Statement of Facts — United States v. Havana (Dkt. 14, E.D. Va.)

Summary

A statement of facts in United States of America v. Seir Robinson Havana, Case No. 1:22-cr-00116, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Alexandria Division, filed July 20, 2022. The United States and Havana stipulate that the allegations in the two-count Criminal Information and the facts set out are true and would have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. It states that from about April of 2019 through about November of 2021, Havana conspired with Quin Ngoc Rudin and others to defraud the United States and to commit wire fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1343, and then sets out the facts. It is signed by Havana and his attorney Edward M. Robinson.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Record facts

Full text

Text recognized from a scanned document; may contain errors.

Case 1:22-cr-00116-AJT Document 14 Filed 07/20/22 Page 1 of emaeelDe 58
                                                                                      FI
                                                                              ___'N OP eR coun IRT

                  IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THA__              “hal sup PeTEICE SOURT

                            EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA

                                 ALEXANDRIA DIVISION

 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

        V.                                        Case No. 1:22-cr-00116

 SEIR ROBINSON HAVANA,

        Defendant.

                                 STATEMENT OF FACTS

       The United States and the defendant, SEIR ROBINSON HAVANA (hereinafter, “the

defendant”), stipulate that the allegations in the two-count Criminal Information and the following

facts are true and correct. The United States and the defendant further agree that had the matter

gone to trial, the United States would have proven the allegations in the Criminal Information and

the following facts beyond a reasonable doubt with admissible and credible evidence:

       Li,    From in or about April of 2019 and continuing through in or about November of

2021, in the Eastern District of Virginia and elsewhere, the defendant SEIR ROBINSON

HAVANA did unlawfully, knowingly and intentionally combine, conspire, confederate and agree

with Quin Ngoc Rudin, and with other persons known and unknown to: (1) defraud the United

States; and (2) commit an offense against the United States, namely wire fraud, in violation of 18

U.S.C. § 1343, in any manner and for any purpose, and that one or more of such persons did any

act to effect the objects of the conspiracy, all in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371.

       2.     The conspiracy had two objects. The first object was to impede, impair, obstruct,

and defeat the lawful government functions of the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) of the

Department of the Treasury in the ascertainment, computation, assessment, and collection of

federal income taxes by preparing and filing false tax returns on behalf of professional athletes

Case 1:22-cr-00116-AJT Document 14 Filed 07/20/22 Page 2 of 19 PagelD# 59

. seeking large tax refunds to which the athletes were not entitled. The second object was to devise
and intend to devise a scheme and artifice to obtain money from financial institutions by submitting
materially false applications for loans financed by the federal Paycheck Protection Program
(“PPP”) and cause to be transmitted by means of wire communication in interstate commerce
writings, signs, signals; pictures, and sounds for the purpose of executing the scheme and artifice
to defraud, in violation 18 U.S.C. § 1343.

3. It was a purpose of the conspiracy that the defendant and his co-conspirators
obtained and tried to obtain large fees from the professional athletes for whom they obtained
income tax refunds, often in the amount of 30% of the fraudulent tax refunds obtained.

4, Additionally, one of the purposes of the conspiracy was for the defendant and his
co-conspirators to enrich themselves by obtaining PPP loan funds for businesses in amounts for
which the businesses did not qualify by grossly overstating the number of employees the
businesses employed and by grossly overstating the businesses’ payroll expenses. It was a further
purpose of the conspiracy for the defendant and his co-conspirators to obtain PPP loans for
businesses that did not exist before February 15, 2020, and did not have any actual employees or
payroll expenses, and were therefore unqualified for the program. Finally, it was a purpose of
the conspiracy that the defendant and his co-conspirators obtained and tried to obtain fees from
the business owners for whom they obtained PPP loans successfully, often in the amount of 30%
of the PPP loans obtained.

5. On or about June 18, 2020, in the Eastern District of Virginia and elsewhere,
defendant SEIR ROBINSON HAVANA did knowingly engage and attempt to engage in a
monetary transaction in criminally derived property of a value greater than $10,000 that was

derived from specified unlawful activity; that is, the conspiracy to defraud the United States and

Case 1:22-cr-00116-AJT Document 14 Filed 07/20/22 Page 3 of 19 PagelD# 60

to commit wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343, as alleged in count | of this Information,
all in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1957.

6. More specifically, on or about June 18, 2020, the defendant obtained a cashier’s
check from Gulfstream Exchange’s bank account at Financial Institution-6, which was made
payable to Company 32 in the amount of $250,000. The source of these funds was a fraudulent
PPP loan the co-conspirators previously obtained on May 12, 2020, for MANA TAX in the amount
of $730,932. The defendant provided this $250,000 cashier’s check to UCC-3 for referring
Company 3 and Company 4 to MANA TAX to obtain PPP loans.

Background

7. The defendant was a pilot by training and earned income from flying jets for private
clients. The defendant met co-conspirator Quin Ngoc Rudin (“Rudin”) around 2010 while
working as a pilot.

8. During the course of the conspiracy, the defendant worked with Rudin, UCC-1,
UCC-3, UCC-4, among others.

9. UCC-1 prepared and assisted in the preparation of tax returns that were filed with
the IRS and used to obtain fraudulent PPP loans.

10. | UCC-3 owned a mortgage business which he ran under the name of Company 30.
UCC-3 also controlled the shell company Company 32.

11. UCC-4 was self-employed in the entertainment industry representing musical
groups and performing artists.

12. UCC-3 and UCC-4 recruited businesses to have PPP loans prepared by MANA

TAX,

Case 1:22-cr-00116-AJT Document 14 Filed 07/20/22 Page 4 of 19 PagelD# 61

13. The defendant knew, but concealed from others, that Rudin was a convicted felon
and was under court supervision during a portion of their participation in the conspiracy. The
defendant told others that Rudin used to work for the IRS and was knowledgeable about tax
preparation in order to enhance his credibility.

14. | The defendant and Rudin agreed that the defendant would be the “boss” on paper
and the face of the business to the public, but Rudin ran the operation and had the final say on
decisions.

15. The defendant and Rudin discussed opening a tax preparation business. Toward
that end, Rudin eventually incorporated Robinson & Associates and Mana Tax Services (“MANA
TAX”). In May 2018, the defendant was listed as an officer and director of MANA TAX with
the Secretary of State of Hawaii. UCC-1 was to be a principal of the company.

16. In order for a tax preparation firm to electronical file tax returns with the IRS, it
must have an Electronic Filer Identification Number ““EFIN”). In August 2018, Rudin applied
for an “EFIN’ in the name of UCC-1 for MANA TAX to use.

17. The defendant was affiliated with Gulfstream Exchange, Incorporated
(“Gulfstream Exchange”), a corporate entity he formed in Hawaii in 2018. The defendant was
the sole signatory on various bank accounts that he opened for Gulfstream Exchange between 2018
and 2021. The defendant and Rudin represented that MANA TAX and Robinson & Associates
were subsidiaries of Gulfstream Exchange.

18. In furtherance of the conspiracy, the defendant held himself out as the Chief
Executive Officer (“CEO”) and Rudin held himself out as the Chief Financial Officer (“CFO”) of
Gulfstream Exchange.

19. The defendant knew that during the conspiracy, Quin Rudin falsely represented to

Case 1:22-cr-00116-AJT Document 14 Filed 07/20/22 Page 5 of 19 PagelD# 62

others that Gulfstream Exchange was a global aviation company with lots of employees that
provided business owners with access to jet planes.

20. | Company 36 purported to be a non-profit organization with its principal place of
business in Leesburg, Virginia.

21. The defendant was also affiliated with a number of other corporate entities,

. including Summerwind Management, Community Investment Corporation (“CIC”), CIC Global
and Seir & Sire. In addition to using these entities as payees to receive the 30% fee for tax refunds
from the professional athletes and from businesses for their PPP loan applications, the conspirators
listed a number of these entities on fraudulent PPP loan applications. At the direction and under
the supervision of Quin Rudin, members of the conspiracy made false and fraudulent statements
about the businesses and submitted false and fraudulent tax documents prepared by MANA TAX
in order to get the loans.

22. In furtherance of the conspiracy, the defendant opened numerous bank accounts for
corporate entities he controlled at numerous financial institutions and was often the sole signatory
on the accounts.

23. The conspirators earned fees paid by the MANA TAX clients, typically 30% of the
value of the unlawful tax refunds the IRS paid to the professional athletes or 30% of the amount
of PPP loans funded. The fees the defendant obtained included, at least, the following:

a. $3,183,585.33 in fees paid by professional athletes for their fraudulent IRS tax

refunds obtained by MANA TAX and deposited into entities controlled by the
defendant.

b. $3,966,914.00 in fees paid by other business entities to entities which the defendant
controlled, for the fraudulent PPP loans applied for by MANA TAX.

24. Additionally, during and in the course of his participation in the conspiracy, the |

amount of PPP loans that the defendant assisted in obtaining was approximately $24,707,323.

Case 1:22-cr-00116-AJT Document 14 Filed 07/20/22 Page 6 of 19 PagelD# 63

This figure represents the amount of loans obtained by corporate entities controlled by the
defendant; entities for which he was the signatory on the bank account; entities with whom he had
significant contact; and those small businesses owned and operated by other individuals, but
recruited by UCC-3 and UCC-4 as clients for MANA TAX.

25. During and in furtherance of his participation in this conspiracy, the defendant
personally obtained at least approximately $6,182,446 in criminal proceeds from the PPP loan
fraud scheme for loans funded where he defendant was listed as the applicant. This money was
deposited into bank accounts he controlled, directly or indirectly, and is traceable to the PPP loan
fraud scheme.

26. From February 2021 through October 2021, the defendant withdrew approximately
$1,004,800.00 in cash from bank accounts held in the names of Gulfstream Exchange and
Robinson & Associates.

27. In furtherance of his cooperation, the defendant surrendered to the United States
approximately $5,615,875 in cashier’s checks. These checks were made payable to Summerwind

Management, CIC Global and Gulfstream Exchange and account for a portion of the 30% fee the
clients owed to MANA TAX. These funds were obtained from two primary sources. First, the
defendant surrendered cashier’s checks, representing the 30% fee charged, paid to the defendant’s
entities by the professional athlete clients of MANA TAX. Next, the defendant surrendered
checks from business entities representing the 30% fee to MANA TAX for obtaining the PPP loans
fraudulently. The defendant controlled many of those entities by being a signatory to bank
accounts held in their names.

The Fraudulent Tax Return Scheme for Professional Athletes

28. The defendant and the co-conspirators, through MANA TAX, assisted in the

Case 1:22-cr-00116-AJT Document 14 Filed 07/20/22 Page 7 of 19 PagelD# 64

preparation and filing of false income tax returns on behalf of a number of professional athletes.
These tax returns all reported substantial business losses and claimed large tax refunds from the
IRS to which the athletes were not entitled. The defendant and the co-conspirators charged the
athletes a 30% flat fee based on the amount of the income tax refund obtained from the IRS.

29. The defendant worked to recruit the professional athletes to have MANA TAX
prepare their tax returns. Toward that end, the defendant, Rudin and the co-conspirators
represented to the professional athletes that Rudin was knowledgeable and experienced in the
preparation of tax returns. The defendant and Rudin represented that MANA TAX could obtain
large refunds for the athletes and that Rudin had specialized knowledge that their prior CPAs and
tax professionals did not have.

30. In or about May 2019, the defendant, Quin Rudin and UCC-3 met with Professional
Athlete-7 in the greater Los Angeles, California area. Quin Rudin and the defendant represented
that MANA TAX could obtain tens of millions of dollars in federal income tax refunds. During
this time, Professional Athlete-7 agreed to have MANA TAX prepare his tax returns.

31. In or about June and/or July 2019, the defendant along with Rudin, UCC-1, UCC-
3, and others flew to Leesburg, Virginia to meet with Professional Athlete-7. During this visit, at
least one co-conspirator discussed with Professional Athlete-7 his tax returns and that MANA
TAX would seek millions of dollars in tax refunds on his behalf from the IRS.

32. In addition, the conspirators discussed with Athlete-7 the possibility of referring
other professional athletes to MANA TAX for tax return preparation services. At the co-
conspirators request, Professional Athlete-7 spoke to other professional athletes at their practice
facility located in the Eastern District of Virginia. In addition, Professional Athlete-7 spoke to |

other athletes on the phone, and texted with other athletes about MANA TAX. Some of these

Case 1:22-cr-00116-AJT Document14 Filed 07/2Q/22 Page 8 of 19 PagelD# 65

communications occurred while at least one of the athletes was in the Eastern District of Virginia.
Ultimately, several other professional athletes whom Professional Athlete-7 spoke to engaged
MANA TAX to prepare their tax returns.

33. The athletes dealt primarily with the defendant and sometimes with Quin Rudin.
In that regard, the defendant would text, email, or have phone calls with the athletes about the
preparation of their tax returns and claims for refunds. Because Rudin had the tax knowledge, the
defendant normally directed the athletes to Rudin to answer any tax-specific questions.

34. UCC-1, at the direction of Quin Rudin, filed new income tax returns for the
professional athlete clients and also filed amended income tax returns for past years. Rudin
explained to the athletes that he would file the amended returns to correct what he falsely
characterized as “errors” the athletes’ previous accountants made, many of whom, if not all, were
Certified Public Accountants. Other members of the conspiracy assisted in the preparation of
these tax returns on behalf of MANA TAX.

35. The defendant, UCC-1- and Quin Rudin, willfully aided and assisted in the
preparation and presentation to the IRS of Forms 1040, U.S. Individual Income Tax Returns, and
Forms 1040-X, Amended U.S. Individual Income Tax Returns, for the taxpayers and calendar
years set forth below, knowing full well that the returns were false and fraudulent as to material

matters in order to obtain refunds to which the taxpayers were not entitled, including at least the

following:
Approximate Refund
Taxpayer Filing Date Form Year Issued
Professional Athlete 1 9/4/19 1040 2017 $1,623,600
Professional Athlete 2 10/15/19 1040 2018 $4,559,703
Professional Athlete 2 §/31/21 1040 2019 $3,793,420
Professional Athlete 3 10/16/20 1040 2019 $1,888,888
Professional Athlete 4 9/17/19 1040-X 2018 $481,299
Professional Athlete 4 11/16/20 1040 2019 $635,616


Case 1:22-cr-00116-AJT Document 14 Filed 07/20/22 Page 9 of 19 PagelD# 66

Approximate Refund
Taxpayer Filing Date Form Year Issued

Professional Athlete 5 11/30/20 1040 2019 $1,325,326
Professional Athlete 5 12/14/20 1040 2018 $1,179,279
Professional Athlete 7 11/30/20 1040 2019 $4,081,626

Professional Athlete 8 8/10/20 1040 2019 $104,966

Professional Athlete 9 10/13/20 1040 2019 $458,511
TOTAL $20,132,234

36. In addition to recruiting the professional athletes, the defendant instructed the
athletes how to pay the 30% fee. In order to conceal the payments received, the defendant directed
the payments be made to entities other than MANA TAX that he controlled.

37. The professional athletes identified below paid the co-conspirators at least the

following fees:

Taxpayer Date Fee Paid | Refund Requested Fee Paid
Professional Athlete 1 3/10/2020 $1,623,600 $480,000
Professional Athlete 2 8/8/20 $4,559,703 $1,367,911.03
Professional Athlete 3 1/4/21 $1,888,888 $566,666.70
Professional Athlete 4 10/21/2020 $481,299.00 $144,389
Professional Athlete 4 11/27/20 $635,616 $190,684
Professional Athlete 5 1/11/21 $1,179,279 $403,933.80
Professional Athlete 8 8/8/20 $104,966 $30,000

Fraudulent PPP Loans

38. During the course of the conspiracy, the defendant and his co-conspirators filed and
caused to be filed a number of false and fraudulent PPP loan applications with various financial
institutions which resulted in the funding of millions in fraudulent loans. The defendant and his
co-conspirators, through MANA TAX, collected fees from some of the applicants, which equaled
approximately 30% of the face value of the funded loan. |

39. | The defendant and Rudin encouraged and relied on UCC-3 to recruit small business
owners that UCC-3 knew from his mortgage business to become clients ofp MANA TAX. UCC-

3 acted as an intermediary between MANA TAX and the clients, many of whom were not fluent

Case 1:22-cr-00116-AJT Document 14 Filed 07/20/22 Page 10 of 19 PagelD# 67

in English, by communicating on their behalf with Rudin and the defendant.

40. | UCC-4 was self-employed in the entertainment industry representing musical
groups and performing artists. UCC-4 referred a number of his own clients to MANA TAX to
obtain PPP loans.

41. The defendant also authorized or caused the filing of fraudulent PPP loan
applications in the name of corporate entities he controlled, directly or indirectly, including
Gulfstream Exchange, CIC and Company 36. The application falsely stated that HAVANA was
the President and 100% owner of Company 36. The amount of fraudulent loan proceeds obtained
by entities under the defendant’s control totaled approximately $6,182,446, and these funds were
disbursed directly into bank accounts the defendant controlled.

42. The defendant and his co-conspirators submitted knowingly, assisted in the
submission of, and caused to be submitted a number of PPP loans, including the following, which
had material false representations which were relied upon by the financial institutions and the SBA

in authorizing the disbursement of funds:

PPP Loan Applicant Listed Authorized | Date submitted Loan amount
Representative (on or about) funded
Company 34 Person U 4/24/2020 $273,437
Company 1 Person A 5/5/2020 $520,832
Gulfstream Exchange) se7R HAVANA 5/8/2020 $1,752,130
Incorporated
Mana Tax Services, Inc. UCC-1 5/8/2020 $ 730,932
Company 48 SEIR HAVANA 5/13/2020 $ 478,822
Company 2 Person B 5/14/2020 $ 776,040
Company 49 Person V 5/15/2020 $ 745,586
Company 3 Person C 6/4/2020 $ 703,391
Company 4 Person D 6/5/2020 $ 1,512,290
Company 24 UCC-4 6/15/2020 $ 1,849,513
Company 50 UCC-4 6/15/2020 $ 1,387,135
Company 22 Person W 6/23/2020 $ 1,838,222

10

Case. 1:22-cr-00116-AJT

Document 14 Filed 07/20/22 Page 11 of 19 PagelD# 68

PPP Loan Applicant Listed Authorized | Date submitted Loan amount
Representative (on or about) funded
Company 51 Person K 7/20/2020 $ 260,125
Company 26 Person X 7/24/2020 $ 1,151,571
Company 5 Person E 1/25/2021 $ 1,995,642
Company 14 Person K 3/12/2021 $ 831,952
Company 39 Person K 3/13/2021 $ 200,130
Company 40 Person K 3/15/2021 $ 211,250
Gulfstream Exchange | SEIR HAVANA 3/17/2021 $ 1,971,682
ncorporated
Company 35 UCC-1 3/17/2021 $ 1,963,552
Community Investment | sETR HAVANA 3/18/2021 $ 1,979,812
orporation
Company 31 Person S 4/11/2021 $ 861,847
Company 47 Person K 4/13/2021 $ 500,035
Company 29 Person T 4/14/2021 $ 211,395
TOTAL $ 24,707,323

43. | The banks sent data from the loan applications to the SBA, which were then
processed by the SBA server in Sterling, Virginia, within the Eastern District of Virginia, to
authorize the funding of the loans.

44, The defendant received a portion of the 30% PPP loan fee paid by various business
entities for the fraudulent PPP loans that were funded after MANA TAX submitted false and
fraudulent applications and tax records. The defendant and Rudin directed UCC-3 to tell the
MANA TAX clients that UCC-3 recruited that they had to pay the 30% PPP loan fee to an entity
other than MANA TAX. As the direction of the defendant and Rudin, these fees were often paid
via cashier’s checks. The defendant and Rudin told UCC-3 to instruct the clients to write false
notations on the cashier’s checks, such as “payroll” or “intercompany transfers” in order to conceal
the true source of the funds.

45. During and in furtherance of the conspiracy, the defendant obtained approximately

$3,966,914 in fraudulent loan proceeds through the 30% PPP loan fee paid to MANA TAX. The

11

Case 1:22-cr-00116-AJT Document 14 Filed 07/20/22 Page 12 of 19 PagelD# 69

defendant directed the deposit of these fees into bank accounts for entities that he controlled,
directly or indirectly, such as Gulfstream Exchange.

46. After the PPP loan proceeds were deposited into bank accounts controlled by the
defendant, the defendant conducted further financial transactions with the funds in order to conceal
and disguise the nature, source and ownership of the funds. Typically, the defendant directed that
the funds be transferred into other bank accounts that he controlled, including Gulfstream
Exchange, CIC Global and MANA TAX. Many of those transactions were in amounts greater
than $10,000.

47. As discussed above in paragraph 42, all of the below referenced PPP loans were
fraudulently submitted as part of the conspiracy and included material misstatements.

Financial Transactions Involving Round One PPP Loans

48. On or about May 12, 2020, Financial Institution-2 funded the MANA TAX PPP
loan for $730,932 and deposited the proceeds into a Financial Institution-2 account for MANA
TAX (x9865) that the defendant and UCC-1 controlled. Thereafter, the defendant conducted the
following financial transactions out of that account:

a. A cashier’s check for $438,000 made payable to MANA TAX and deposited into a
10. 2020; Institution-5 account in the name of MANA TAX by Quin Rudin on July

b. Two payments totaling $50,000 to Company 32, an entity controlled by UCC-3;
and

c. A $250,000 cashier’s check made payable to another conspirator.
49. On or about May 13, 2020, Financial Institution-2 funded the Gulfstream Exchange
PPP loan for $1,752,130, and deposited the proceeds into a Financial Institution-2 account for
Gulfstream Exchange (x7154) that the defendant controlled. The defendant then caused the

following financial transactions to be made from the Gulfstream Exchange account (x7154):

12

Case 1:22-cr-00116-AJT Document 14 Filed 07/20/22 Page 13 of 19 PagelD# 70

a. A wire transfer to CIC Global’s account at Financial Institution-2 (x3397) for
$1,050,000;

b. The purchase of 3 cashier’s checks for a total of $650,000 made payable to
Gulfstream Exchange; and

c. The withdrawal of $39,000 in cash.

50. On or about May 18, 2020, Financial Institution-2 funded a Company 2 PPP loan
for $776,040, and deposited the loan proceeds into a Company 2 account at Financial Institution-
2. Then, the defendant or Quin Rudin caused the transfer of $762,500 out of that account and into
another Company 2 account that the defendant controlled at Financial Institution-2. On or about
June 15, 2020, the defendant directed the movement of the fraudulent PPP loan proceeds of the
Company 2 account he controlled at Financial Institution-2 as follows:

a. $369,300 was transferred to CIC Global’s account at Financial Institution-2;
b. $32,359 was transferred to MANA TAX’s account at Financial Institution-2; and
c. A $225,000 cashier’s check made payable to Gulfstream Exchange.

51. On or about June 15, 2020, the defendant and Quin Rudin also withdrew $1,000
from Gulfstream Exchange’s account at Financial Institution-2.

52. On or about June 18, 2020, the defendant obtained.a cashier’s check from
Gulfstream Exchange’s account at Financial Institution-6 made payable to Company 32 in the
amount of $250,000. The source of these funds was the fees paid by Company 3 and 4 for their
fraudulently obtained PPP loans. The defendant gave this $250,000 cashier’s check to UCC-3 for
referring Company 3 and Company 4 to MANA TAX.

53. Then, into the same account that received the $369,000 and the $1,050,000
referenced above in paragraphs 49(a) and 50(a), on or about June 25, 2020, the defendant deposited

a cashier’s check from Company 22 for $551,466, into the CIC Global account at Financial

13

Case 1:22-cr-00116-AJT Document 14 Filed 07/20/22 Page 14 of 19 PagelD# 71

Institution-2. This $551,466 payment was the 30% fee from the owner of Company 22. The
- cashier’s check noted falsely on the memo line that the payment was for “Inter Company Payroll
Expenses.”

54. On or about June 26, 2020, the defendant obtained a $150,000 cashier’s check made
payable to Company 32, from the CIC Global’ s account at Financial Institution-2, which received
the $369,000, $1,050,000 and $551,466. The defendant gave this $150,000 check to UCC-3 for
referring Company 22 to MANA TAX to obtain a fraudulent PPP loan. Then, three days later,
on or about June 29,2020, the defendant obtained a cashier’s check from the CIC Global, Inc.
account at Financial Institution-2 for nearly the remaining funds totaling $1,821,521.

55. | Onorabout July 7, 2020, UCC-4 gave HAVANA a cashier’s check for $554,883.90
from an account held by Company 24 at Financial Institution-2 and payable to Summerwind
Management. This check represented the MANA TAX fee for obtaining a PPP loan for Company
24, acompany referred by UCC-4. In furtherance of his cooperation, HAVANA surrendered this
- check to the government.

56. During the first round of PPP loans, approximately eleven companies that received
fraudulent inflated PPP loans prepared by MANA TAX paid a 30% fee (based on the value of the
loan amount) to corporate entities the defendant controlled, such as Gulfstream Exchange, CIC
Global, Summerwind Management and Company 21.

57. The total amount of fees paid to these entities the defendant controlled was
approximately $3,966,914. These payments were typically made with cashier’s checks with false
notations on the memo lines. Knowing that these fees represented the proceeds of the fraudulently
obtained PPP loans, the defendant conducted financial transactions to conceal and disguise the

nature, the location, the source, the ownership and the control of the proceeds of the fraud.

14

Case 1:22-cr-00116-AJT Document 14 Filed 07/20/22 Page 15 of 19 PagelD# 72

Financial Transaction Involving Round Two PPP Loans

58. On or about March 19, 2021, members of the conspiracy obtained a PPP loan for
CIC from Financial Institution-4 in the amount of $1,979,812. Within days, the defendant
disbursed approximately $1,180,388 to MANA TAX and $797,740 to Company 19, a company
controlled by another conspirator. For one of the transactions, the defendant issued a check from
CIC to MANA TAX for $586,444 and noted falsely on the memo line the check was for “payroll
services.”

59. | Onor about March 29, 2021, the defendant obtained a cashier’s check for $100,000
from the Gulfstream Exchange account at Financial Institution-4. The check was made payable to
Company 30 and was funded by a fraudulent PPP loan obtained by MANA TAX for Gulfstream
Exchange. The defendant gave this check to UCC-3 for referring a number of clients, including
Company 5, to MANA TAX to get PPP loans.

60. During his participation in the conspiracy, the defendant deposited numerous
cashier’s checks into bank accounts that he controlled. Then, he conducted additional financial
transactions with the PPP funds, such as by wire transfers, through and among other bank accounts
he controlled.

61. The defendant knew that the purpose of these financial transactions was to conceal
the nature, the location, the source, the ownership and the control of the proceeds obtained through
the fraudulently obtained PPP loans.

62. This statement of facts includes those facts necessary to support the plea agreement |
between the defendant and the United States. It does not include each and every fact known to
the defendant or to the United States, and it is not intended to be a full enumeration of all of the

facts surrounding the defendant’s case.

15

Case 1:22-cr-00116-AJT Document 14 Filed 07/20/22 Page 16 of 19 PagelD# 73

63. The actions of the defendant, as recounted above, were in all respects knowing and

deliberate, and were not committed by mistake, accident, or other innocent reason.

Date:

7/20(az

By:

Respectfully submitted,

Jessica D. Aber
United States Attorney

to

Kimberly M. Shartar

Kimberly R. Pedersen

Assistant United States Attorneys
David Zisserson

Assistant Chief, Tax Division

16

Case 1:22-cr-00116-AJT Document 14 Filed 07/20/22 Page 17 of 19 PagelD# 74

63. The actions of the defendant, as recounted above, were in all respects knowing and

deliberate, and were not committed by mistake, accident, or other innocent reason.

Date:

Respectfully submitted,

Jessica D. Aber
United States Attorney

Kimberly M. Shartar

Kimberly R. Pedersen

Assistant United States Attorneys
David Zisserson

Assistant Chief, Tax Division

16

Case 1:22-cr-00116-AJT Document 14 Filed 07/20/22 Page 18 of 19 PagelD# 75

63. The actions of the defendant, as recounted above, were in all respects knowing and

deliberate, and were not committed by mistake, accident, or other innocent reason.

Date:

Respectfully submitted,

Jessica D. Aber
United States Attorney

Be seh le

Kimberly M. Shartar

Kimberly R. Pedersen

Assistant United States Attorneys
David Zisserson

Assistant Chief, Tax Division

16

Case 1:22-cr-00116-AJT Document 14 Filed 07/20/22 Page 19 of 19 PagelD# 76

After consulting with my attorney and pursuant to the plea agreement entered into this day
between the defendant, SEIR ROBINSON HAVANA, and the United States, I hereby stipulate
that the above Statement of Facts is true and accurate, and that had the matter proceeded to trial,
the United States would have proved the same beyond a reasonable doubt.

\

SEIR ROBINSON HAVANA

I am Edward M. Robinson, defendant’s attorney. I have carefully reviewed the above

Statement of Facts with the defendant. To my knowledge, his decision to stipulate to these facts

Edward M. Robinson, Esq.
Attorney for SEIR ROBINSON HAVANA

is an informed and voluntary one.

17

File and source

File

14.pdf

Size

1,282,992 bytes

SHA-256

a66a21d47a8b5491afbe4fd3e588e3bce7c1f346a052a7584b142e8d581d8b70

Our copy

14.pdf