Boston PPP Loan Fraud Lawyers
You got a PPP loan in 2020. Maybe 2021. The government was throwing money at businesses during the pandemic, and you applied like everyone else. You got approved, used the funds, maybe even got forgiveness. Years passed. You moved on with your life. You assumed the federal government had moved on too.
It hasn't.
The federal government turned PPP loan fraud prosecution into an assembly line - and Boston is directly in the crosshairs. The District of Massachusetts has been one of the most aggressive federal districts in the country for pandemic fraud prosecution. Congress extended the statute of limitations to 10 years in 2022 - retroactively. That 2020 loan you thought was forgotten? It's prosecutable until 2030. That 2021 loan? Until 2031. And there's a window - six to twelve months between when the SBA flags your file and when the FBI opens a criminal case - where civil resolution might still be possible. Miss that window, and you're facing federal charges with no off-ramp.
Welcome to Spodek Law Group. We handle federal PPP loan fraud defense in Boston and throughout the District of Massachusetts. If you're under investigation, if you've received contact from the SBA Office of Inspector General, or if federal agents have reached out to you - this article explains exactly what you're facing and what options might exist.
The 10-Year Clock Is Running
In August 2022, President Biden signed the PPP and Bank Fraud Enforcement Harmonization Act. Most people have no idea what it actualy did.
It extended the statute of limitations from 5 years to 10 years - retroactively.
That means a PPP loan from 2020 is prosecutable until 2030. A loan from 2021 until 2031. The government gave itself a full decade to come for you. And there using it. The COVID-19 Fraud Enforcement Task Force - which coordinates FBI, IRS Criminal Investigation, SBA OIG, and Secret Service - remains fully operational. The FBI Boston Field Office is actively investigating PPP fraud cases right now. They have years left on the clock and theyre not slowing down.
According to Pandemic Oversight, as of December 31, 2024: 3,096 defendants have been charged with pandemic relief fraud. 2,532 have been convicted - thats an 82% conviction rate. Of those convicted, 1,741 received prison time - 81%. More than 2,008 were ordered to pay restitution. The IRS Criminal Investigation division alone achieved a 97.4% conviction rate on COVID fraud cases.
These aren't historical figures from some concluded effort. This is an assembly line that's still running. The SBA Office of Inspector General has recieved more than 250,000 hotline complaints since the pandemic began. From those, their data analytics team identified over 95,000 actionable leads. As of their last public testimony, they described this as representing "more than 100 years of investigative case work." Your file could be sitting in that queue right now. You'd have no way of knowing until they contacted you.
Massachusetts Is Ground Zero
The District of Massachusetts covers all of Massachusetts - Boston, Cambridge, Worcester, Springfield, the Cape. And this district has been particuarly aggressive on PPP fraud. They prosecute at every level.
Look at Bill Dessaps.
He operated a used-car dealership in Easton. When he submitted his PPP application, he claimed 40 employees and average monthly payroll expenses of $334,720. His dealership actualy had 3 or 4 workers, including himself. The lender disbursed $836,800. With that money, he bought a house in his sister's name (his credit score wouldn't have qualified him for a mortgage), a Rolls Royce, and French bulldogs. He was convicted in 2025 of wire fraud conspiracy, money laundering, and bank fraud. His sentencing is scheduled for January 2026. He's facing decades in federal prison.
Other Massachusetts PPP fraud cases currently being prosecuted:
- Durgaprasad Rao (Carlisle): Indicted for $18 million+ PPP fraud scheme across multiple states. Four counts of wire fraud, three counts of money laundering. Allegedly transferred funds to foreign businesses and purchased a luxury condo in New York City.
- Lonnie Smith-Matthews (Boston): Indicted for falsely claiming $128,000 in business income to obtain two PPP loans, when he actualy made less then half that amount and didn't have a real business. Sentencing March 2026.
- Adiana Pierre and Gardy Alexandre (multi-state scheme): Part of a $7.5 million fraud ring that submitted fraudulent applications for Massachusetts businesses. Pierre got 17 months. Alexandre got 15 months. They collected 10-20% kickbacks from borrowers.
The amount doesn't determine whether you get prosecuted. It only affects your sentence length.
Jameela Gross submitted a fraudulent PPP application for $18,750 on behalf of a fictitious photography business. She received time served - one day - and three years supervised release. But that sentence came from an early guilty plea with counsel. Rindal Pierre-Canel got probation for $50,000 in fraud - again, early plea. The people who waited, who talked to agents without lawyers, who let there cases progress before getting representation - they faced very different outcomes.
The Window Nobody Told You About
Most people dont know this exists.
There's a window - typically six to twelve months - between when the SBA OIG flags a loan as potentially fraudulent and when the case gets referred to the FBI for criminal investigation. During this window, there is leverage that completley disappears once criminal charges are filed.
During the OIG review stage, a skilled defense attorney may be able to negotiate a civil disposition. Repayment plus a fine. Maybe a False Claims Act settlement. These outcomes aren't pleasant, but their not federal felony convictions either. You keep your freedom. You keep your right to vote. You keep your ability to work in your profession.
But here's why those light sentences happened - the ones I mentioned above.
Jameela Gross didn't get time served because the government was feeling generous. She got time served because she had counsel, she acted early, and she negotiated a resolution before the case escalated. Same with Rindal Pierre-Canel's probation. The difference between probation and prison often isn't the amount of fraud. Its the timing of intervention.
And here's the trap most people fall into.
Some people, panicking, decide to voluntarily repay the loan thinking it will make the problem disappear. The instinct makes sense - "I'll just give it back." But the DOJ has explicitly stated that voluntary repayment can be used as evidence of consciousness of guilt. Returning the money doesn't make the criminal exposure go away. It can actualy strengthen the government's case. "Why did you repay if you didn't know it was fraudulent?"
This is complicated. The timing matters enormously. Whether to repay, when to repay, how to structure any potential resolution - these decisions require counsel who understands how federal prosecutors think and what the current landscape looks like in the District of Massachusetts.
What Happens If You Wait
So what happens if you miss the window?
The PPP itself has no criminal provisions. The CARES Act isn't a penal statute. But the DOJ uses pre-existing fraud statutes to prosecute PPP fraud - and they stack charges. One PPP application can trigger:
- Wire Fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1343) - 20-30 years
- Bank Fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1344) - 30 years
- False Statements to SBA (18 U.S.C. § 1014) - 30 years
- Money Laundering (18 U.S.C. § 1956) - 20 years
- Aggravated Identity Theft (18 U.S.C. § 1028A) - +2 years mandatory consecutive
One application. Five potential charges. Over 100 years of theoretical exposure. In practice, sentences don't reach that level - but charge stacking gives prosecutors enormous leverage in plea negotiations.
And then there's this: talking to federal agents without counsel frequently creates additional charges.
There have been several recent cases where people who decided to talk to investigators without a lawyer ended up being charged with obstruction or making false statements to federal agents - on top of the underlying PPP fraud. The agents seem friendly. They seem cooperative. They act like they're just trying to understand what happened. They are not on your side. Every word you say is being evaluated for inconsistencies that can become a separate federal charge.
Todd Spodek has handled PPP fraud cases in the District of Massachusetts. He understands the difference between OIG-stage investigations where civil resolution may still be possible, and FBI-stage investigations where criminal defense becomes the priority. He knows what prosecutors in this district look for and how they build these cases.
When Your Ready
If you're in Boston - or anywhere in Massachusetts - and you're facing a PPP loan fraud investigation, Spodek Law Group can help you understand where you stand and what options exist.
The consultation is free. Theirs no obligation. What you'll get is an honest assessment. Is this still at the OIG stage where civil resolution might be possible? Has it been referred to the FBI? What does the evidence look like? What are realistic outcomes - not best-case fantasies, but actual possibilities based on how these cases are playing out in the District of Massachusetts right now?
Call us at 888-997-5177. The statute of limitations runs until 2030 or 2031 depending on when you got your loan. The government has time. But once they move, things happen fast. The earlier you have counsel, the more leverage exists. The window I described - that six to twelve month period where civil resolution is still on the table - closes without warning.
Don't wait until federal agents show up at your door.
Were here when you need us.
