Indianapolis PPP Loan Fraud Lawyers

You thought the business you created on paper would be impossible to disprove. After all, how do prosecutors prove something never existed? You figured if they couldn't find records of fraud, they couldn't build a case.

They don't need records of fraud. They need records of nothing.

Welcome to Spodek Law Group. Our goal is to tell you what other websites won't: in Indianapolis and across Indiana's federal districts, PPP fraud prosecutions aren't about proving you lied. They're about proving your business never existed. And proving a negative turns out to be remarkably easy when you left zero evidence of legitimate operations.

Brooke Bowie claimed to run a business called "Icie Beauty 4 Life" with $20,000 to $80,000 in revenue. The business had no employees, no revenue, no operations - it didn't exist. D'Ericka Lee claimed to run three separate businesses: a retail clothing store, a daycare, and a medical services company. None of them existed. Rakita Davis, while employed by the IRS, claimed to operate a catering business. There was no catering business.

If you're facing PPP fraud charges in Indianapolis, if the FBI has contacted you about pandemic relief loans, if you've received a target letter from the U.S. Attorney's Office - you need to understand that prosecutors dont have to prove you committed fraud. They just have to prove your business was never real. And the absence of every normal business record becomes overwhelming evidence against you.

The Business That Never Existed

Most PPP fraud cases involve inflated numbers. A real business claims more employees than it had. A legitimate operation overstates payroll. Those cases involve interpretation - prosecutors have to prove the actual numbers, then prove the application numbers were false, then prove the applicant knew they were false.

Indianapolis cases are different.

In Indiana, prosecutors have built there careers on phantom business prosecutions. The defendants didnt exaggerate existing operations - they invented businesses from nothing. A few paragraphs typed into a loan application created companies that existed nowhere else. No tax filings. No employees. No customers. No vendors. No actual operations of any kind.

Heres why this matters for your defense. When prosecutors charge someone with inflating an existing business, defense attorneys can argue about categorization, interpretation, honest mistakes. When prosecutors charge someone with inventing a business from nothing, there's nothing to argue about. Either the business existed or it didnt. And proving it didnt exist is as simple as checking IRS records, state filings, bank accounts, and business licenses.

The government dosent need witnesses who saw fraud. They dont need documents showing falsification. They need the absence of documents - the Schedule C that was never filed, the quarterly taxes that were never paid, the business account that never received customer deposits. The hole in the record IS the record.

If your business existed only on your PPP application, prosecutors already have everything they need. The absence of evidence isnt a gap in the governments case. It is the governments case. Every missing tax form, every non-existent employee record, every business address that turns out to be a personal residence - its all evidence that what you claimed was never real.

How Indiana Prosecutors Prove a Negative

Consider how straightforward these prosecutions actualy are.

D'Ericka Lee filed three EIDL applications. She claimed to run a retail clothing and apparel business. She claimed to operate a daycare. She claimed to provide medical services. Each business purportedly employed multiple people and generated revenue.

The addresses she listed? Personal residences incapable of housing a business. The employees she claimed? They didnt exist. The revenue she reported? There was none. The businesses themselves? Completly fictional.

Prosecutors didnt need insider witnesses. They didnt need recorded conversations. They checked basic records and found nothing. No business license applications. No state registration. No IRS filings showing business income. No bank accounts with customer deposits. No suppliers. No inventory. No customers. No evidence of any kind that these businesses ever operated.

Lee received one year of probation and was ordered to pay $10,000 in restitution. Her case took relativley little prosecutorial effort becuase there was nothing to investigate - just an absence to document.

The pattern repeats across Indiana cases. Dashanae Hamlet-Davis claimed to be the sole proprietor of a retail business. The business didnt exist. She used PPP funds for clothing, jewelry, electronics, and a vacation. Prosecutors proved the non-existence of her business, documented her personal spending, and secured a conviction.

Jade Price filed four fraudulent PPP applications. She claimed gross income for a business that didnt exist. Prosecutors documented the absence of legitimate business records, and Price was sentenced to 12 months probation with over $80,000 in restitution.

Rachael Robinson submitted two PPP applications for a business that did not exist. The investigation was straightforward: verify that no such business ever operated, trace where the funds went, prosecute. She was ordered to repay over $55,000.

These arnt complicated fraud schemes requiring forensic accountants. These are basic verifications that any investigator can complete in hours. Does the claimed business appear in IRS records? No. Did the applicant file Schedule C showing self-employment income? No. Is there a business license on file with the state? No. Are there bank deposits consistent with claimed revenue? No.

When every answer is no, the prosecution writes itself.

What Indianapolis Sentences Actually Look Like

Let me show you whats actualy happening in Indiana's federal courts right now. These arnt hypotheticals. These are real sentences from real phantom business prosecutions.

Brooke Bowie - Indianapolis. 4 felony counts for fraudulent EIDL applications. Claimed to run "Icie Beauty 4 Life" with $20K-$80K revenue. Business didnt exist. Had pending felony charges at time of applications. Sentence: 8 months federal prison.

Robert K. Hall - Bloomington. Conspiracy to commit wire fraud and money laundering. Combined BEC schemes with PPP fraud. 73 years old. Total fraud: $668,746. Sentence: 41 months federal prison.

D'Ericka Lee - Indianapolis. Wire fraud, false documents. Three fake businesses (retail, daycare, medical services). None existed. Listed personal residences as business addresses. Sentence: 1 year probation. Restitution: $10,000.

Dashanae Hamlet-Davis - Fort Wayne. Wire fraud. Fake retail business. Spent funds on clothing, jewelry, electronics, vacation. 26 years old. Sentence: 18 months probation. Restitution: $23,431.

Jade Price - Winfield. Wire fraud. Four fraudulent PPP applications. Business didnt exist. 29 years old. Sentence: 12 months probation. Restitution: $80,355.

Rakita Davis - Fort Wayne. Former IRS employee. Wire fraud. Fake catering business. Spent funds on jewelry, airfare, luxury car rentals, vacations. 45 years old. Sentence: 24 months probation. Restitution: $55,213.

Kimberly Dumes - Indianapolis. Former Postal employee. Wire fraud. Three fraudulent CARES Act applications. $51,664 obtained. Sentence: 3 years probation.

James Henley - Greenwood. Serial fraudster. Aggravated identity theft, conspiracy, money laundering, 8 counts wire fraud. Multiple complex schemes over 3 years. Total loss: $2.9 million. Sentence: 10 years federal prison. Restitution: $1.88 million.

Heres the pattern you should notice. Smaller phantom business cases result in probation. Mid-size cases involving conspiracy or aggravating factors result in prison time. Large-scale or serial fraud results in substantial sentences. Hall got 41 months at age 73. Henley got 10 years for being a serial fraudster.

The financial consequences are permanant regardless of whether you receive prison time. Restitution orders follow you forever. These amounts cant be discharged in bankruptcy. Wage garnishment continues for decades. Tax refunds get intercepted indefinatly. Even probation cases result in five-figure or six-figure repayment obligations that fundamentaly alter your financial future.

The IRS Employee Who Committed PPP Fraud

Rakita Davis's case demonstrates something important about phantom business prosecutions: even people who should have known better made the same fundamental mistake.

Davis was 45 years old and employed by the IRS when she applied for two PPP loans in 2021. She claimed to be the sole proprietor of a catering business. The business didnt exist.

Think about what that means. An IRS employee - someone who processes tax returns, who understands how the government tracks income, who knows exactly what documentation the IRS maintains - decided to claim a fake business on a federal loan application. She apparently believed that inventing a catering company on paper would somehow be difficult to disprove.

It wasnt difficult at all. The government checked there own records and found no evidence of a catering business. No Schedule C. No quarterly payments. No employee withholding. No sales tax filings. Nothing.

But heres what made Davis's case even worse for her defense. She used the PPP funds for luxury purchases. Jewelry. Airfare. Luxury car rentals. Vacations. Every dollar spent became additional evidence that the funds were never intended for payroll protection - becuase there was no payroll to protect.

Davis received 24 months probation and was ordered to pay over $55,000 in restitution. Her IRS employment history didnt help her - if anything, it underscored how deliberatly she committed the fraud. Someone with her background couldnt plausibly claim ignorance about federal documentation requirements.

The lesson here is straightforward. If an IRS employee couldnt successfully hide a phantom business from federal investigators, neither can you. The systems that track business activity are interconnected, comprehensive, and thorough. A business that exists only on a loan application leaves a conspicuous hole in every other system where legitimate businesses appear.

Heres something else practitioners understand about phantom business cases. The spending pattern becomes part of the prosecution. Davis didnt just create a fake business - she spent the funds in ways that proved the fraud. Jewelry isnt payroll. Vacations arnt business expenses. Luxury car rentals dont protect employees. Every personal purchase became additional evidence that she never intended to use the funds for there stated purpose.

This is why Indianapolis prosecutors love phantom business cases. The fraud is obvious from two directions: the absence of any legitimate business, and the presence of spending thats clearley inconsistent with payroll protection. Most defendants dont realize that there credit card statements and bank records are building the prosecution's case while the investigation proceeds.

And the statute of limitations gives prosecutors time. The PPP and Bank Fraud Enforcement Harmonization Act of 2022 extended the statute to 10 years. That means prosecutors have until 2030-2032 to pursue phantom business fraud from 2020 applications. The investigation might not have reached you yet. But the records showing your business never existed arnt going anywhere. Theyre permanantly available for prosecutors to access whenever they're ready to build your case.

When Pending Charges Expose Everything

Brooke Bowie's case reveals another risk of phantom business fraud that most defendants never consider.

Bowie was 29 years old when she submitted four EIDL applications for a business called "Icie Beauty 4 Life." She claimed the business had revenue between $20,000 and $80,000. In reality, the business had no employees, no revenue, and didnt actually exist.

But heres what made Bowie's situation uniquley problematic. On her EIDL applications, she stated that she had no pending felony charges. That was false. At the time of her applications, Bowie had numerous pending felony charges.

This created multiple layers of fraud. The phantom business itself was fraudulent. The certification about pending charges was also false. And the existence of those pending charges gave investigators additional reason to scrutinize her applications.

Indiana's State Board of Accounts denied all four of Bowie's EIDL applications due to suspicion of fraud. But the denial wasnt the end - it was the beginning of a federal prosecution. U.S. District Judge Sarah Evans Barker sentenced Bowie to 8 months in federal prison, one of the harsher outcomes in Indiana's phantom business cases.

The absence of business records isn't a gap in the government's case - it IS the government's case. Bowie apparantly thought that creating a fake business would be hard to disprove. Instead, proving the non-existence of "Icie Beauty 4 Life" was trivial. No business license. No tax filings. No actual operations. Combined with her false certification about pending charges, the case was airtight.

Consider your own situation. If you claimed a business that dosent exist on a PPP or EIDL application, investigators dont need to find evidence of fraud. They need to find the absence of evidence that your business was real. And that absence is everywhere - in every database where legitimate businesses appear and yours dosent.

Heres the part that catches most defendants off guard. The investigation often starts with automated cross-referencing. Federal databases compare PPP application claims against IRS records, state business registrations, and financial institution data. When your claimed business dosent appear in any of these systems, your application gets flagged for review. You might not hear from investigators for months or even years, but the discrepancy between what you claimed and what exists in federal records has already been identified.

The cross-referencing process has gotten increasinly sophisticated. Early in the pandemic, investigators relied on obvious red flags - duplicate Social Security numbers, identical addresses across multiple applications, impossibley high employee counts. Now they use pattern recognition to identify applications where business claims dont match any verifiable records. A phantom business that looked safe in 2020 may already be on a priority list for prosecution in 2025.

Indiana's federal districts have prosecuted dozens of phantom business cases, and the conviction rate is virtualy 100%. Thats not becuase prosecutors are unusualy skilled - its becuase these cases are almost impossible to defend. The defendant claims a business existed. The government shows it didnt. There's no interpretation to argue about, no ambiguity to exploit. The absence of records is definative proof.

Why Early Intervention Matters in Phantom Cases

If your facing PPP fraud allegations in Indianapolis - if the FBI has contacted you, if youve received a target letter, if you suspect your phantom business application has attracted attention - you need to understand the limited defense options available.

Phantom business cases are extremly difficult to defend after indictment. The government's case is simple: they claim your business didnt exist. Your defense options are essentially:

1. Prove the business actualy existed (requires documentation you probably dont have)
2. Challenge the investigation methodology (rarely successful)
3. Negotiate a plea with reduced charges or sentencing recommendations

Option 1 is impossible if your business genuinly didnt exist. You cant manufacture years of tax filings, customer records, and business operations retroactivly. The hole in the documentary record is permanant.

Option 2 faces long odds becuase phantom business investigations are straightforward. Theres little room for procedural challenges when the government simply verified the absence of records.

That leaves Option 3 - negotiation. And the timing of that negotiation matters enormousely.

OK so heres the reality that most defendants dont want to hear. Phantom business cases rarely go to trial. The evidence is too straightforward. The outcome is too predictable. Nearly every defendant pleads guilty becuase fighting an airtight case only increases the eventual sentence. The question isnt whether you'll be convicted - its how bad the conviction will be.

Defendants who engage counsel before indictment have more leverage. They can proactivley approach prosecutors. They can provide context about there circumstances. They can demonstrate cooperation before charges are filed. In phantom business cases, early cooperation often results in probation rather than prison time.

Defendants who wait until after indictment have fewer options. The charges are already public. The investigation is complete. The government has documented every way your claimed business failed to exist. Negotiation becomes damage control rather than case resolution.

At Spodek Law Group, Todd Spodek has handled hundreds of federal fraud cases involving fabricated business claims. The defendants who call before there names appear on an indictment have meaningful choices about how there cases proceed. The defendants who call after charges are filed are often negotiating the terms of there guilty plea rather than there case outcome.

Call 212-300-5196 before prosecutors finish documenting everything your business never did. Not becuase were trying to frighten you into hiring a lawyer. Becuase in Indianapolis, phantom business prosecutions are designed to be simple, fast, and devastating. The absence of your business from every normal record is all the evidence prosecutors need.

Spodek Law Group. The Woolworth Building, 233 Broadway Suite 710, New York. We put this information on our website becuase most defendants dont understand how easy phantom business cases are to prove. Our goal isnt to scare you. Its to make sure you understand that in Indiana's federal districts, the business that existed only on your application left a permanent, provable absence everywhere else.

In Indianapolis, prosecutors dont have to prove you lied. They prove your business never existed - and proving a negative is simple when you left zero evidence it was ever real. The phantom business you created on paper left no paper trail to defend. Every missing document, every absent filing, every non-existent record becomes another piece of the governments case. The hole you left in the system is the evidence that convicts you.