were found. It is that prosecutors described identifying information belonging to hundreds of real people in a case tied to substantial financial fraud.
The unclaimed-property case shows another way identity theft can operate: stolen identity information, forged paperwork, and impersonation can be combined in an attempt to obtain a large payment.
Neither case proves that every fake Michigan ID originates from stolen data. Together, however, they show why counterfeit identification and identity theft should be examined as connected risks rather than unrelated problems.
For Michigan residents, the response is practical: replace lost or stolen credentials through official state services, report suspected theft, consider a driver-record alert when appropriate, secure compromised accounts, review financial records, and dispute fraudulent entries.
For businesses and institutions, identity verification should rely on documented procedures and appropriate checks rather than a single visual impression.
For investigators, the next step is to establish the scale of the connection between stolen personal data, counterfeit documents, and financial fraud using court records and agency data—not search terms or assumptions.
A missing license may require a replacement. A stolen identity may require a much broader recovery effort. Knowing which problem you have is the first step toward addressing it.
Sources and Further Reading
U.S. Department of Justice, Eastern District of Michigan — Southfield Man Pleads Guilty to Possession of Fake IDs and ID-Making Equipment Used to Cause over $500k in Fraud Losses, April 16, 2026.
Michigan Attorney General — Three Sentenced for Half-a-Million-Dollar Identity Theft, Fraud, Forgery Scheme, April 3, 2026.
Federal Trade Commission — Consumer Sentinel Network Data Book 2024.
Michigan Department of State — License, ID or Permit Replacement.
Michigan Department of State — Report Fraud.
Michigan Department of State — License and ID Information.
Michigan Attorney General — Michigan Identity Theft Support.
Michigan Attorney General — What to Do if Your Identity Is Stolen.
Federal Trade Commission — IdentityTheft.gov.