Discover who qualifies for relief under the Complete COVID Collections Act. Explore eligibility, legal insights, and navigate requirements for small businesses today.
What does the Complete COVID Collections Act mean for those seeking financial relief? As a seasoned Federal Debt Default lawyer at the Protect Law Group Firm, I will provide you with an in-depth understanding of the Complete COVID Collections Act from a legal standpoint. This article will explore the eligibility criteria for relief, the critical components of the act, and what it means for small businesses impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. With the intricate details of this legislative measure, small business owners and stakeholders can better navigate the requirements and implications of the law.
The Complete COVID Collections Act introduces a structured framework to ensure that collections on COVID-19-related loans are neither paused nor interrupted. Its provisions are rooted in a desire to maintain financial accountability and secure a smooth recovery from the economic turmoil induced by the pandemic.
The Act incorporates several key elements designed to maintain orderliness in loan collection processes and enforce accountability. Here's a breakdown of these components:
Under this legislation, collections on loans guaranteed by certain provisions of the Small Business Act due to the pandemic cannot be suspended. This mandates continued collection activities to prevent defaults and ensure financial accountability. Such provisions are vital to preserving the integrity of the funds disbursed to assist businesses.
Another significant aspect of the Act is the requirement for the Small Business Administration (SBA) to refer claims related to loans under $100,000 to the Department of the Treasury. This referral signals an added layer of governmental oversight aimed at efficient recovery and management of public funds.
The SBA Administrator must provide monthly briefings to Congress on loan collection progress and related activities. This ensures legislative oversight and keeps elected officials informed about the current status of collections and any unforeseen challenges.
A pivotal aspect of this legislation involves fraud enforcement. There is a 10-year statute of limitations for initiating criminal or civil actions linked to fraud associated with any COVID-19 relief-related loan or grant. This lengthy timeframe highlights the government's commitment to pursuing fraudulent activities long-term and deterring deceitful practices.
Transparency is integral to this Act, with a requirement placed on the Pandemic Response Accountability Committee to maintain real-time data about funds recovered by the Federal Government. This provision promotes openness and allows stakeholders to trace the allocation and recovery of funds efficiently.
To fully grasp the implications of the Complete COVID Collections Act, we must first understand the critical definitions that guide the Act's applicability and enforcement.
A covered loan includes loans guaranteed under specified sections of the Small Business Act and ones associated with economic injury due to COVID-19. The scope of these loans extends beyond the ordinary lending frameworks to encompass the extraordinary assistance provided during the pandemic.
The term "covered programs" encompasses various loan and grant programs introduced through COVID-19 relief legislation. This includes the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), as well as grants aimed at supporting shuttered venues and restaurants, among others.
The Act outlines essential oversight and reporting requirements to ensure compliance and bolster accountability.
Coordination between the SBA and the Inspector General is apparent through permitted inspections and reports, which ensure thorough reporting and oversight. This collaborative effort supports the integrity and accuracy of reports related to COVID-19 relief programs.
The Act obligates the Attorney General to provide monthly reports to Congress detailing activities and prosecutions concerning covered programs. This includes enforcement metrics, which offer a lens into the compliance and legal actions taking place.
Understanding the legislative intent behind the Complete COVID Collections Act is crucial for appreciating its implications on financial relief and accountability.
The Act's primary aim is to maintain financial accountability while ensuring the recovery framework for COVID-19 remains stable. By codifying regulations for collections on loans and enacting oversight measures, it supports long-term economic resilience.
The eligibility for relief under this legislation is inextricably linked to compliance with the stipulated provisions, financial transparency, and accountability.
Businesses that demonstrate adherence to the Act's provisions and those partaking in covered programs may qualify for relief. These entities must ensure their financial dealings align with the specific requirements outlined, displaying conformity and lawful conduct.
Compliant businesses are required to follow specified guidelines concerning loan usage, reporting, and collection participation. Non-compliance can lead to legal repercussions, making awareness of these obligations critical.
The Complete COVID Collections Act presents a formidable legal structure designed to evaluate how loan collections are managed during and after the COVID-19 pandemic.
For small businesses, navigating the complexities of this Act involves understanding its core elements and compliance requirements to leverage potential relief opportunities. The Act emphasizes the importance of robust financial management, which can profoundly impact eligibility.
From a legal perspective, non-compliance can bear severe consequences, underscoring the need for meticulous adherence to legislative guidelines. The emphasis on fraud detection and reporting ushers in a new level of scrutiny and accountability.
The Complete COVID Collections Act defines a clear pathway for maintaining financial discipline and supporting a post-COVID-19 economic resurgence. By understanding your responsibilities under the Act, you can ensure compliance with regulations and potentially access eligible relief. This legislative framework underscores the necessity of continued vigilance and accountability as we navigate the path toward recovery.
Client’s small business obtained an SBA 7(a) loan for $150,000. He and his wife signed personal guarantees and pledged their home as collateral. The SBA loan went into default, the term or maturity date was accelerated and demand for payment of the entire amount claimed was made. The SBA lender’s note gave it the right to adjust the default interest rate from 7.25% to 18% per annum. The business filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy but was dismissed after 3 years due to its inability to continue with payments under the plan. Clients wanted to file for Chapter 7 bankruptcy, which would have been a mistake as their home had significant equity to repay the SBA loan balance in full as the Trustee would likely seize and sell the home to repay the secured and unsecured creditors. However, the SBA lender opted to pursue the SBA 7(a) Guaranty and subsequently assigned the loan and the right to enforce collection to the SBA. Clients then received the SBA Official 60-Day Notice and hired the Firm to respond to it and negotiate on their behalf. Clients disputed the SBA’s alleged balance of $148,000, as several payments made to the SBA lender during the Chapter 11 reorganization were not accounted for. To challenge the SBA’s claimed debt balance, the Firm Attorneys initiated expedited discovery to obtain government records. SBA records disclosed the true amount owed was about $97,000. Moreover, because the Clients’ home had significant equity, they were not eligible for an Offer in Compromise or an immediate Release of Lien for Consideration, despite being incorrectly advised by non-attorney consulting companies that they were. Instead, our Firm Attorneys recommended a Workout of $97,000 spread over a lengthy term and a waiver of the applicable interest rate making the monthly payment affordable. After back and forth negotiations, SBA approved the Workout proposal, thereby saving the home from imminent foreclosure and reducing the Clients' liability by nearly $81,000 in incorrect principal balance, accrued interest, and statutory collection fees.
Small business and guarantors obtained an SBA COVID-EIDL loan for $1,000,000. Clients defaulted causing SBA to charge-off the loan, accelerate the balance and refer the debt to Treasury's Bureau of Fiscal Service for collection. Treasury added nearly $500,000 in collection fees totaling $1,500,000. Clients were served with the SBA's Official 60-Day Notice and exercised the Repayment option by applying for the SBA’s Hardship Accommodation Plan. However, their application was summarily rejected by the SBA without providing any meaningful reasons. Clients hired the Firm to represent them against the SBA, Treasury and a Private Collection Agency. After securing government records through discovery, we filed an Appeals Petition with the SBA Office of Hearings & Appeals (OHA) court challenging the SBA's referral of the debt to Treasury. During litigation and before the OHA court issued a final Decision and Order, the Firm successfully negotiated a reinstatement and recall of the loan back to the SBA, a modification of the original repayment terms, termination of Treasury's enforced collection and removal of the statutory collection fees.
Client’s small business obtained an SBA 7(a) loan for $750,000. She and her husband signed personal guarantees exposing all of their non-exempt income and assets. With just 18 months left on the maturity date and payment on the remaining balance, the Great Recession of 2008 hit, which ultimately caused the business to fail and default on the loan terms. The 7(a) lender accelerated and sent a demand for full payment of the remaining loan balance. The SBA lender’s note allowed for a default interest rate of about 7% per year. In response to the lender's aggressive collection action, Client's husband filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy in an attempt to protect against their personal assets. However, his bankruptcy discharge did not relieve the Client's personal guarantee liability for the SBA debt. The SBA lender opted to pursue the SBA 7(a) Guaranty and subsequently assigned the loan and the right to enforce collection against the Client to the SBA. The Client then received the SBA Official 60-Day Notice. After conducting a Case Evaluation with her, she then hired the Firm to respond and negotiate on her behalf with just 34 days left before the impending referral to Treasury. The Client wanted to dispute the SBA’s alleged debt balance as stated in the 60-Day Notice by claiming the 7(a) lender failed to liquidate business collateral in a commercially reasonable manner - which if done properly - proceeds would have paid back the entire debt balance. However, due to time constraints, waivers contained in the SBA loan instruments, including the fact the Client was not able to inspect the SBA's records for investigation purposes before the remaining deadline, Client agreed to submit a Structured Workout for the alleged balance in response to the Official 60-Day Notice as she was not eligible for an Offer in Compromise (OIC) because of equity in non-exempt income and assets. After back and forth negotiations, the SBA Loan Specialist approved the Workout proposal, reducing the Client's purported liability by nearly $142,142.27 in accrued interest, and statutory collection fees. Without the Firm's intervention and subsequent approval of the Workout proposal, the Client's debt amount (with accrued interest, Treasury's statutory collection fee and Treasury's interest based on the Current Value of Funds Rate (CVFR) would have been nearly $291,030.
.jpg)
