The Complete COVID Collections Act aims to improve oversight and recovery of fraudulently obtained COVID-19 relief funds by extending oversight powers, lengthening the statute of limitations for fraud prosecution, and mandating detailed reporting on recovery efforts. This act also prohibits the suspension of collection efforts on COVID-19 related SBA loans and requires monthly reporting to Congress on collection progress.
Joni Ernst
Senator
IA
The "Complete COVID Collections Act" aims to enhance oversight and recovery of funds allocated for COVID-19 relief programs. It expands the authority and extends the term of the Special Inspector General for Pandemic Recovery, harmonizes fraud enforcement timelines, and mandates the Department of Justice and Pandemic Response Accountability Committee to increase transparency in reporting fraud and recovered funds. The Act also prohibits the Small Business Administration from suspending collection efforts on COVID-19 related loans and requires regular reporting to Congress on collection progress and improper payments.
The Complete COVID Collections Act is basically a major overhaul of how the government plans to get back COVID-19 relief money that was improperly paid out or fraudulently obtained. It significantly beefs up oversight and collection efforts, particularly targeting programs managed by the Small Business Administration (SBA). The bill's main aim, according to its text, is to "enhance oversight and recovery of COVID-19 relief funds." (SEC. 1).
This bill significantly expands the powers of the Special Inspector General for Pandemic Recovery (SIGPR), initially established by the CARES Act. The SIGPR's term is extended to September 30, 2030 (SEC. 3), giving them a much longer leash to investigate potential fraud and misuse of funds. Think of it like this: the government's watchdog for pandemic relief just got a bigger kennel and sharper teeth. The SIGPR will also be coordinating directly with the SBA Administrator and the SBA Inspector General, meaning more eyes on where every dollar went. The bill also harmonizes fraud enforcement timelines across various programs, extending the statute of limitations to 10 years for criminal charges or civil actions related to fraud in programs like the Restaurant Revitalization Fund and grants for shuttered venue operators (SEC. 4). For example, if a restaurant owner inflated their revenue loss to get a bigger grant, the government now has a decade to come after them.
One of the most impactful sections of the bill prohibits the SBA from suspending collections on certain COVID-19 related loans (SEC. 5). This is a big deal for businesses that might still be struggling. Previously, the SBA had some leeway to pause collection efforts on loans under $100,000. Under this new law, all those collection claims must be sent to the Department of the Treasury, which will make the final call on whether to pursue them. The SBA Administrator also has to give monthly updates to Congress on collection progress and testify annually about improper payments and compliance (SEC. 5). This puts a lot of pressure on the SBA and, indirectly, on businesses that received these loans. Consider a small business owner who took out an Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) and is still having trouble making payments. This bill removes their chance of getting a temporary reprieve from the SBA.
The bill also mandates increased reporting from both the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Pandemic Response Accountability Committee (PRAC). The DOJ has to provide detailed monthly reports to Congress on COVID-19 program fraud prosecutions, including the number of cases, dollar amounts recovered, and even the reasons why cases were declined (SEC. 6). The PRAC is tasked with publishing real-time data on all recovered funds on its website (SEC. 7). While transparency is generally good, this level of reporting could create a significant administrative burden. The bill defines "covered funds" and "covered programs" broadly (SEC. 2), encompassing a wide range of relief efforts, and the definition of "improper payment" (SEC. 2) could also lead to scrutiny of payments that were made in good faith but might not perfectly align with complex regulations.