Indictment as to Alexandra Acosta (1) count(s) 1. Forfeiture Allegations — USA v. Alexandra Acosta (Dkt. 3, S.D. Fla.)

Record facts

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida · No. 0:23-cr-60170-RNS · Doc. 3 · 2023-09-14 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

SEALED
IJNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CaseNo. 23-60170-CR-SCO 1.A/GO O D M AN
18 U.S.C. j 1343
18 U.S.C. j 981(a)(1)(C)
UNITED STATES OF AM EW CA
FILED BY 
AT 
D.c . y
Sep 14, 2023
GG AE NM  *
A'nxus 'o. cm
ùœ
s). 0- -  itk. - F.rl,
VS.
ALEX ANDRA ACOSTA,
Defendant.
/
INDICTM ENT
The Grand Jury charges that:
GENERAL ALLEGATION:
At a11 times relevant to this Indictmentz
The SmallBusiness AdminWtratlon
The United States Small Business Administration ($%SBA'') wms an executive
1.
branch agency of the United States government that provided support to enkepreneurs and small
businesses. The mission of the SBA was to maintain and strengtlwn the nation's economy by
enabling the establishment and viability of small businesses alld by a sisting in the economic
recpvery of commllnities after dismsters.
2. 
As part of this effort, the SBA enabled and provided loans through bnnks, credit
unions, and other lenders, These loans had government-backed guarantees.
Case 0:23-cr-60170-RNS   Document 3   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/15/2023   Page 1 of 10

The Paycheck Protection Program
The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security ISCCARES''I Act was a federal
law enacted in or around M arch 2020, designed to provide emergency financial assistance to the
m illions of Americans whO were suffering from the econom ic effects caused by the COV1D-19
pandemic. One source of relief that the CARES Act provided was the Paycheck Protection
Program (ûTPP''), which authorized forgivable loans to small businesses for job retention and
certain other expenses.
The SBA promulgated regulations concem ing eligibility for a PPP loan. To obtain
a PPP loan, a qualifying business was required to submit a PPP loan application, which was signed
by an authorized representative of the business. The PPP loan application required the business
(through its authorized representative) to acknowledge the program rules and make certain
affinnative certifications to be eligible to obtain the PPP loan, including that the business was in
operation on Februaty 15, 2020, and either had employees for whom it paid salaries and payroll
taxes or paid independent contractors. Paym ents to independent contractors are typically reported
to the Internal Revenue Service C$IRS'') on a ttForm 1099-M1SC.''ln the PPP loan application
(SBA Form 2483), the small business (tluough its authorized representative) was required to state,
among other things, its: (a) average monthly payroll expenses', and (b) number of employees.
These figlzres were used to calculate the nm ount of m oney the sm all business was eligible to
receive under the PPP.
ln addition, a business applying for a PPP loan was required to provide
docum entation showing its payroll expenses. This payroll information was material to the
application because, pursuant to statutoty requirem ents and implementing regulations, the amount
of the loan that typically could be approved was a ftmction of the applicant's historical payroll
Case 0:23-cr-60170-RNS   Document 3   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/15/2023   Page 2 of 10

costs, consisting of com pensation to its employees whose principal place of residence was the
United States, subject to certain exclusions.
lndividuals who operated a business under a tdsole proprietorship'' business
structlzre were eligible for a PPP loan. To qualify for such a PPP loan, individuals had to report
and document their income and expenses from the sole proprietorship. Sole proprietorships
typically repol-t their income alld expenses yearly to the IRS on a ûEFOI'I:t'I 1040, Schedule C.'' As
with other PPP loans, this infonnation and supporting documentation was used to ealculate the
amount of money the individual was entitled to zeceive under the PPP. The maximum PPP loan
amotmt for a sole proprietor with no employees was $20,833.
PPP loan applications were processed by participating lenders and third-party 1oan
processors. lf a PPP loan application was approved, the participating lendez funded the PPP loan
using its own m onies. W hile it was the participating lender that issued the PPP loan, the loan was
100% guaranteed by the SBA . Data from  the application, including information about the
borrower, the total amotmt of the loan, and the listed num ber of employees, was transmitted by the
lender to the SBA in the cotlrse of processing the loan.
After the lender funded the PPP loan to the borrower, the lender subm itted
disbursement details into the SBA E--l-ran system with servers located in Sterling, VA. The SBA 'S
Denver Finance Center, located in Denver, Colorado, created paym ent files and authorized
paym ents of the PPP processing fee to the lender tltrough the Financial M anagem ent System to
the Treasury. The prim ary server for the Financial M anagement System is in Sterling, VA. The
PPP processing fee varied depending on the am ount of the loan. Once created, the paym ent files
w ere then transm itted via w ire to the U .S. Treasury disbursing office in K ansas City, M issouri,
Case 0:23-cr-60170-RNS   Document 3   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/15/2023   Page 3 of 10

which, in turn, sent instructions for payment of funds to the Federal Reserve Bank Autom ated
Clearing House processing site in East Rutherford, New Jersey.
The proceeds of a PPP loan could be used cmly for certain specified items, such as
payroll costs, costs related to the continuation of group health care benefits, or m ortgage interest
payments for the business. The proceeds of a PPP loan were not pennitted to be used by the
borrowers to purchase consumer goods, automobiles, personal residences, clothing, orjewelry, to
pay the borrower's personal federal income taxes, or to fund the borrower's ordinaly day-to-day
living expenses tmrelated to the specified authorized expenses.
The PPP allowed the interest and principal on the PPP loan to be entirely forgiven
if the borrower utilized 60% of the loan in the 24 weeks post-disbursement toward payroll costs
and utilized the remaining 40% on qualified expense items (e.g., mortgage, rent, and utilities).
1 1. 
Applying for PPP loan forgiveness was a separate process that required additional
aftirmations that the applicant satisfied the eligibility for PPP loan forgiveness. W hatever portion
of the PPP loan was not forgiven was selwiced as a loan.
The Defendant
ALEXANDM  ACO STA was a resident of Broward County, Florida.
Relevant Lender and Loan Processor
13. 
Lendez 1 was a participating lender in the PPP, and was based in Fort Lee, New
Jersey.
14. 
Loan Processor 1 Nvas a third-p>  loan processor, based in Jersey City, lfe:v
Jersey, that processed PPP loan applications for Lender 1.
Case 0:23-cr-60170-RNS   Document 3   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/15/2023   Page 4 of 10

COIJNT 1
W ire Fraud
(18 U.S.C. j 1343)
Paragraphs 1 through 14 of the General Allegations section of this lndictm ent is
re-alleged and incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein.
From in or around Febnzaly 2021, through in or around June 2021, the exact dates
being tmknown to the Gralld July, in Broward County, Florida, in the Southern District of Florida,
and elsewhere, the defendant,
ALEXANDRA ACO STA,
did knowingly, and with the intent to defraud, devise, and intend to devise, a scheme and artifice
to defraud, and to obtain m oney and property by m eans of m aterially false and fraudulent
pretenses, representations, and prom ises, knowing that the pretenses, representations, and
promises were false and fraudulent when m ade, and, for the purpose of executing the scheme and
artifice, did knowingly transm it and cause to be transmitted, by mealas of wire comm unication in
interstate com merce, certain writings, signs, signals, pictures, and sotmds, in violation of Title 18,
United States Code, Section 1343.
PURPO SE OF THE SCHEM E AND ARTIFICE
17. 
lt was the purpose of the schem e and artifice for the defendant to tmlaw fully enrich
herself by, among other things: (a) submitting and causing the submission of a false and fraudulent
application for a PPP loan made available tltrough the SBA to provide relief for the econom ic
effects caused by the COVID- 1 9 pandemic; and (b) submitting arld causing the submission of a
false and fraudulent application for forgiveness of a PPP loan.
5
Case 0:23-cr-60170-RNS   Document 3   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/15/2023   Page 5 of 10

THE SCHEM E AND ARTIFICE
The m anner and means by which the defendant sought to accom plish the purpose of the
schem e and artifice included, among others, the following:
l 8. 
ATUEXANDR A ACO STA submitted and caused the subm ission of a m aterially
false and fraudulent application for a PPP loan to the SBA and Loan Processor 1, which contained
m aterially false and fraudulent information as to the defendant's m onthly payroll, gross revenue,
and purpose for the loan, am ong other things.
19. 
ALEX ANDRA A CO STA submitted and caused the subm ission of materially false
and fraudulent inform ation and documentation in support of the application for the PPP loan,
including falsified Intenzal Revenue Service tax form s, such as a Schedule C and Form 1099-
M ISC, am ong other things.
As a result of the false and fraudulent PPP loan application submitted as part of this
scheme, on or about Februal'y 4, 2021, Lender 1 approved PPP 1oan ntzmber 1554728404 for
ALEXANDIU  ACOSTA, and disbursed the loan proceeds in the approximate amount of $20,180
to ALEX ANDRA ACOSTA at SunTrust Bnnk account num ber ending in 7279 in the nam e of
ALEX ANDR A A CO STA.
ln furtherance of the scheme and artifice, ALEX ANDRA ACOSTA submitted and
caused the submission of materially false and fraudulent information to the SBA and Lender 1 to
cause and attempt to cause the forgiveness of PPP loan number 1554728404 to which
ALEXANDRA ACOSTA was not entitled.
Case 0:23-cr-60170-RNS   Document 3   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/15/2023   Page 6 of 10

USE OF W IRES
On or about Februaly 4, 202 1, in Broward County, Florida, the Southena District
of Florida, and elsewhere, the defendant, ALEXANDR A ACO STA, for the purpose of executing
and in furtherance of the aforesaid scheme and artifice to defraud, and to obtain m oney and
property by m eans of materially false and fraudulent pretenses, representations, and promises,
knowing that the pretenses, representations, and promises were false and fraudulent when m ade,
did knowingly cause to be transmitted in interstate com merce, by m eans of wire comm unication,
certain writings, signs, signals, pictures, and sounds, that is, the transmission of an Autom ated
Clearing House payment in the amount of approximately $20,180 from Lender 1 to Sun-fnzst Bank
account num ber ending in 7279, inthe nam e of ALEXANDRA ACOSTA , inthe Southern District
of Florida and elsewhere.
ln violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1343.
(remainder of page intentionally left blank)
Case 0:23-cr-60170-RNS   Document 3   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/15/2023   Page 7 of 10

FORFEITURE ALLEGA TIONS
The allegations of this lndictment are hereby re-alleged and by this reference ftzlly
incorporated herein for the purpose of alleging forfeiture to the United States of Am erica of certain
property in which the defendant, ALEXANDR A ACO STA, has an interest.
Upon conviction of a violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1343, as
alleged in this Indictment, the defendant shall forfeit to the United States any property, real or
personal, which constitutes or is derived from proceeds traceable to such offense, pursuant to Title
18, United States Code, Section 981(a)(1)(C).
All plzrsuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 981(a)(1)(C) and the procedtlres set
forth in Title 21, United States Code, Section 853, as incorporated by Title 28, United states Code,
Section 2461(c).
A TRUE BILL
FOREP RS N
aw e 
'
j 
MARKENZ LAPOWTE
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
' 
-- - -..e-'-''--
, 
.- 
- -- .-- - '''-'
TREV G JV S
ASSIS 
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
8
Case 0:23-cr-60170-RNS   Document 3   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/15/2023   Page 8 of 10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTW CT OF FLORIDA
UM TED STATES OF AM ERICA
CASE NO.:
ALEXANDRA ACOSTA,
/
Defendant.
Court Division (select one)
EEI M iami 
n Key W est L FTP
E FTL 
D WPB
1 do hereby certify that:
1 . 
I have carefully considered the allegations of the indictm ent, the number of defendants, the number of probable
witnesses and the legal comylexities of the lndictment/lnformation attached hereto.
1 am aware that the informatlon supjlied on this statement will be relied upon by the Judges of this Court in setting
their calendars and scheduling crimlnal trials under the mandate of the Speedy Trial Act, Title 28 U.S.C. j3161.
CERTIFICATE OF TRIAL ATTORNEY
Superseding Case lnformation:
New Defendantts) (Yes or No)
Number of New Defendants
Total number of counts
Interpreter: (Yes or No) No
List language and/or dialect:
3 days for the parties to tl'y.
This case will take
Please check appropriate categol'y and type of offense listed below :
(Check only one) 
(Check only one)
I ?. 0 to 5 days 
L Petty
11 L 6 to 10 days 
D M inor
ll1 n l l to 20 days 
D Misdemeanor
IV n 21 to 60 days 
S Felony
V L' 61 days and over
;ii' 
6 
Has this case been previously filed in this District Court? (Yes or No) NO
If yes, Judge 
Case No.
Has a complaint been filed in this matter? (Yes or No) No
lf yes, M agistrate Case No.
8. Does this case relate to a previously filed matter in this District Court? (Yes or No) NO
If yes, Judge 
Case No.
9. Defendantts) in federal custody as of
10. Defendantts) in state custody as of
1 1. Rule 20 from the 
District of
12. Is this a potential death penalty case? (Yes or No) N0
l3. Does this case originate from a matter pending in the Northern Region of the U.S. Attorney's Office
prior to August 8, 2014 (Mag. Judge Shaniek Maynard? (Yes or No) No 
.
Does this case originate from a matter pending in the Central Region of the U.S. Attorney's Office
prior to October 3, 2019 (Mag. Judge Jared Strauss? (Yes or No) No
15. Did this matter involve the participation of or consultation with now M agistrate Judge Eduardo 1. Sanchez
during his tenure at the U .S. Attorney's O ffice, which concluded on January 22, 2023? N O
x 
! 
.
By: 
'%'<--
Trevor C. J es
Assistant United States Atlorney
FL Bar N o. 
0092793
Case 0:23-cr-60170-RNS   Document 3   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/15/2023   Page 9 of 10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLO RIDA
PENALTY SHEET
Defendant's Nam e: ALEXANDM  ACOSTA
Case No'.
Count # : 1
W ire Frauda Title 18s United States Code, Section 1343
* M ax. Term  of lm prisonm ent: 20 years
* M andatory Min. Term of lmprisonment (if applicable): n/a
* M ax. Supervised Release: 3 years
* M ax. Fine: $250,000
i
I
I
l
*Refers only to possible term of incarceration, supervised release and flnes. It does not include
restitution, special assessm ents, parole term s, or forfeitures that m ay be applicable.
Case 0:23-cr-60170-RNS   Document 3   Entered on FLSD Docket 09/15/2023   Page 10 of 10

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.flsd.654235.3.0.pdf

Size

430,290 bytes

SHA-256

d91200bdee56b807197ebb7e10d9416753e652bbb539a165b383be3aafedd565

Our copy

gov.uscourts.flsd.654235.3.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)