Alaska PPP Loan Fraud Lawyers
Alaska PPP Loan Fraud Lawyers
FBI agents contacted you about your 2020 PPP loan. Or an SBA audit flagged your Alaska business for investigation. You filled out forms during lockdowns when guidance changed weekly, got approved, survived the pandemic. Now federal prosecutors in the District of Alaska say you committed fraud. You’re reading about Cheryl Labrie from Anchorage charged with $1 million COVID relief fraud in January 2024. You know U.S. Attorney S. Lane Tucker established a COVID-19 Fraud Task Force in February 2024 specifically to prosecute pandemic fraud in Alaska. You’re wondering if your survival loan becomes a federal felony in Anchorage federal court.
Thanks for visiting Spodek Law Group—a second-generation law firm managed by Todd Spodek. We have over 40 years of combined experience defending federal fraud cases, including PPP prosecutions in Alaska federal court. This article tells you what happens from Alaska investigation through sentencing in Anchorage—including recent cases and the COVID-19 Task Force targeting Alaskans. When District of Alaska prosecutors use 30-year maximum sentences to coerce guilty pleas, your Sixth Amendment right to counsel isn’t optional.
Alaska Still Prosecuting 2020 PPP Loans
The Paycheck Protection Program ended in 2021. So why is the District of Alaska still charging cases? Cheryl Labrie, 36, from Anchorage was indicted in January 2024 on wire fraud, bank fraud under 18 USC §1344, and money laundering charges—prosecutors allege she obtained nearly $1 million through multiple EIDL and PPP loans. Peter Igwacho, 64, an Anchorage resident, was convicted in Oregon federal court in August 2025 for filing fraudulent PPP and EIDL applications between April 2020 and October 2021—he faces sentencing in November 2025. An Anchorage businessman agreed to pay $397,990 to settle COVID relief fraud allegations. These aren’t old cases wrapping up; these are new Alaska prosecutions for 2020 conduct. Congress extended the statute of limitations to ten years. Alaska federal prosecutors can charge you through 2031 for a 2020 loan. U.S. Attorney Tucker established an interagency COVID-19 Fraud Task Force in February 2024—FBI, IRS Criminal Investigation, SBA Office of Inspector General, Alaska State Troopers. The government distributed over $800 billion with minimal oversight, then prosecuted borrowers when chaos produced questionable applications. When Alaska federal prosecutors target business owners who struggled to interpret contradictory SBA guidance during a pandemic, constitutional protections become the only barrier between aggressive prosecution and wrongful conviction.
Investigation to Sentencing in Anchorage
Your first indication of trouble: an SBA auditor sends a letter requesting documentation for your 2020 PPP loan. Payroll records, tax returns, bank statements. Or FBI agents appear at your Alaska business asking to “talk” about your loan application. What you do next determines whether you face charges in Anchorage federal court—and if charged, whether you receive probation or prison time like defendants nationwide. SBA audits flag inconsistencies. FBI opens an investigation, subpoenas documents from your bank and accountant, interviews employees. This lasts months, sometimes over a year. You might not know you’re under investigation until agents contact you or you receive a target letter from an Assistant U.S. Attorney in the District of Alaska. This is when counsel matters most—before you talk to Alaska investigators, before you turn over documents, before irreversible decisions. A federal grand jury in Anchorage charges you with 18 USC §1344 (bank fraud), 18 USC §1014 (false statements to SBA), 18 USC §371 (conspiracy)—30 years, 30 years, 5 years maximum respectively. You’re arrested or surrender at the federal courthouse in Anchorage. Initial appearance and detention hearing. Most nonviolent fraud defendants in Alaska are released pending trial. Your Alaska attorney gets discovery. You file motions to suppress evidence, motions to dismiss counts. Plea negotiations begin with the AUSA. Here’s reality: 90% of federal cases resolve through guilty pleas. Not because everyone’s guilty—because of the trial penalty. Alaska prosecutors offer three years if you plead; threaten ten if you go to trial and lose. That coercive power is why your right to trial exists more in theory than practice. You either accept a plea or proceed to trial in Alaska federal court. Sentencing occurs three to six months later. The judge calculates your guideline range based on federal sentencing guidelines—primarily loss amount. Alaska prosecutors argue for prison time. Your attorney argues mitigating factors: repayment, acceptance of responsibility, criminal history, good faith reliance on advice.
Intent
The government must prove you intentionally misrepresented facts on your PPP loan application. Not that you made errors—that you knowingly submitted false information to obtain funds you weren’t entitled to receive. This intent requirement creates the primary defense in Alaska PPP fraud cases: good faith mistake. Consider early 2020’s confusion. The CARES Act left eligibility questions unanswered. The SBA issued FAQs, then revised them repeatedly. How do you calculate “payroll costs” for independent contractors? Can you include owner compensation? These were many, many questions that separated eligibility from fraud charges in Alaska federal court. Suppose you relied on your Alaska accountant to calculate payroll. Your accountant used a methodology including compensation categories the SBA later clarified were ineligible. Years later, District of Alaska prosecutors claim fraud. This is where the intent defense works: you didn’t knowingly submit false information; you relied in good faith on professional advice. That’s not a crime—that’s a paperwork error. Or the SBA guidance was unclear about eligibility. You interpreted it to allow your application. Alaska prosecutors say you were wrong. But criminal fraud requires proof you knew your application was false. If reasonable people disagreed about SBA guidance—and in early 2020, they did—prosecutors can’t prove intentional fraud. Alaska federal prosecutors charge you with 30-year maximum bank fraud, then offer five years to plead. That coercive dynamic forces innocent people to accept convictions. The constitutional principle: punishment should fit the crime in Anchorage federal court, not prosecutor discretion. When the line between paperwork error and federal felony depends on interpreting ambiguous pandemic guidance, presumption of innocence separates legitimate prosecution from overreach. The Labrie case from Anchorage involved allegations of nearly $1 million in fraudulent EIDL and PPP loans. At the other end: defendants nationwide who obtained small loans based on good faith errors and repaid before sentencing sometimes receive probation. Sentencing in Alaska federal court depends on loss amount—guidelines increase dramatically as loss increases. Acceptance of responsibility: pleading guilty brings a three-level reduction, often the difference between prison and probation in Anchorage. Restitution before sentencing demonstrates remorse. First-time offenders receive lower sentences than those with priors. Cooperation investigating other cases brings significant reductions. Recent sentences nationwide: $11 million with money laundering got 15+ years. $900,000 scheme got 51 months. Smaller amounts with mitigating factors in Alaska federal court: supervised release or short terms possible. When FBI agents searched your Anchorage office, did they have a warrant? If they searched without a warrant or exceeded its scope, evidence gets suppressed under the Fourth Amendment. Sometimes suppressing key evidence collapses the government’s case in Alaska federal court. When agents interviewed you in Alaska, did they advise you of Miranda rights before custodial interrogation? Did they continue questioning after you invoked your right to remain silent? Statements obtained in violation of the Fifth Amendment get suppressed. If your confession was the prosecution’s centerpiece and gets suppressed in Anchorage, the case might collapse. Did Alaska prosecutors rely on evidence from an administrative subpoena that exceeded authority? Did investigators coerce your Alaska accountant into providing privileged documents? These aren’t technicalities—these are constitutional protections that exist because government power can be abused. The “insufficient evidence” defense challenges government burden. Alaska prosecutors must prove every element beyond reasonable doubt. If evidence shows errors but doesn’t prove intentional fraud in Anchorage federal court—if your SBA interpretation was objectively reasonable even if wrong—government hasn’t met its burden.
212-300-5196.
Related Posts
CFTC Defense LawyersUnderstanding the Role of the CFTC and Facing Investigations Working hand-in-hand with the U.S. Department…
NJ CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEYS