SBA OIG Report Highlights Missed Collection Opportunities on Delinquent COVID 19 EIDLs
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.
Learn why the SBA failed five consecutive financial audits, what it means for small businesses, and how the agency plans to fix internal control weaknesses.
Book a Consultation CallThe U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) has faced serious scrutiny in recent years due to its inability to obtain a clean financial audit. From FY 2020 to FY 2024, the SBA received repeated disclaimers of opinion on its financial statements, signaling systemic internal control failures. These issues raise concerns not only for government accountability but also for the small business community that relies on the SBA for vital support.
This blog breaks down the findings from OIG Report 25-25, detailing the core issues, the SBA’s remediation strategy, and what small business owners and stakeholders should be aware of moving forward.
The SBA’s financial audit troubles stem from its rapid scaling during the COVID-19 pandemic. Between FY 2020 and 2021, the agency distributed over $1.2 trillion in pandemic-related aid through programs like the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), COVID-19 Economic Injury Disaster Loans (EIDL), and others. While this support was critical for struggling businesses, it overwhelmed the agency’s financial reporting systems.
Key findings from the Office of Inspector General (OIG) include:
Five consecutive years of audit disclaimers.
Up to seven material weaknesses in internal controls annually.
Audit issues primarily tied to COVID-19 relief programs, financial reporting failures, and inadequate oversight of contractors and IT systems.
Repeated audit recommendations—many of which remain unresolved.
When the SBA faces internal control and audit failures, it affects the broader small business ecosystem:
Delayed program funding and audits may slow down future relief or assistance.
Reduced public trust in SBA-managed programs.
Potential for fraud or mismanagement, as oversight gaps create vulnerabilities.
Moreover, businesses that rely on the SBA for financing or disaster assistance must recognize the agency’s current limitations in oversight and governance.
In January 2025, the SBA launched its Financial Statement Audit Remediation Strategy, focusing on five key areas:
Refining internal governance.
Finalizing critical financial policies.
Validating COVID-19 EIDL loan populations.
Improving third-party vendor oversight.
Upgrading financial information systems.
While the strategy is a step in the right direction, the OIG notes that not all material weaknesses have been fully prioritized, and execution gaps remain. Notably, the SBA has not yet designated a single empowered executive with the authority to enforce remediation across all program offices—an essential step for success.
The OIG made four strategic recommendations:
Appoint a senior executive to lead audit remediation.
Improve agencywide communication of audit goals.
Integrate remediation goals into the strategic plan.
Align individual performance plans with remediation outcomes.
SBA management has accepted most recommendations, though the key leadership appointment remains unresolved as of September 2025.
The SBA plays a critical role in supporting small businesses, especially in times of economic crisis. However, effective support requires sound financial management and internal accountability. While the agency is taking steps to recover from its audit challenges, stakeholders should remain informed and vigilant.
Small businesses should also consider working with experienced legal professionals who understand the SBA’s evolving landscape—particularly when navigating SBA loan disputes, appeals, or compliance issues.
If your business has been impacted by SBA loan programs or you’re facing challenges with SBA-related financial or legal matters, contact Protect Law Group today. Our experienced attorneys are here to help you understand your rights and options. Contact us today to ensure your business is protected and positioned for success.
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.
Clients obtained an SBA 7(a) loan for their small business in the amount of $298,000. They pledged their primary residence and personal guarantees as direct collateral for the loan. The business failed, the lender was paid the 7(a) guaranty money and the debt was assigned to the SBA. Clients received the Official 60-Day Notice giving them a couple of options to resolve the debt balance directly with the SBA before referral to Treasury's Bureau of Fiscal Service. The risk of referral to Treasury would add nearly $95,000 to the SBA principal loan balance. With the default interest rate at 7.5%, the amount of money to pay toward interest was projected at $198,600. Clients hired the Firm with only 4 days left to respond to the 60-Day due process notice. Because the clients were not eligible for an Offer in Compromise (OIC) due to the significant equity in their home and the SBA lien encumbering it, the Firm Attorneys proposed a Structured Workout to resolve the SBA debt. After back and forth negotiations, the SBA Loan Specialist assigned to the case approved the Workout terms which prevented potential foreclosure of their home, but also saved the clients approximately $294,000 over the agreed-upon Workout term with a waiver of all contractual and statutory administrative fees, collection costs, penalties, and interest.
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’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)
.jpeg)
