San Antonio PPP and EIDL Loan Fraud Lawyers

Thanks for visiting Spodek Law Group, a second-generation criminal defense firm managed by Todd Spodek – with over 50 years of combined experience defending federal fraud cases nationwide. If you’re facing PPP or EIDL fraud charges in San Antonio, you’re dealing with federal prosecutors from the Western District of Texas who handle pandemic fraud prosecutions at the John H. Wood Jr. U.S. Courthouse in downtown San Antonio. These prosecutors have charged business owners throughout the metro area – including surrounding Bexar County communities, New Braunfels, and the Hill Country – with bank fraud, wire fraud, and false statements for allegedly inflating payroll figures, misrepresenting employee counts, using proceeds for unauthorized purposes, or submitting applications through multiple entities prosecutors claim were created solely to multiply loan amounts. What makes San Antonio cases particularly challenging is that Western District prosecutors are known for aggressive enforcement and seeking harsh sentences, treating small business owners like sophisticated criminals even when errors were made under economic pressure during unprecedented crisis.

Federal PPP Fraud Prosecution in San Antonio

The Western District of Texas, with a significant presence in San Antonio, has been active in prosecuting PPP and EIDL fraud throughout South Texas. Prosecutors have brought cases involving restaurant owners, construction contractors, healthcare providers, automotive businesses, and retail operations. One case that drew attention involved a San Antonio business owner charged with obtaining $800,000 across multiple entities – prosecutors argued the companies were shells with no legitimate operations, while defense claimed they were separately managed businesses with distinct employees entitled to individual loans. After conviction, the court imposed a 7-year sentence followed by supervised release and full restitution.

EIDL fraud prosecutions in San Antonio often involve cases where defendants allegedly used fabricated business information or identity theft to obtain advances. These cases frequently result in aggravated identity theft charges under 18 U.S.C. § 1028A, carrying mandatory consecutive 2-year sentences that must run after any sentence imposed on underlying fraud charges. Even defendants who played relatively minor roles in submitting applications face significant prison time when identity theft enhancements are added.

Bank Fraud and Wire Fraud Charges

Bank fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1344 carries up to 30 years in federal prison and applies whenever you allegedly made false statements to obtain PPP or EIDL funds. San Antonio prosecutors use this statute aggressively, arguing that any material misstatement on loan applications constitutes bank fraud regardless of whether you intended to use proceeds legitimately or planned to repay loans. The statute doesn’t require proof you intended to permanently deprive financial institutions of money – only that you knowingly made material misrepresentations to obtain funds.

Wire fraud charges under 18 U.S.C. § 1343 get stacked on top when you used electronic communications during the application process: submitting online applications, emailing documents to lenders, receiving wire transfers. Each electronic communication can be charged as a separate count. We’ve seen Western District prosecutors charge 10-15 wire fraud counts for single loan applications, each carrying 20 years maximum, creating theoretical exposure of 200-300 years to pressure defendants into guilty pleas.

False Statements and Conspiracy

False statements charges under 18 U.S.C. § 1001 criminalize lying to federal agencies and carry 5 years maximum. Prosecutors use this when you allegedly provided false information to SBA even if banks approved loans without detecting problems. In cases involving multiple defendants, prosecutors add conspiracy charges under 18 U.S.C. § 371, making all conspirators responsible for the entire amount of fraud committed by any member, which dramatically increases exposure and creates pressure to cooperate against co-defendants.

Defenses That Work in San Antonio Federal Court

The strongest defenses challenge prosecutors’ proof of intent. Federal fraud statutes require proof that you knowingly made false statements – not that you made good-faith errors or relied on incorrect advice. We build intent defenses by presenting evidence that you consulted accountants or business advisors before applying, that you relied on their calculations, that you made reasonable interpretations of SBA guidance that was genuinely ambiguous during rapid program implementation in early 2020.

We present testimony from professionals you consulted, showing they reviewed your materials and advised your applications were accurate. We present character witnesses who testify about your reputation for honesty and legitimate business operations throughout San Antonio spanning years. We show you disclosed information to lenders voluntarily rather than concealing it, demonstrating lack of fraudulent intent.

Materiality Challenges

Even when statements were false, prosecutors must prove they were material – meaning they influenced lending decisions. If you overstated payroll by $20,000 but would have qualified for the same loan with accurate figures, that undermines the fraud charge. If banks approved your loan despite red flags that should have triggered denial, that suggests your statements weren’t material. We hire forensic accountants who analyze applications and testify about whether alleged misstatements actually affected loan amounts or eligibility.

Negotiating with Western District Prosecutors

Assistant U.S. Attorneys in San Antonio handle substantial PPP fraud caseloads, creating both pressure to resolve cases efficiently and desire to secure convictions that demonstrate aggressive enforcement. We negotiate from positions of strength when possible: identifying weaknesses in government evidence, highlighting proof problems with intent or materiality, demonstrating that trials will be expensive and uncertain for prosecutors.

We push for reduced charges – pleading to false statements under § 1001 instead of bank fraud reduces maximum exposure from 30 years to 5 years, dramatically affecting guideline calculations. We also fight over loss amounts because they determine guideline ranges. Government claims $300,000 loss, we present evidence showing $120,000 was spent on payroll and rent – reducing actual loss to $180,000 and lowering offense levels by 2-4 points, translating to years less incarceration.

San Antonio Federal Sentencing

Federal judges in the Western District of Texas are known for taking fraud cases seriously, particularly pandemic fraud that they view as exploitation of programs designed to help struggling businesses during crisis. However, they also carefully consider individual circumstances when presented with compelling mitigation. Successful sentencing requires presenting evidence beyond just asking for leniency: demonstrating lack of criminal history, strong family and community ties throughout San Antonio, acceptance of responsibility, rehabilitation efforts, charitable work, and the extraordinary economic pressures of the pandemic.

We present letters from community members, employers, family, and religious leaders who vouch for your character. We hire experts who testify about economic conditions in your industry during 2020, showing that business owners throughout San Antonio faced unprecedented uncertainty and made desperate decisions under extreme pressure. We argue for alternatives to incarceration – probation, home confinement, community service – emphasizing that restitution and supervised release accomplish sentencing goals without destroying families and businesses.

Cooperation and Substantial Assistance

When evidence is overwhelming, cooperation becomes an option – but requires careful evaluation. Cooperation means providing information about others involved in fraud, testifying against co-defendants, and working with prosecutors to build cases against targets. The benefit is substantial assistance departures that can reduce sentences by 50% or more, sometimes resulting in probation even when guidelines call for significant prison time.

But cooperation has serious risks. You must disclose all criminal conduct – not just charged offenses but everything you’ve ever done. If prosecutors discover you lied or withheld information, they’ll void your agreement and use your proffer statements against you. You may need to testify at trial, facing cross-examination designed to destroy your credibility. You face potential retaliation from co-defendants. For many defendants, cooperation isn’t realistic, and alternative strategies become the path to favorable outcomes.

Pre-Indictment Intervention

If you become aware of an investigation early – because investigators contacted your bank, interviewed employees, or agents approached you for voluntary interviews – that’s the critical moment to hire counsel. We’ve successfully negotiated declinations by presenting prosecutors with evidence showing: you made good-faith errors, you relied on professional advice, ambiguous SBA guidance made it reasonable to interpret eligibility differently, you’ve already repaid questionable amounts, your business was and remains legitimate with operations throughout San Antonio.

Federal prosecutors in San Antonio have discretion whether to charge cases. When we intervene early with compelling evidence contradicting criminal intent or demonstrating lack of materiality, we sometimes persuade prosecutors that federal prosecution isn’t warranted. Even when we can’t prevent charges entirely, early intervention often results in more favorable charging decisions – fewer counts, lower loss amounts, reduced charges.

What Spodek Law Group Does for San Antonio Defendants

We defend PPP and EIDL fraud cases in San Antonio federal court and throughout Texas. We intervene during investigations before charges are filed, presenting evidence to prosecutors that sometimes leads to declinations. After indictment, we file motions challenging the legal sufficiency of charges, arguing that alleged conduct doesn’t meet fraud elements under federal law. We move to suppress evidence obtained through improper searches or overly broad subpoenas.

We conduct independent investigations, interviewing witnesses prosecutors ignored and hiring forensic accountants who testify about why alleged misstatements weren’t material or why your conduct was consistent with legitimate business practices. At trial, we cross-examine cooperating witnesses about their criminal histories and motivations to fabricate. We present defenses focused on intent, materiality, and good-faith reliance on ambiguous guidance during unprecedented crisis.

At sentencing, we present mitigation packages showing your ties to the San Antonio community, lack of criminal history, acceptance of responsibility, rehabilitation efforts, and pandemic circumstances that created economic desperation rather than criminal greed. We’ve secured probationary sentences and below-guideline terms for defendants facing guideline ranges calling for years in prison by humanizing them to judges and presenting compelling reasons for mercy.

At Spodek Law Group, Todd Spodek has defended high-profile cases others thought unwinnable – including the client whose story became a Netflix series. When you’re facing years in federal prison for PPP or EIDL fraud charges in San Antonio, aggressive defense determines the outcome. We’re available 24/7 at our offices throughout NYC and Long Island. Reach out now – early intervention makes enormous difference in federal fraud prosecutions.