ReportWire

Tag: Paycheck Protection Program

  • Montgomery Co. accountant sent to federal prison for $24 million COVID relief fraud scheme – WTOP News

    [ad_1]

    A Gaithersburg, Maryland, accountant has been sentenced to three years in federal prison, followed by six months of home confinement for conspiring to commit wire fraud by submitting fraudulent loan applications for various COVID-19 relief benefits.

    A Gaithersburg, Maryland, accountant has been sentenced to three years in federal prison, followed by six months of home confinement, for conspiring to commit wire fraud by submitting fraudulent loan applications for various COVID-19 relief benefits.

    According to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for Maryland, 54-year-old Harold Dotson was part of the scheme that filed more than $24 million in phony CARES Act loan applications between 2020 and 2022. He was sentenced earlier this week by U.S. District Judge Richard Bennett.

    During the pandemic, several economic assistance mechanisms were established to keep businesses afloat: the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act, the Paycheck Protection Program, and the Economic Injury Disaster Loan.

    Citing Dotson’s plea agreement and other court documents, prosecutors said Dotson “used his accountant expertise to assist with preparing numerous false and fraudulent EIDL and PPP applications for purported businesses that did not exist in any legitimate capacity.”

    The duplicitous loan applications included false information about the fake businesses’ number of employees, monthly payroll costs and revenue. Prosecutors said he also routinely created fraudulent IRS tax forms.

    In his sentencing memo, Dotson’s lawyer said his client was an addicted gambler, with his family on the brink of economic disaster, when he was approached by co-conspirator Ahmed Sary, 47, of Brooklyn, Maryland, who ran a credit repair company.

    While Dotson originally believed his helping small businesses apply for PPP loans was aboveboard, he eventually realized Sary was sending him paperwork for businesses that didn’t exist “or that grossly overstated their payroll and assets,” according to his attorney.

    “The influx from the fraud was like gasoline on the fire of his addiction,” wrote Dotson’s lawyer. “He returned to the casino four to five times a week, gambling (and usually losing) thousands of dollars per session.”

    According to prosecutors, Dotson’s conspiracy with Sary resulted in the disbursement of more than $14 million in PPP funds in connection with more than 85 fraudulent loans. Dotson’s conspiracy with another co-conspirator resulted in the disbursement of fraudulent PPP loans valued at more than $6 million, prosecutors said.

    Additionally, prosecutors said more than $3.5 million was funded and disbursed in connection with Dotson’s submission of fraudulent EIDL applications.

    In addition to the prison time and probation, Bennett ordered Dotson to pay $24,807,432 in restitution.

    In June, Bennett sentenced Sary to seven years in federal prison for his role in the conspiracy.

    Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.

    © 2025 WTOP. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.

    [ad_2]

    Neal Augenstein

    Source link

  • PPP loans cost nearly double what Biden’s student debt forgiveness would have. Here’s how the programs compare.

    PPP loans cost nearly double what Biden’s student debt forgiveness would have. Here’s how the programs compare.

    [ad_1]

    After the Supreme Court reversed President Biden’s student-loan forgiveness plan, critics of the decision are pointing to other recent examples of the government forgiving debt —many with far larger amounts of money than at stake than in the student loan plan.

    In particular, the Paycheck Protection Program has so far forgiven $757 billion in loans to private businesses, according to government databases — nearly double what the Biden administration’s student-loan forgiveness would have cost. 

    Mr. Biden made that comparison in a press conference on Friday afternoon, pointing out that many members of Congress received PPP loans that were forgiven. 

    “I was trying to provide students with $10,000 to $20,000 in relief,” Biden said. “The average amount forgiven in the PPP program was $70,000.”

    He added, “The hypocrisy is stunning.”

    How much in PPP loans was forgiven?

    The government, through the Small Business Administration, gave out nearly $790 billion in PPP loans between March 2020 and May 2021, when the program ended, public records show. Of that amount, $757 billion has been forgiven. 

    The recipients include two dozen members of Congress who received between $79,000 and $3.4 million apiece for businesses, according to reporting at the time. 

    While the PPP did preserve up to 3 million jobs for one year, according to one study from economists at MIT and the Federal Reserve, the major beneficiaries of that money were business owners and shareholders —not workers. 

    Between two-thirds and three-quarters of the PPP’s benefits “did not go to paychecks, however, but instead accrued to business owners and shareholders,” the study found, estimating that “about three-quarters of PPP benefits accrued to the top quintile of household income.”

    How much did the government spend on pandemic relief? 

    The government also spent nearly $700 billion on enhanced unemployment benefits and $860 billion on direct payments in the form of stimulus checks, according to public data tracked by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget

    How much would student loan forgiveness have cost?

    The Department of Education relied on the 2003 HEROES Act as its legal justification for wiping out roughly $430 billion in debt, while the Biden student-debt relief plan would have cost as much as $519 billion over 10 years, according to an estimate from the Penn Wharton Budget Model, a nonpartisan group that examines the economic impact of public policies. 

    About two-thirds of the benefit would have gone to households earning less than $88,000 a year, the group estimated.

    Why was the PPP loan forgiveness program legal? 

    The PPP program as well as the student loan forgiveness plan “were both programs that were established to address the impact of the national emergency,” said Abby Shafroth, director of the Student Loan Borrower Assistance Project at the National Consumer Law Center. “Both programs recognized that the pandemic was enormously economically disruptive.”  

    However, the two programs rely on different laws. 

    PPP was authorized as part of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act passed in March 2020. From the start, the loan program was designed to be fully or partially forgiven, as long as the businesses used the money for eligible expenses such as payroll.

    “Embedded within the PPP was this idea that it could be forgiven from the very beginning,” noted Chavis Jones, associate counsel in the educational opportunities project at the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. 

    The PPP loans never faced the same scrutiny — or legal challenges — as student debt relief, experts said. 

    But, Shafroth noted, “As soon as the student loan program was announced, critics and opponents backed by billionaire organizations attacked the program and filed briefs in court challenging it,” she said. 

    Why was the student loan program struck down?

    Student loan forgiveness, the Biden administration argued, was authorized under the HEROES Act, which Congress passed in the wake of the September 11 terrorist attacks and later expanded. 

    Since 2003, the act held that the Secretary of Education could “waive or modify any statutory or regulatory provision” in the case of a national emergency. The Trump administration used this authority to pause student-interest loan repayments in 2020.

    A lawsuit from six Republican-led states asked the Supreme Court to consider whether the Secretary of Education had the authority to forgive student loan debt under the HEROES Act. On Friday, the high court ruled that the law does not grant the secretary that authority.

    Both the PPP and student debt relief “were created to remedy the economic harms during the pandemic,” Jones said. “What we do know is the PPP loans disproportionately impact people of greater means, and we know the student debt relief program impacts those who are more economically vulnerable.” 

    He added, “Once again, people with lesser means and those who are economically vulnerable have taken a gut punch of sorts.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • ‘Looking into an abyss’: For many lenders, PPP still a source of pride

    ‘Looking into an abyss’: For many lenders, PPP still a source of pride

    [ad_1]

    The Paycheck Protection Program opened for business on April 3, 2020.

    Not long after, the Small Business Administration’s E-Tran loan processing program crashed. SBA approved about 52,000 loans in fiscal year 2019 under its flagship 7(a) loan guarantee program, 60,000 the year before. As big as those numbers seem, they would be quickly dwarfed by PPP.

    Jovita Carranza, who served as SBA’s administrator from January 2020 to January 2021, called 2020 the most extraordinary year in the agency’s history. In that single year, SBA “approved more loans…than it has in all of the years combined since the agency was founded in 1953,” Carranza wrote in SBA’s 2020 Agency Financial Report.

    Even so, pushing loans through a sluggish, crash-prone E-Tran would be a perennial problem for the program’s lenders.

    For Solomon Lax, CEO of Jersey City-based Revenued, they were the source of one of his most enduring PPP memories. “The most vivid moment was when 5,000 applications hit the system in 10 minutes and the application portal went down,” Lax said. “It was an all-hands-on- deck moment for the company.”

    Of course, Revenued, which worked as a partner with Cross River Bank in Fort Lee, New Jersey, managed to get its loans through, as did hundreds of other banks and credit unions that participated in the $800 billion program.

    For them, despite controversies that have severely tarnished the program’s reputation in recent months, the PPP experience remains a high point, a time when the industry rallied to support the businesses and communities it serves.

    “It is still a source of pride as we positively impacted thousands upon thousands of business owners and the communities they operate in,” Jim Fliss, national SBA manager at Cleveland-based KeyCorp, said. “While PPP is not common office conversation these days, I trust that all who were involved doing the work derive strength from meeting a large challenge head-on.”

    A very big deal

    It seems safe to include the Paycheck Protection Program within the ranks of the financial services industry’s biggest endeavors in recent years, perhaps among the biggest ever. PPP was intended to support employers and allow them to continue paying employees, especially where coronavirus had forced shutdowns. It came at a time of unprecedented dislocation.

    The U.S. gross domestic product plummeted 31% during the second quarter of 2020, giving an indication of the veritable body blow the pandemic delivered to the economy. PPP offered businesses with 500 or few employees fully forgivable loans, provided at least 60% of the proceeds were spent on employee compensation, occupancy, safety equipment, business software and other eligible expenses.

    By the time PPP started lending on April 3, the Trump administration had declared a state of emergency and implemented an international travel ban covering more than two dozen countries. Cruise lines halted travel and states and local governments had begun issuing a series of shutdown orders covering schools, theaters, dine-in restaurants, gyms, barber shops and salons, and a host of other businesses. Unemployment, which measured 3.5% at the start of 2020, began rising in March and peaked at 14.7% — a level not seen since before World War II — in April, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. 

    “Our economy basically shut down,” said Lloyd Doaman, executive director of Carver Community Development Corp., a subset of New York-based Carver Bancorp.

    ABM0423_Cover Story_for online.jpg

    Congress tapped the Treasury Department and SBA to co-administer PPP. Lawmakers implemented PPP as part of 7(a), which had been guaranteeing loans to small businesses since SBA’s creation in 1953. While SBA had acted as a direct lender in its early years, 7(a) had long since evolved into a public-private partnership. Lenders, primarily banks and credit unions, made the loans.

    SBA was an obvious choice to manage PPP, given 7(a)’s existing infrastructure, but the move placed banks and credit unions in the path of a hurricane. Congress appropriated $349 billion for PPP loans. It was an enormous number considering 7(a), SBA’s largest lending program, had never handled more than $25.8 billion of loan volume in a single year.

    Around the clock

    As PPP got up and running, it was clear almost instantly that it wouldn’t take long to dole out the mountain of cash. Most institutions were overwhelmed with applications as soon as they opened their online portals.

    At JPMorgan Chase, more than 75,000 prospective borrowers filled out an online form seeking basic application data the first hour it was online.

    PPP lenders, nevertheless, distributed the program’s massive initial outlay in just 16 days. Congress provided a fresh $310 billion appropriation to restart the program in May, as well as another $284 billion in January 2021.

    Things were never quite as frenzied as during the program’s opening phase in April 2020. The waves of borrowers, combined with E-Tran’s operational woes, forced participating lenders to radically expand working hours. In essence, an industry once joked about for keeping for lax “bankers hours” lurched suddenly to around-the-clock operations.

    At many community banks and credit unions, it took the entire staff, from those at the lowest rungs on the ladder to senior managers and CEOs to cope.

    “We were working well into the weekends, working late at night,” the $713 million-asset Carver’s Doaman said. CEO Michael Pugh “even rolled up his sleeves. He was working with clients one-on-one. He helped get them to the finish line.”

    “People found another gear,” said Ben Parkey, Dallas market president at the $1.1 billion-asset Texas Security Bank in Dallas. “It was inspiring to watch how everyone leaned on each other…We saw individuals grow and develop in a very short period of time out of necessity.”

    Due to the pandemic’s rapid onset, PPP never went through the normal legislative and regulatory process most new programs do. It was established without an extended public comment or rulemaking period. Many of the rules and procedures that governed it were disclosed after the program started, then oftentimes adjusted.

    “It was a challenging program to take on,” said Ken Michalac, commercial lending manager at the $2.6 billion-asset Lake Trust Credit Union in Brighton, Michigan. “Details were rolled out in an unexpected way, so we had to quickly learn not only how to get the funds to business owners, but also to develop a process for taking in applications.”

    The uncertainty created another pressure point for lenders, since frequent changes and additions created widespread confusion.

    “What we found was that a lot of our clients needed additional support,” Doaman said. “They needed someone to work closely with them to demystify the process, to help them calculate what their payroll numbers would be, what the final loan amount would be, to just pull together all the documents that they needed.”

    The same was true even for bigger banks. At the $190 billion-asset Key, “we received multiple weeks of inquiries — early to late — from countless business owners and our employees on how to best navigate” PPP, Fliss said. “Teams across the bank mobilized at warp speed to setup a new PPP infrastructure, processes and technology.”

    Despite well-documented flaws, there remains little doubt, at least in the minds of the bankers and credit union lenders who participated, that PPP was worthwhile. To them, PPP succeeded in achieving its core aim of funneling emergency cash to small businesses reeling from the pandemic, saving millions of jobs in the process.

    Ben Parkey.png

    Most economists agree PPP preserved jobs, though estimates of the number saved vary. A study published in the spring 2022 issue of the Journal of Economic Perspectives concluded PPP preserved about 2.97 million jobs per week in the spring of 2020.

    Nationally, unemployment fell to 11% in June 2020 and was under 7% by the end of the year. GDP, which had declined at a record-setting pace in the second quarter, rebounded to grow at a sizzling 33% pace between July and September 2020.

    “PPP mostly worked, despite its flaws,” Keith Leggett, a retired American Bankers Association economist, said. “We were looking into the economic abyss and the program provided a lifeline to main street businesses.

    Carver believes its 420 PPP loans helped preserve 5,000 jobs, according to Doaman. Nic Bustle, chief lending officer at U.S. Century Bank in Miami, estimated his institution’s PPP lending saved as many as 17,500 jobs.

    “The PPP program, despite its shortcomings, was a lifeline. We felt it was a Dunkirk moment for small business and that everyone we ferried to the other side wasn’t going to make it otherwise,” said Lax, referring to the small coastal town in France where hundreds of thousands of allied forces were evacuated during World War II. “There was real desperation in the voices of the small business owners who had their entire livelihood going to zero before their eyes.”

    Changes made

    In addition to the 1% interest on their PPP portfolios, banks were paid fees by the government for each loan they made, 5% on credits smaller than $350,000, 3% on those between $350,000 and $2 million, and 1% on deals larger than $2 million.

    For PPP lenders, those fees generated substantial income. Northeast Bank in Portland, Maine originated $2 billion in PPP loans on its own and purchased another $11 billion on the secondary market, generating more than $100 million in fee revenue. The $2.8 billion-asset Northeast used its PPP capital to significantly expand its national commercial real estate lending business.

    For many banks, though, PPP’s most lasting impact has been the boost it gave to commercial and small-business banking. Case in point: Carver built on its PPP momentum by launching a microloan program.

    “We gained some really dynamic relationships and great success stories,” Doaman said. “It’s been pretty effective at helping many of the small businesses continue to pivot and stabilize their operations.”

    Texas Security made $264 million in PPP loans in 2020 and 2021. The bank’s loan portfolio, which totaled $403 million at the end of 2019, had grown to $817 million on Dec. 31, 2022 — due in large part to new relationships forged during the pandemic, Parkey said. 

    PPP “provided us with the perfect stage to demonstrate our ability to roll up our sleeves and show off our work ethic,” Parkey said. “So many of the PPP clients that didn’t have accounts with us before PPP are now full TSB clients.”

    Lake Trust Credit Union, too, was able to expand small-business lending, according to Michalak, who said the institution’s PPP clients demonstrated a preference for interacting with people, rather than applying online.

    “We were able to show how our hands-on approach to business lending was much more effective,” he said. “Members we work with showed their appreciation for the additional hand-holding that was available to them during that very uncertain time.”

    [ad_2]

    John Reosti

    Source link