How Small‐Dollar Fraud Provides the SBA Powerful Leverage though the SBA OIG’s Administrative False Claims Act (AFCA) Muscle That Can Cost SBA Lenders, Borrowers, and Guarantors Up To $1 Million
Book a Consultation Call
On December 23, 2024, Congress super-charged an obscure statute—the Administrative False Claims Act (AFCA)—when it passed the FY 2025 National Defense Authorization Act. The amendments raise the cap on administrative cases from $150,000 to $1 million and broaden what counts as a “false claim,” empowering every federal inspector general—including the SBA Office of Inspector General (OIG)—to pursue loan-related fraud or malfeasance even when the Department of Justice (DOJ) says “no thanks.”
More importantly, it should be noted that SBA Administrator Kelly Loeffler published her "Day One Memo" confirming SBA plans to aggressively step up collection efforts and audit investigations for COVID loans disbursed due to the pandemic –which can lead to a number of AFCA actions in the near future.
As part of the Trump Administration’s policy to pursue SBA COVID Loan fraud specifically involving PPP and EIDL loans, legislation was introduced in Congress by Republicans to ensure that collections on loans made to small businesses borrowers and guarantors related to the COVID-19 pandemic will no longer be suspended.
Click the following link to learn more about the "Complete COVID Collections Act" that was introduced as a Senate bill and may become federal law in the future: COVID Collections Act
Feature: Where the case is heard
AFCA (as amended): Administrative hearing before a United States Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) at the SBA Office of Hearings & Appeals Court (OHA) or Board of Contract Appeals member
Civil FCA: Federal District Court
Feature: DOJ involvement
AFCA (as amended): DOJ must approve the filing but does not have to prosecute in Federal District Court
Civil FCA: DOJ (or a qui-tam relator) files the suit
Feature: Dollar threshold
AFCA (as amended): ≤ $1 million per case (indexed for inflation)
Civil FCA: No cap
Feature: Penalties
AFCA (as amended): Up to $5,000 per false claim/statement + double damages + investigation costs
Civil FCA: Up to ~$27,000 per claim + treble damages
Feature: Statute of limitations
AFCA (as amended): 6 years from violation or 3 years from discovery (max 10)
Civil FCA: 6–10 years depending on facts
Sources: 31 U.S.C. §§ 3801-3812; FY 2025 NDAA § 5203.
Hearing & Decision – After discovery and an evidentiary hearing,the presiding ALJ issues findings in a Decision and Order – which can involve the imposition of penalties or dismisses the case. Appeals go to the SBA Administrator and then to the Federal D.C. Circuit pursuant to rights and remedies under the Administrative Procedures Act (APA).
Player: 7(a) / CDC Lenders
Potential AFCA Violation: Certifying that collateral was properly perfected or liquidated in a commercially reasonable manner when it was not
Real-World Example: Filing an SBA Form 159 indicating all fees were disclosed when “packaging” fees were hidden
Player: Borrowers
Potential AFCA Violation: Overstating payroll in a PPP forgiveness application
Real-World Example: Claiming EIDL funds were used for working capital while diverting cash to personal real estate or other personal expenses
Player: Guarantors
Potential AFCA Violation: Concealing assets to avoid repayment (reverse false claim)
Real-World Example: Transferring property to a spouse after default but before Treasury offset; Lying about or omitting relevant financial information in financial statements (Form 770), Offer in Compromise(Form 1150) or other pertinent documents submitted under penalty of perjury
Player: Servicers / Purchasers
Potential AFCA Violation: Misreporting liquidation proceeds to maximize the SBA guarantee purchase
Real-World Example: Failing to remit auction proceeds and certifying “no recoveries available"
Because the amended AFCA now covers reverse false claims,hiding assets or under-reporting recoveries can trigger liability even when no new funds are sought. Source: (National Law Review)
For a single 7(a) guarantee purchase of $400,000 supported by four false certifications, exposure can exceed $900,000 before interest.
The AFCA’s $1 million ceiling and broader definitions mean SBA OIG no longer needs to wait for DOJ to chase many PPP, EIDL, Disaster, 7(a)or 504 fraud cases. Small-dollar no longer means small risk. A single inaccurate certification under penalty of perjury can invite an administrative lawsuit before the SBA OHA Court that freezes assets, garnishes Treasury payments, and tarnishes reputations.
If you are an SBA borrower, or guarantor facing an inquiry—contact the attorneys at SBA-Attorneys.com for a confidential Case Evaluation.
This article is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified SBA-Attorney for advice regarding your individual situation.
Millions of Dollars in SBA Debts Resolved via Offer in Compromise and Negotiated Repayment Agreements without our Clients filing for Bankruptcy or Facing Home Foreclosure
Millions of Dollars in Treasury Debts Defended Against via AWG Hearings, Treasury Offset Program Resolution, Cross-servicing Disputes, Private Collection Agency Representation, Compromise Offers and Negotiated Repayment Agreements
Our Attorneys are Authorized by the Agency Practice Act to Represent Federal Debtors Nationwide before the SBA, The SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals, the Treasury Department, and the Bureau of Fiscal Service.
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.
Our firm successfully resolved an SBA 7a loan in the original amount of $364,000 for a New Jersey-based borrower. The client filed Chapter 7 bankruptcy but the mortgage on his real estate securing the loan remained in place. The available equity amounted to $263,470 and the deficiency equaled $317,886.
We gathered the pertinent documentation and prepared a comprehensive collateral analysis. We negotiated directly with the SBA, obtaining a full release of the mortgage for $80,000.
Client personally guaranteed SBA 7(a) loan for $350,000. The small business failed but because of the personal guarantee liability, the client continued to pay the monthly principal & interest out-of-pocket draining his savings. The client hired a local attorney but quickly realized that he was not familiar with SBA-backed loans or their standard operating procedures. Our firm was subsequently hired after the client received the SBA's official 60-day notice. After back-and-forth negotiations, we were able to convince the SBA to reinstate the loan, retract the acceleration of the outstanding balance, modify the original terms, and approve a structured workout reducing the interest rate from 7.75% to 0% and extending the maturity date for a longer period to make the monthly payments affordable. In conclusion, not only we were able to help the client avoid litigation and bankruptcy, but our SBA lawyers also saved him approximately $227,945 over the term of the workout.
.jpg)
