OIG’s August 2025 audit reveals SBA failed to use key tools in collecting $47B in delinquent COVID‑19 EIDLs. Learn what it means for borrowers now.
Book a Consultation CallThe U.S. Small Business Administration’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) released Audit Report 25‑23in August 2025, scrutinizing SBA’s efforts to collect on delinquent COVID‑19 Economic Injury Disaster Loans (EIDLs). With over $47 billion charged off andless than 1% recovered, the report highlights serious deficiencies in SBA’s debt recovery processes. For small business borrowers, especially those still navigating loan obligations, the findings signal potential changes in enforcement and underscore the need for proactive legal strategy.
1. $47 Billion Charged Off with Minimal Recovery
As of December 2024, SBA had charged off 369,588 COVID‑19 EIDLs totaling over $47 billion—none of which involved confirmed or suspected fraud. Less than 1% of those loan amounts were recovered, primarily through borrower-initiated actions such as business closures, bankruptcy filings, or voluntary repayments.
2. Inadequate Use of Federal Collection Tools
The OIG found that SBA did not exhaust key debt collection remedies before referring delinquent loans tothe U.S. Department of the Treasury, as required by law. These missed actions included:
These omissions likely reduced recovery prospects and failed to safeguard taxpayer interests.
3. Short Liquidation Timeframes Undermined Collections
Audit data revealed that 88% of charged-off loans were in liquidation for an average of only 3 days—far shorter than the 67-day average for loans that yielded partial recovery. In some cases, SBA charged off loans the same day they entered liquidation,without any documentation of substantial recovery efforts beyond automated notices.
4. Security Interests in Bank Accounts Not Perfected
Although SBA filed blanket liens under UCC law, it did not perfect its interest in borrower bank accounts bysecuring control agreements with financial institutions. Without these agreements, SBA was unable to claim account balances upon default—a missed opportunity for significant recovery.
5. Minimal Reporting to Credit Bureaus
The OIG found that over 94% of delinquent borrowers were not reported to credit bureaus, undermining the effectiveness of federal lending safeguards. SBA’s reporting systems lacked verification controls, which left many delinquent loans unflagged in credit databases—potentially enabling defaulted borrowers to access new federal loans.
6. No DOJ Referrals for Litigation
Despite its authority to coordinate with DOJ on large delinquent debts, SBA did not refer any EIDL loans to the DOJ for litigation. Instead, the agency relied entirely on Treasury’s Cross‑Servicing Program—which, due to a 2024 policy change, returned these loans to SBA for servicing until March 2026.
In its August 2025 audit report, the Office of Inspector General (OIG) issued three key recommendations to improve the SBA’s collection of delinquent COVID-19 EIDLs. First, OIG urged SBA to conduct a study to determine when post-default site visits would be cost-effective, and to develop policies ensuring such visits are performed to identify and liquidate collateral. SBA disagreed, arguing that most collateral covered by its blanket liens held little recoverable value, that site visits would be resource-intensive, and that their cost would outweigh potential benefits. As such, this recommendation remains unresolved.
Second, OIG recommended that SBA verify all delinquent borrowers and guarantors are reported to credit bureaus in a timely manner. SBA agreed and committed to adding functionality in its ETRAN system to log and track credit bureau submissions, with an implementation target date of June 2026. This recommendation is considered resolved but pending final action.
Finally, OIG recommended SBA establish a reasonable standard for referring delinquent COVID-19 EIDLs to the Department of Justice (DOJ) for litigation. SBA rejected this proposal, maintaining that referrals to Treasury remain the most effective collection method. The agency emphasized that DOJ referrals are resource-intensive and less effective than Treasury’s administrative offset processes. SBA did, however, acknowledge that it would coordinate with DOJ in cases involving fraud. Because OIG had specifically excluded fraud cases from its review, this recommendation also remains unresolved.
Borrowers with delinquent COVID‑19EIDLs should be aware of several key takeaways:
The OIG’s audit paints a sobering picture of SBA’s limited recovery on delinquent COVID‑19 EIDLs—and a possible shift toward more assertive collection efforts in the future. Borrowers facing delinquency or navigating default should assess their legal exposure and consider their options now.
If your business is struggling with anSBA loan or facing collection actions, contact Protect Law Group today to schedule a confidential consultation with an attorney experienced in SBA debt resolution.
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.
Clients obtained an SBA 7(a) loan for $324,000 to buy a small business and its facility. The business and real estate had an appraisal value of $318,000 at the time of purchase. The business ultimately failed but the participating lender abandoned the business equipment and real estate collateral even though it had valid security liens. As a result, the lender recouped nearly nothing from the pledged collateral, leaving the business owners liable for the deficiency balance. The SBA paid the lender the 7(a) guaranty money and was assigned ownership of the debt, including the right to collect. However, the clients never received the SBA Official 60-Day Notice and were denied the opportunity to negotiate an Offer in Compromise (OIC) or a Workout directly with the SBA before being transferred to Treasury's Bureau of Fiscal Service, which added an additional $80,000 in collection fees. Treasury garnished and offset the clients' wages, federal salary and social security benefits. When the clients tried to negotiate with Treasury by themselves, they were offered an unaffordable repayment plan which would have caused severe financial hardship. Clients subsequently hired the Firm to litigate an Appeals Petition before the SBA Office & Hearings Appeals (OHA) challenging the legal enforceability and amount of the debt. The Firm successfully negotiated a term OIC that was approved by the SBA Office of General Counsel, saving the clients approximately $205,000.
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)
