October 28, 2020

Volume X, Number 302

Advertisement

October 27, 2020

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

October 26, 2020

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

Acting Assistant Attorney General Brian Rabbitt Announces 57 Charged with PPP Fraud in Remarks Delivered at PPP Fraud Enforcement Press Conference

As predicted, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and other enforcement agencies have acted quickly to bring substantial criminal enforcement actions for fraud against the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP).  Acting Assistant Attorney General (AAG) Brian Rabbitt announced recently that the DOJ’s Criminal Division reached the important milestone of criminally charging more than 50 individuals for alleged fraud committed to obtain PPP funds. 

Including the charges brought within a few hours of AAG Rabbitt’s remarks, DOJ has actually charged 57 defendants with over $175 million in PPP-related fraud.  DOJ's Criminal Division has prosecuted these cases around the country, in 19 different districts.  They range from loan requests for just $30,000 to approximately $24 million. 

AAG Rabbitt credited DOJ’s Criminal Division and the dedicated fraud unit operating under the leadership of Rob Zink, as well as the use of data analytics, the whole-of-government approach to combatting fraud in the program, and public-private partnerships, with contributing to the recovery of over $30 million so far in fraudulently obtained PPP funds.  He ended his remarks with a clear message to fraudsters: “You will be identified.  You will be held accountable.  You will face the severest of consequences for trying to exploit your fellow Americans’ suffering for your own personal gain.”

AAG Rabbitt’s remarks focused on the unprecedented speed with which the Criminal Division leapt into action, bringing cases within the first month of the PPP’s roll out.  DOJ’s Criminal Division has brought several types of criminal cases, including cases against (1) parties who purportedly lied about having legitimate businesses or claimed they needed the funds to finance their businesses but instead spent them extravagantly, and (2) alleged criminal rings engaged in systematic and organized PPP fraud.  AAG Rabbitt declared that the latter would be DOJ’s main focus moving forward.

According to the remarks, cases fall into a few categories:

  • False representations and misrepresentations made in applications for PPP funds, including the number of employees, average monthly revenue and payroll figures, and applicants’ criminal backgrounds.  PPP applicants charged to date also falsified tax records, used dummy payroll and revenue records, and, in some cases, utilized stolen personal information from third parties.
  • Misuse of PPP funds, including use of these funds to purchase luxury cars and jewelry.

AAG Rabbitt gave some specific examples of charges that DOJ brought recently. (He cautioned that the allegations are just that until defendants are proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.) Those individuals charged include:

  • A criminal ring in Miami that attempted to steal $24 million in PPP relief funds;
  • Seven individuals, who were part of a criminal ring that attempted to steal and launder hundreds of thousands of PPP dollars;
  • Two men in Buffalo, New York, who allegedly tried to steal $7.6 million from the program; and
  • Eleven individuals in Cleveland and Miami, including a professional athlete and his business manager, who conspired to attempt to steal $24 million in PPP funds.

While the cases DOJ discussed seem to represent blatant fraud, they demonstrate the focus on enforcement related to PPP funds, as well as other government relief programs.  The collaborative effort across governmental agencies to prosecute PPP fraud cases is notable; AAG Rabbit listed the FBI, the Small Business Administration's Office of Inspector General, the Internal Revenue Service, the U.S. Postal Inspection Service, the Offices of Inspectors General from the FDIC and Federal Housing Finance Agency, and the U.S. Attorneys’ Offices in the Northern District of Ohio and Southern District of Florida as critical partners to the Criminal Division as it leads the charge against PPP fraud.  Whether civil enforcement will follow this wave of criminal enforcement remains to be seen and is an area we’re closely monitoring.

©1994-2020 Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C. All Rights Reserved.National Law Review, Volume X, Number 269
Advertisement

TRENDING LEGAL ANALYSIS

Advertisement
Advertisement

About this Author

Jane Haviland, Mintz Levin Law Firm, Complex Commercial Litigation Product Liability & Complex Tort Securities Litigation Health Care Enforcement & Investigations
Associate

Jane’s practice focuses on litigation matters, including health care enforcement defense, complex civil and business litigation, and product liability law. Recent victories to which Jane has contributed include:

  • Defense verdicts on summary judgment in multi-jurisdictional product liability disputes involving FDA-approved pharmaceutical drugs and assay test development.
  • Defense verdict on partial summary judgment in a bet-the-company case involving a dispute between the majority owner of a multi-billion dollar company and private equity investors.

Jane...

617.348.4473
Brian P. Dunphy, Pharmaceutical Attorney, Mintz Levin, Anti-Kickback Lawyer,Health Care Enforcement & Investigations Health Care Compliance, Fraud & Abuse, and Regulatory Counseling Complex Commercial Litigation
Member

Brian has handled a wide range of health care litigation matters, government investigations, and voluntary disclosures for an array of health care providers, life sciences companies, and private equity funds and their portfolio companies. He defends clients against allegations of false claims for payment to the government, in SEC investigations and enforcement proceedings, and represents clients in complex business disputes. Brian also counsels clients on health care regulatory issues, including telemedicine laws, compliance with the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act and analogous state laws, and trains marketing and sales forces on compliance with these laws.

Brian is also committed to pro bono work. He has successfully represented an asylum seeker in removal proceedings, and a disabled student seeking a residential educational placement. Brian advises a nonprofit organization dedicated to researching and preventing traumatic brain injuries. As a result of his pro bono work, Brian was selected to participate in the Boston Bar Association’s Public Interest Leadership Program.

Before joining Mintz Levin, Brian worked for Accenture, a management and technology consulting firm. There, he was a project manager and provided consulting services to several large asset management firms.

During law school, he co-chaired the Grimes Moot Court Competition and was a member of the Frederick Douglass Moot Court team.

617-348-1810
Advertisement
Advertisement