A December 2024 report from the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis, led by Rep. James Clyburn, exposes widespread fraud in the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), facilitated by financial technology companies (fintechs). The investigation targeted firms like Kabbage, Blueacorn, and Womply, and their partner banks, revealing systemic failures to prevent fraud while profiting from taxpayer-funded administration fees.
Chairman Clyburn criticized fintechs for neglecting fraud prevention, stating: âEven as these companies failed in their administration of the program, they nonetheless accrued massive profits.â For example, Blueacorn earned over $1 billion in fees, spending less than 1% on fraud prevention. Its founders reportedly prioritized high-dollar âVIPPPâ loans, neglected proper vetting, and allegedly enriched themselves with fraudulent PPP loans.
Similarly, Womply generated $2 billion in profits despite inadequate fraud screening, with its systems described as âput together with duct tape and gum.â Womplyâs CEO, previously convicted of insider trading, resisted federal fraud investigations and allegedly misused sensitive borrower data.
The report highlights how fintechs deflected blame, attributing fraud to Trump administration policies. Emails revealed attitudes like âthe SBAâs shitty rules created fraud, not [us],â and efforts to evade accountability.
Clyburn called for stronger oversight, urging agencies to investigate and the Department of Justice (DOJ) to act on findings. He emphasized the need for guardrails to ensure future emergency programs operate efficiently, equitably, and with minimal abuse.
December 1, 2022
Clyburn writes SBA, SBA OIG, and DOJ to refer findings, including evidence that some fintech ownersâwhose companies took billions in program administration feesâmay have themselves committed PPP fraud
Washington, D.C. (December 1, 2022) â Today, the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis, chaired by Rep. James E. Clyburn, released a staff report detailing the poor performance of many financial technology companies (fintechs) in administering the nationâs largest pandemic relief program, the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP). The report details how the investigated companies, despite being tasked with processing PPP applications while screening out those with signs of fraud, abdicated that responsibilityâin many cases recklesslyâresulting in the approval of large numbers of fraudulent applications.
In May 2021, the Select Subcommittee initiated an investigation into the role of fintech companies Kabbage, Inc. and Bluevine and partner banks Cross River Bank and Celtic Bank in facilitating PPP fraud following public reports they were linked to disproportionate numbers of fraudulent loans. The investigation was expanded in November 2021 to include fintech start-ups Blueacorn PPP, LLC, and Womply, Inc., after an analysis determined significant percentages of PPP loans facilitated by the companies had indicators of fraud.
Chairman Clyburn released the following statement about todayâs report:
âAs todayâs report details, many fintechs, while promising to help disburse billions of Paycheck Protection Program dollars to struggling small businesses efficiently and expeditiously, refused to take adequate steps to detect and prevent fraud despite their clear responsibility to safeguard taxpayer funds. Even as these companies failed in their administration of the program, they nonetheless accrued massive profits from program administration fees, much of which was pocketed by the companiesâ owners and executives. On top of the windfall obtained by enabling others to engage in PPP fraud, some of these individuals may have augmented their ill-gotten gains by engaging in PPP fraud themselves.
âWe must learn from this inexcusable misconduct to erect guardrails that will help ensure that federal programsâincluding emergency assistance programs in future crisesâare administered more effectively, efficiently, and equitably while keeping waste, fraud, and abuse to an absolute minimum. Based on our initial findings, I have asked the SBA and SBA OIG to conduct further investigation into these companies and pursue all appropriate remedies, and I have informed DOJ that some of our findings may warrant its attention.â
Todayâs staff report is entitled ââWe Are Not the Fraud Policeâ: How Fintechs Facilitated Fraud in the Paycheck Protection Programâ and is available in full here. The report reveals the following key findings:
Fintechs and Lenders Observed Significant Fraud in the PPP, Which They Attributed to Program Mismanagement as They Sought to Evade Responsibility
- Fintechs and lenders blamed the Trump Administrationâs mismanagement of the PPP for the high volume of fraud in the program. In a September 2020 email, fintech Kabbageâs head of policy wrote of the Small Business Administration (SBA): âAt the end of the day, itâs the SBAâs shitty rules that created fraud, not [Kabbage].â
- In response to an August 2020 SBA email announcing a webinar on preventing PPP fraud, lender Celtic Bankâs President called the Trump Administrationâs action âa bit late,â remarking that the âhorse has been out of the barn for a while nowâ with respect to PPP fraud.
- Fintechs and lenders looked to avoid taking responsibility for taxpayer money that was lost to fraud. In an internal email obtained by the Select Subcommittee, the CEO of Celtic Bank wrote: âthe industry should push hard to make sure the SBA accepts the fraud risk.â
Blueacorn Took Only Minimal Steps to Prevent Fraud in Its Facilitation of Billions of Dollars in PPP Loans, While Abusing the Program to Enrich Its Owners
- Fintech Blueacorn received over $1 billion in taxpayer-funded processing fees but spent little on fraud prevention and eligibility verification. Blueacorn transferred nearly $300 million in profits to its owners while only spending $8.6 millionâless than one percent of the fees it received for its PPP workâon its fraud prevention program. Blueacorn also gave approximately $666 million to a marketing firm controlled by members of its senior leadershipâalmost 50 times more than the $13.7 million the fintech spent on eligibility verification to detect fraud. Blueacorn had only âone direct employee who assisted with processing PPP loan applicationsâ for the 1.7 million loans it reviewed.
- Blueacorn âalmost exclusively relied on third-party companies and contractorsâ to process PPP loan applications. According to a former employee, Elev8 Advisors âhired at least 30 of [Elev8 Advisorsâ ownerâs] closest friends and family to work as underwriters submitting PPP loans to the SBA through Blueacorn.â In a text message obtained by the Select Subcommittee, Elev8 Advisorâs owner, Kristen Spencer, made her motivation clear: âWe are doing this for the people we hired to make money. Our friends and family. That is where the money is going. And it will be life changing money for anyone who does it.â
- Blueacorn loan reviewers reported receiving poor training and being pressured to âpush throughâ PPP loans, even if the reviewers doubted the authenticity of the loanâs supporting documents. One former Blueacorn loan reviewer told the Select Subcommittee that the companyâs reviewers were âsubmitting PPP loans to the SBA the first minute of the first dayâ of their employment despite having âno formal or informal training on loan underwriting, as well as no training on how to properly identify and report fake government identification such as a driverâs license.â The reviewers were told âthe faster the betterâ and that each loan application review âshould take you less than 30 seconds.â
- Blueacorn gave priority and less scrutiny to high dollar loans and those identified as âVIPPPâ by Blueacornâs founder. Blueacornâs owners directed reviewers to prioritize âmonster loans [that] will get everyone paidâ and created an exclusive category of PPP loans, called âVIPPPâ loans. Blueacornâs owners directed loan reviewers âto prioritize and submit large [âVIPPPâ] loans without following protocols that [loan reviewers] had been trained to complete.â While prioritizing âVIPPPâ loans, Blueacornâs owners were dismissive of other loans, writing âdelete them,â âwho fucking cares,â and â[w]eâre not the first bank to decline [PPP] borrowers who deserve to be fundedâŚthey go elsewhere.â
- Blueacornâs founders attempted to improperly charge some PPP applicants. According to their former business partners, Blueacorn founders Nathan Reis and Stephanie Hockridge attempted to directly charge some applicants a 10 percent fee for successfully procuring PPP loansâin violation of SBA rules.
- Blueacornâs founders arranged PPP loans for themselves through Blueacorn, some of which have signs of potential fraud. In addition to likely taking over $120 million in taxpayer-funded PPP processing fees as personal profit, Mr. Reis and Ms. Hockridge received nearly $300,000 in PPP loans, some of which were facilitated by their own company. Applications for these loansâsome of which Blueacorn lending partner Capital Plus later demanded be repaidâincluded supporting documentation with suspicious elements. In one application, Mr. Reis claimed to be an African American and a veteranâboth of which appear to be false.
- The owners of Elev8 AdvisorsâBlueacornâs primary eligibility verification and compliance consultantsâreceived PPP loans for themselves, their businesses, and their family members through Blueacornâs lending partners. Elev8 Advisors owners Adam Spencer and Kristen Spencer used Blueacorn to secure PPP loans for themselves, their companies, and their family members. In the months after receiving these loans, the Spencers purchased an $8 million mansion in cash and acquired multiple luxury cars. The Spencersâ loan applications also contained suspicious elements, including companies with unusually high profit margins and claims of income that appear unsupported by accompanying documentation. A confidential witness who spoke to the Select Subcommittee said that Mr. Spencer directed at least one family memberâwho also served as a PPP loan reviewerâto fraudulently apply for a PPP loan for a defunct business through Blueacorn, and later used the funds for home renovations.
Womplyâs PPP Fraud Screenings Failed to Prevent âRampant Fraudââand Were Accompanied by Questionable Business PracticesâDespite Generating Over a Billion in Profits
- Lenders paid Womply over $2 billion in processing fees for Womplyâs âPPP Fast Laneâ to screen applications for fraud and eligibility. In the first round of the PPP, Womply provided referral services to lenders, receiving just $3 million from lenders for its services. Womply later rebranded itself as a âtechnology service providerâ and, according to its lending partners, became responsible for handling eligibility and fraud verification for over a million PPP loans through its âPPP Fast Lane.â
- Multiple Womply lending partners, including Dreamspring, Lendistry, Fountainhead and Benworth, criticized Womplyâs fraud prevention practices, with lenders describing its systems as âput together with duct tape and gumâ and accusing Womply of allowing ârampant fraudâ to infiltrate the PPP.
- Largely thanks to windfall taxpayer-funded PPP processing fees, Womply had a net revenue of over $2 billion in 2021, but received over $5 million in PPP loans for itself, which the SBA later determined it was ineligible to receive. In 2021, Womply had a gross profit of $1.8 billion and gross profit margin of nearly 90 percent, yet it received over $5 million in PPP loans from its largest biggest partner, Harvest, and asked forgiveness for these loans in 2021. After reviewing Womplyâs forgiveness application, the SBA determined that Womply was ineligible for the loans that Harvest approved and has since required the fintech to repay them in full. Both Womplyâs CEO and President also received PPP loans for themselves, despite each earning over $400,000 in salary in 2021 and likely taking tens of millions in taxpayer-funded PPP processing fees as personal profits.
- Womplyâs CEOâwho was convicted of insider trading in 2014 and has been permanently barred from participating in the securities industryâled Womplyâs fraud prevention efforts and instructed his company to not cooperate with federal PPP fraud investigators. Despite telling its lending partners that Womply was working closely with the SBA and SBA Office of Inspector General (SBA OIG), Mr. Scammell resisted providing information to federal investigators conducting PPP fraud investigations. The SBA OIG and Fountainhead, one of Womplyâs lending partners, made multiple requests for information from Womply âso that the SBA can investigate potential fraudulent loan activity carried out by PPP borrowers.â Womply refused to cooperate, and Fountainhead was ultimately forced to get a temporary restraining order against Womply so they could not âdestroy these [PPP loan] documents.â
- Womply updated its privacy policy in 2022 to give itself the right to transfer sensitive personal and financial data of hundreds of thousands of PPP borrowers to its ownersâ new business. In May 2022, Womply notified its customersâlikely including PPP applicantsâthat it was giving itself the right to transfer âover 2 [million] tax documents, over 1.5 [million] bank accounts from applicantsâ to its new company, Solo Global, Inc. Womply refused to tell the Select Subcommittee whether it has transferred sensitive PPP applicant personal and financial data to this new company, how it is using sensitive PPP applicant data, and whether it is using this data to generate profits for their new company.
Capital Plus, Harvest, and Other Fintech-Partnered Lenders Conducted Little Oversight over Womply and Blueacornâs Activities, Allowing Fraud to Infiltrate The PPP
- Multiple PPP lenders admitted to having no formal program to monitor their fintech partners or to detect fraud in the PPP loans that they submitted. The lenders investigated told the Select Subcommittee that they largely relied on their fintech partners to perform fraud prevention and eligibility verification.
- Prestamos and Harvest described their oversight of fintech processed loans as being limited to âspot checksâ conducted at ârandomâ on a small percentage of loan application files. In one case, lender Capital Plus approved dubious loans to Blueacornâs owners but claimed to not have discovered that they issued these loans until months later. Despite this lack of oversight, multiple for-profit lendersâincluding Capital Plus and Harvestâreported hundreds of millions of dollars in profits as a result of their participation in the program.
Kabbageâs PPP Activities Illustrate that the PPP Lacked Incentives for Fintechs to Implement Strong Fraud Prevention Controls or Appropriate Borrower Servicing
- Kabbage, which facilitated over 310,000 PPP loans, implemented a system that confused and concerned employees and financial institutions. Multiple employees expressed concern about Kabbageâs loan review process, with one informing her supervisor that she was âreally uncomfortable with the review proceduresâ for loans and expressing her belief that âthe level of fraud weâre reviewing is wildly underestimated.â A bank working with Kabbage expressed concern about the âsignificant increase in the fraudulent transactions confirmed by Kabbageâ during the first round of the PPP.
- Kabbage approved loans with likely indicators of fraud, partly because the program imposed minimal risk on lenders who approved questionable applications. In one exchange, a Kabbage risk manager supervising fraud specialists told his team that âa fundamental differenceâ between the level of diligence applied in the PPP, as opposed to normal lending by Kabbage, was that âthe risk here is not ours â it is SBAâs risk.â
- As PPP fraud surged, Kabbage reduced its full-time fraud prevention staff. Between May and June of 2020, during the height of the PPP, Kabbage reduced its risk and account review teams by approximately half. After American Express acquired the majority of Kabbageâs assets in October 2020, its PPP loan portfolio was transferred to a minimally resourced spin-off entity. That company continued to fund tens of thousands of loans while retaining only one full-time anti-fraud employee.
Bluevine Initially Faced Significant Fraud Rates, but Its Longstanding Partners Intervened to Improve Fraud Prevention Over the Course of the Program
- Federally regulated bank partners successfully pushed Bluevine to improve its controls during the PPP, likely reducing fraud. In contrast to the other fintechs and lenders examined by the Select Subcommittee, Bluevineâs partner lender Celtic Bank conducted continuous oversight of Bluevineâs anti-fraud controls and prompted Bluevine to introduce new software and manual review processes. These changes were followed by a steep decline in fraud incidents.
- Overwhelmed by fraud despite improved controls, Bluevine faced difficulties with timely reporting of fraud to law enforcement. Celtic Bank submitted late Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) due to delays at Bluevine, in violation of applicable banking regulations and to the possible detriment of law enforcement efforts to address ongoing fraud. These issues raise concerns about adequate and full reporting of PPP fraud by other third-party service providersâespecially those who lacked experience in filing SARsâwho were facing the same fraud threats but received less rigorous oversight from lending partners.
Based on the findings, the report includes 11 recommendations to address PPP fraud and improve future programs. It urges the SBA to consider carefully whether businesses like fintechs that are not subject to traditional financial regulations should be permitted to play a part in future federal lending programs, and recommends that Congress take these factors into account in considering future legislation. The report also recommends that the SBA and SBA OIG continue to investigate fraud in PPP and require stricter oversight during emergency programs, and that the SBA OIG investigate any including potentially fraudulent loans received by Blueacorn owners and consultants detailed in todayâs report, and that the Department of Justice (DOJ) continue its work prosecuting fraud in the PPP. Finally, the report recommends that any expansion of SBA programs to unregulated lenders or agents, including fintechs, should be accompanied by greater oversight by the agency.
The Select Subcommitteeâs findings are based on more than 83,000 pages of internal documents from Kabbage, BlueVine, Cross River Bank, and Celtic Bank, Blueacorn and Womply as well as information and documents from fintech PPP lending partners Harvest, Capital Plus, Prestamos, American Express, KServicing, Fountainhead, Benworth, Wells Fargo, Bank of America, and CDC Small Business Finance. The Select Subcommittee had multiple briefings and conversations with former fintech employees, executives, lending partners, and others with knowledge of fintech activities during the PPP, as well as with the SBA and the SBA OIG.
Click here to readâs todayâs report.
Click here to read the letter from Chairman Clyburn to the Department of Justice.
Click here to read the letter from Chairman Clyburn to the Small Business Administration.
Click here to read the letter from Chairman Clyburn to the Small Business Administration Office of Investigator General.
Click to read documents released with todayâs report by section: Background/General Findings, Blueacorn, Womply, Criminal Gangs, Kabbage, and BlueVine.