Information — United States v. Vinicius Santana (District of Massachusetts)
Summary
An Information in United States of America versus Vinicius Santana, Criminal No. 22cr10221, in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, dated August 22, 2022. Count One charges wire fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1343, based on a $2.5 million wire of PPP loan proceeds from Northeast Bank on or about May 11, 2020, and Count Two charges unlawful monetary transactions under 18 U.S.C. § 1957. The Information alleges that Santana's painting company, Complete Home Care LLC, had three PPP applications denied, then sought $2.5 million through Lendio claiming 154 employees, supported by an IRS Form 944 that falsely claimed $12,041,600 in 2019 wages. It alleges the proceeds were spent on cars, cryptocurrency and real estate, and is signed by Assistant U.S. Attorney Benjamin A. Saltzman.
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
Cite this document
“Information — United States v. Vinicius Santana (District of Massachusetts).”
Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/16-information-felony-as-to-vinicius-santana-1-count-s-1-2-atta-27a622b86d/
, SHA-256 4c7e9df7feeefa9f4bcd43b6e95dd388a8441467ee81969d579e6ebd112e1d9f.Full text
Case 1:22-cr-10221-FDS Document 16 Filed 08/22/22 Page 1 of 11
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
) 22cr10221
Criminal No.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )
) Violation:
v. )
) Count One: Wire Fraud
VINICIUS SANTANA ) (18 U.S.C. § 1343)
)
Defendant ) Count Two: Unlawful Monetary Transactions
) (18 U.S.C. § 1957)
)
) Forfeiture Allegation:
) (18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C) and
)
28 U.S.C. § 2461)
)
)
) Money Laundering Forfeiture Allegation:
) (18 U.S.C. § 982(a)(1))
INFORMATION
At all times relevant to this Information:
General Allegations
1. Defendant VINICIUS SANTANA (“SANTANA”) lived in Massachusetts and
owned Complete Home Care LLC (“CHC”).
2. CHC was a Massachusetts painting company that SANTANA incorporated on or
about September 2, 2017.
3. Northeast Bank was a federally insured financial institution.
4. Lendio, Inc. (“Lendio”) was a company headquartered in Lehi, Utah that
specialized in facilitating small-business lending.
5. The United States Small Business Administration (“SBA”) was an agency of the
executive branch of the United States government. The mission of the SBA was to maintain and
1
Case 1:22-cr-10221-FDS Document 16 Filed 08/22/22 Page 2 of 11
strengthen the nation’s economy by enabling the establishment and viability of small businesses
and by assisting in the economic recovery of communities after disasters. As part of this effort,
the SBA enabled and provided for loans, guaranteed by the government, through banks, credit
unions, and other lenders.
The CARES Act
The Paycheck Protection Program
6. The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (“CARES”) Act was a federal
law enacted in March 2020 that was designed to provide emergency financial assistance to
Americans suffering the economic harm as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. Among other
things, the CARES Act provided funding for forgivable loans to small businesses for job retention
and certain other expenses through the Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP”).
7. PPP loan proceeds were required to be used by small businesses on certain
permissible expenses, namely, payroll costs, interest on mortgages, rent, and utilities. The PPP
allowed the interest and principal on the PPP loan to be entirely forgiven if the business spent the
loan proceeds on these expenses within a designated period of time and used at least a minimum
amount of the PPP loan proceeds toward payroll expenses.
8. To obtain a PPP loan, a qualifying business was required to submit a PPP loan
application 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 affirmative certifications in order to be eligible to obtain the PPP loan. One such
certification required the applicant to affirm that “[t]he [PPP loan] funds w[ould] be used to retain
workers and maintain payroll or make mortgage interest payments, lease payments, and utility
2
Case 1:22-cr-10221-FDS Document 16 Filed 08/22/22 Page 3 of 11
payments.” The applicant (through its authorized representative) was also required to
acknowledge that “I understand that if the funds are used for unauthorized purposes, the federal
government may pursue criminal fraud charges.” In the PPP loan application, the applicant was
also required to state, among other things, its (a) average monthly payroll expenses and (b) number
of employees. Lenders used these figures to calculate the amount of money the small business
was eligible to receive under the PPP. The applicant was also required to provide documentation
showing its payroll expenses.
9. Participating financial institutions, including Northeast Bank, received and
processed business’s PPP loan applications. If a PPP loan application was approved, the
participating financial institution would fund the PPP loan using its own monies, which were
guaranteed by the SBA.
Scheme to Defraud
10. Between April 2020 and September 2020, in the District of Massachusetts,
SANTANA devised a scheme to defraud and to fraudulently obtain pandemic relief funds by filing
false and fraudulent PPP loan applications on behalf of CHC.
11. As described below, SANTANA made four false and fraudulent PPP loan
applications. Three were denied, but the fourth loan application resulted in CHC receiving $2.5
million. SANTANA thereafter misused the loan proceeds to buy cars and real estate, invest in
cryptocurrency, and send money to individuals and companies that were not connected to CHC’s
payroll, utilities, rent, or mortgage payments.
A. The Failed CHC PPP Applications
12. Between approximately April 10, 2020 and April 26, 2020, SANTANA submitted
3
Case 1:22-cr-10221-FDS Document 16 Filed 08/22/22 Page 4 of 11
three unsuccessful PPP applications on behalf of CHC to Lendio, which connected small
businesses with financial institutions participating in the PPP.
13. The three applications, which sought between $25,000 and $45,000, claimed that
CHC had five employees and between $10,000 and $18,000 in average monthly payroll. In support
of these applications, SANTANA submitted tax documents showing $88,577 in gross receipts
from an unrelated business—a document that did not support the $120,000 to $216,000 in annual
payroll cost that CHC claimed in the application.
14. Participating lenders denied all three applications.
B. The Funded CHC PPP Loan
15. On or about April 26, 2020, SANTANA submitted a fourth PPP loan application
on CHC’s behalf through Lendio, to Northeast Bank. SANTANA sought $2.5 million, a loan at
least 50 times larger than the three earlier loans.
16. In the fourth application, SANTANA claimed that CHC had 154 employees and an
average monthly payroll of $1,000,000. As with the loan amount, the number of employees and
the claimed average monthly payroll dwarfed the figures in CHC’s three applications earlier that
month. SANTANA identified the “purpose of the loan” as “Payroll,” “Lease / Mortgage Interest,”
and “Utilities.”
17. SANTANA supported the fourth application with an IRS Form 944, a tax document
that purported to reflect CHC’s wages and federal payroll tax information for 2019. The form, which
bore SANTANA’s signature but had not been filed with the IRS, falsely claimed that CHC paid
$12,041,600 in wages, tips, and other compensation in 2019.
4
Case 1:22-cr-10221-FDS Document 16 Filed 08/22/22 Page 5 of 11
18. On or about May 11, 2020, in reliance on SANTANA’s statements, Northeast Bank
approved CHC’s application and wired $2,500,000 to a CHC account numbered xxxx9926 at the
East Boston Savings Bank (“the EBSB Account”).
C. SANTANA’s Misuse of the Proceeds
19. As described below, SANTANA spent the PPP funds on personal expenses, such
as cars, cryptocurrency, and real estate. He also sent money to businesses and individuals that
were not related to CHC.
20. On July 2, 2020, SANTANA used $29,471 from the EBSB Account to purchase a
2019 Toyota Highlander.
21. On July 25, 2020, SANTANA used $90,000 from the EBSB Account to purchase
an Audi luxury coupe.
22. Between September 4 and September 14, 2020, SANTANA wired $900,000 from
the EBSB Account to an account at Kraken (a cryptocurrency exchange) that he opened on or
about September 4, 2020.
23. On December 29, 2020, SANTANA sent a $407,587.60 bank check from the EBSB
account to a law office for the purchase of a residential property in Lowell, Massachusetts.
5
Case 1:22-cr-10221-FDS Document 16 Filed 08/22/22 Page 6 of 11
COUNT ONE
Wire Fraud
(18 U.S.C. § 1343)
The United States Attorney charges:
24. The United States Attorney re-alleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1
through 23 of this Information.
25. On or about May 11, 2020, in the District of Massachusetts and elsewhere, the
defendant,
VINICIUS SANTANA,
having devised and intending to devise a scheme and artifice to defraud, and for obtaining money
and property by means of materially false and fraudulent pretenses, representations, and promises,
did transmit and cause to be transmitted by means of wire communications in interstate and foreign
commerce, writings, signs, signals, pictures, and sounds for the purpose of executing the scheme
to defraud, to wit, a $2.5 million wire of PPP loan proceeds from Northeast Bank to CHC’s EBSB
Account.
All in violation of Title 18, United State Code, Section 1343.
6
Case 1:22-cr-10221-FDS Document 16 Filed 08/22/22 Page 7 of 11
COUNT TWO
Unlawful Monetary Transactions
(18 U.S.C. § 1957)
The United States Attorney further charges:
26. The United States Attorney re-alleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1
through 23 of this Information.
27. On or about July 25, 2020, in the District of Massachusetts and elsewhere, the
defendant,
VINICIUS SANTANA,
knowingly engaged and attempted to engage in a monetary transaction in criminally derived
property of a value greater than $10,000, specifically, the purchase of a $90,000 bank check
payable to Audi of Burlington, where such property was derived from specified unlawful activity,
that is, wire fraud, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1343.
All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1957.
7
Case 1:22-cr-10221-FDS Document 16 Filed 08/22/22 Page 8 of 11
FORFEITURE ALLEGATION
(18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C) and 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c))
The United States Attorney further alleges:
28. Upon conviction of the offense in violation Title 18, United States Code, Section
1343, set forth in Count One, the defendant,
VINICIUS SANTANA
shall forfeit to the United States, pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 981(a)(1)(C),
and Title 28, United States Code, Section 2461(c), any property, real or personal, which
constitutes or is derived from proceeds traceable to the offense. The property to be forfeited
includes, but is not limited to, the following assets:
a. The property at 54-58 Willow Street, Lowell, Massachusetts 01852; and
b. $2,500,000, to be entered in the form of an Order of Forfeiture (Money
Judgment).
29. If any of the property described in Paragraph 28, above, as being forfeitable
pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 981(a)(1)(C), and Title 28, United States Code,
Section 2461(c), as a result of any act or omission of the defendant --
a. cannot be located upon the exercise of due diligence;
b. has been transferred or sold to, or deposited with, a third party;
c. has been placed beyond the jurisdiction of the Court;
d. has been substantially diminished in value; or
e. has been commingled with other property which cannot be divided without
difficulty;
8
Case 1:22-cr-10221-FDS Document 16 Filed 08/22/22 Page 9 of 11
it is the intention of the United States, pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 2461(c),
incorporating Title 21, United States Code, Section 853(p), to seek forfeiture of any other
property of the defendant up to the value of the property described in Paragraph 28 above.
All pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 981(a)(1)(C), and Title 28, United
States Code, Section 2461(c).
9
Case 1:22-cr-10221-FDS Document 16 Filed 08/22/22 Page 10 of 11
MONEY LAUNDERING FORFEITURE ALLEGATION
(18 U.S.C. § 982(a)(1))
The United States Attorney further alleges:
30. Upon conviction of the offense in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section
1957, set forth in Count Two, the defendant,
VINICIUS SANTANA,
shall forfeit to the United States, pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 982(a)(1),
any property, real or personal, involved in such offense, and any property traceable to such
property. The property to be forfeited includes, but is not limited to, the following assets:
a. The property at 54-58 Willow Street, Lowell, Massachusetts 01852; and
b. $2,500,000, to be entered in the form of an Order of Forfeiture (Money
Judgment).
31. If any of the property described in Paragraph 30, above, as being forfeitable
pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 982(a)(1), as a result of any act or omission of
the defendant --
a. cannot be located upon the exercise of due diligence;
b. has been transferred or sold to, or deposited with, a third party;
c. has been placed beyond the jurisdiction of the Court;
d. has been substantially diminished in value; or
e. has been commingled with other property which cannot be divided without
difficulty;
10
Case 1:22-cr-10221-FDS Document 16 Filed 08/22/22 Page 11 of 11
it is the intention of the United States, pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 982(b),
incorporating Title 21, United States Code, Section 853(p), to seek forfeiture of any other property
of the defendant up to the value of the property described in Paragraph 30 above.
All pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 982(a)(1).
RACHAEL S. ROLLINS
United States Attorney
By: /s/ Benjamin A. Saltzman
Mackenzie A. Queenin
Benjamin A. Saltzman
Assistant U.S. Attorneys
Date: August 22, 2022
11
File and source
- File
- 16-information-felony-as-to-vinicius-santana-1-count-s-1-2-atta.pdf
- Size
- 212,818 bytes
- SHA-256
- 4c7e9df7feeefa9f4bcd43b6e95dd388a8441467ee81969d579e6ebd112e1d9f
- Original
- No public link identified.