Can I Get in Trouble If Someone Else Prepared My PPP

Can I Get in Trouble If Someone Else Prepared My PPP

You didn’t fill out the PPP application yourself. Someone else did. Maybe a friend who “knew the system.” Maybe a family member who helped other people get approved. Maybe someone you found on Instagram or Telegram who charged a fee. You’re thinking this gives you an out – that “someone else prepared it” is your defense if anything goes wrong. Here’s what nobody explains: having someone else prepare your application doesn’t create distance from fraud. It creates evidence of conspiracy. The informal nature of your arrangement – the cash payment, the lack of contracts, the person who wasn’t a licensed professional – is exactly what prosecutors point to when they argue you knew what was happening was wrong. A licensed CPA might give you a reliance defense. A random helper gives you a co-conspirator. The less professional the person who helped you, the more exposed you are.

Welcome to the Spodek Law Group resource on what happens when someone else prepared your PPP application – and why the defense you think you have is actually the evidence that convicts you. Our goal is to show you exactly how federal prosecutors view these arrangements, because the way they see it is completely different from the way you see it. You think: “I didn’t fill it out. I trusted someone. If anything was wrong, that’s on them.” Prosecutors think: “This person paid a stranger to submit a federal loan application for them. They didn’t use a licensed professional because they didn’t want questions asked. The informal payment structure proves consciousness of guilt. Every element of this arrangement was designed for deniability – and that design proves intent.”

That’s the reality Todd Spodek and the Spodek Law Group team explain to clients who come in after learning they’re being investigated. The initial reaction is always the same: “But I didn’t prepare the application – someone else did.” The problem is that prosecutors don’t care who typed the numbers. They care who signed the certification. They care who received the money. They care who benefited from the fraud. And they care about the nature of your relationship with the person who “helped” you – because that relationship tells them everything about what you knew.

“Someone Else Did It” Isn’t a Defense – It’s a Confession

Heres the paradox that changes everything about your situation. You think having someone else prepare your application protects you. Actually, its evidence against you. The very fact that you used an informal helper – instead of doing it yourself or hiring a licensed professional – is what prosecutors point to when they argue you knew the application was going to be false.

Think about it from there perspective. Why would you have a stranger fill out your buisness loan application? Why would you pay cash to someone you met online? Why wouldnt you use your own accountant or do it yourself?

The answer prosecutors suggest: because you wanted deniability. You wanted someone else to put the false numbers on paper so you could claim you didnt know. You specificaly chose an informal arrangement to avoid a paper trail.

That isnt a defense. Thats consciousness of guilt.

The Signature You Didn’t Read Still Says You Certified It

You probly didnt read every line of the application before you signed it. You trusted your helper. They told you where to sign. You signed.

Heres what that signature says: “I certify under penalty of perjury that the information in this application is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge.”

It dosent say “I certify that what someone else wrote is probly correct.” It dosent say “I trust my helper.” It says YOU certify that the information is true. You personally. Under penalty of perjury.

Federal courts have ruled consistantly that you cannot delegate criminal responsibility by having someone else fill in the blanks before you sign. The signature is your guarentee. Whatever numbers your helper put on that application – the payroll figures, the employee count, the revenue claims – you certified them as true when you signed.

If those numbers were false, you certified false statements to the federal government. That your helper was the one who typed them dosent change who certified them.

A CPA Gives You a Defense – A Friend Gives You a Co-Conspirator

Heres the irony that should terrify you. The thing that seemed sketchy – paying a licensed professional to help with your application – was actualy your only protection. The thing that seemed safer – using an informal contact – is what destroys you.

When you use a licensed CPA or attorney, and you disclose all relevent facts to them, and you follow there advice in good faith, you have whats called a “reliance defense.” You can argue: “I relied on a licensed professional. I disclosed everything. I followed there guidance. If the application was wrong, I didnt intend for it to be wrong – I trusted the expert.”

This defense dosent always work, but it exists. It gives your attorney something to argue.

When you use an informal helper – a friend, a family contact, someone from social media – you have no reliance defense. You cant claim you relied on a professionals guidance when your helper wasnt a professional. You cant claim good faith reliance when you paid cash with no contract, no documentation, no disclosure.

What you created instead is a conspiracy. You and your helper, working together, to submit a fraudulent federal loan application. Your not a victim of bad advice. Your a co-conspirator in fraud.

Six Family Members, One Indictment

In November 2025, six family members in Brooklyn were indicted together for PPP fraud conspiracy. They didnt each commit separate frauds. They were charged together because they helped each other.

The investigation revealed that one defendant coordinated the applications and recieved payments from several co-defendants ranging from $500 to $2,500 marked for “services.” Family members helping family members. Small payments. Informal arrangements.

All six charged with conspiracy.

In another case, Thompson and Harris were small buisness owners who allowed someone to assist them with creating there false PPP loan applications. There applications exaggerated the amount of buisness income they actualy had. Both were held responsible for submitting false applications. Settlement judgments were obtained against them: $23,516, $23,415, $23,435.

The pattern is clear. When you let someone help you prepare a fraudulent application, you dont escape liability. You share it.

Willful Blindness: Why Not Knowing Makes It Worse

You might be thinking: “But I really didnt know the application was false. I trusted my helper. I didnt look at the numbers.”

In federal court, not knowing can be worse then knowing.

The doctrine is called “willful blindness.” Prosecutors argue that you deliberately avoided learning the truth. You didnt ask questions because you didnt want to hear the answers. You didnt verify the numbers because you knew they wouldnt verify.

Heres how they frame it: Why didnt you ask your helper where those payroll numbers came from? Because you already knew they were inflated and didnt want confirmation. Why didnt you review the application before signing? Because you didnt want to see evidence of fraud. Why did you use a random contact instead of your own accountant? Because your accountant would have asked questions you didnt want answered.

Not asking questions isnt neutral. Its evidence you already knew the answers.

Under federal law, willful blindness equals knowledge. Knowledge plus agreement equals conspiracy. And suddenly your legally identical to your guilty helper – facing the same charges, the same potential sentence.

Pinkerton Liability – Your Helper’s Crimes Become Yours

Theres a legal doctrine called Pinkerton liability that most people have never heard of. Once prosecutors establish you were in a conspiracy, Pinkerton activates.

Your helpers crimes become your crimes.

Lets say you used someone who helped 20 other people get PPP loans. You didnt know about those other applications. You had nothing to do with them. But if prosecutors establish that you joined a conspiracy with this helper – that you agreed to submit a fraudulent application together – then all 20 of there fraudulent applications become your liability too.

There 20 counts of wire fraud become YOUR 20 counts of wire fraud.

This is how federal conspiracy law works. When you join a criminal agreement, your responsible for all reasonably forseeable acts of your co-conspirators. You didnt sign 20 applications? Dosent matter. You joined a conspiracy that filed 20 applications. Your on the hook for all of them.

This is why using an informal helper is so dangerous. You have no idea what else they were doing. You have no idea how many other people they “helped.” And under Pinkerton, there entire operation becomes your criminal liability.

Your Helper Is Cooperating Against You Right Now

When your helper gets arrested – and if they were helping multiple people with fraudulent applications, there going to get arrested – the first thing there lawyer tells them is: cooperate.

Federal sentencing guidelines give masive credit for “substantial assistance.” The more information a defendant provides, the more names they give, the more useful they are to prosecutors – the lighter there sentence. Your helper is facing years in federal prison. The only way to reduce that sentence is to help prosecutors build cases against everyone they helped.

That includes you.

Right now, your helper is sitting with there attorney and a federal prosecutor. There going through every application they prepared. There explaining what each client told them, what each client paid, what each client knew. Every detail about your arrangement is being traded for sentence reduction.

There not protecting you. There selling you.

You might think: “We had a good relationship. They wouldnt turn on me.” When your facing 5 to 10 years in federal prison, relationships stop mattering. Survival matters. Your helper is surviving by giving you up.

Why “My Accountant Did It” Is Failing in Every Court

Even the strongest version of this defense – “my licensed accountant prepared it” – is failing in federal courts across the country. Judges are flat-out rejecting it. Prosecutors are prepared for it.

If the defense is failing when you used a LICENSED ACCOUNTANT, imagine how completly it fails when your helper was a random Instagram contact.

The legal principle is simple: you cannot delegate criminal responsibility to another person. Courts have ruled consistantly that hiring an accountant – or using a friend, or paying a stranger – dosent absolve you of responsibility for what appears on an application you signed.

You signed under penalty of perjury. That signature means “I swear this is true.” You cant say “well, I didnt read it” or “my helper told me it was fine so I just signed.” Federal judges dont accept that.

If the “my accountant did it” defense dosent work with a licensed professional, what makes you think “my Instagram contact did it” is going to fare any better?

The Second Circuit Problem: New York’s Harsh Reality

If your in New York, Connecticut, or Vermont, your in the Second Circuit. And the Second Circuit has been particuarly harsh on willful blindness cases.

Unlike some circuits that require prosecutors to prove you actualy knew the statements were false, the Second Circuit allows convictions based on deliberate ignorance. You didnt know because you didnt want to know. You structured your arrangement specificaly to avoid knowledge.

The very things that seemed like protection – using an informal helper, not asking questions, not reviewing the application, paying cash with no documentation – those are the elements prosecutors use to prove willful blindness.

You thought you were creating deniability. You actualy created a conviction.

In the Second Circuit, the fact that you went out of your way to not know is treated as evidence that you already knew. The informal helper, the lack of questions, the cash payment – its all evidence of deliberate avoidance. And deliberate avoidance is treated as knowledge under Second Circuit law.

The Blueacorn Warning

Stephanie Hockridge co-founded Blueacorn in 2020, purportedly to help small buisnesses get PPP loans. Her “VIPPP” service recruited referral agents to coach borrowers on how to submit false applications. She and her co-conspirators charged kickbacks based on a percentage of the funds recieved.

She got 10 years in federal prison.

But heres the part that matters to you: the people she “helped” are facing there own charges. The helper didnt protect anyone. The helper created a network of co-conspirators.

If you used a similar service – someone who was “helping” multiple people get PPP loans, someone who charged fees based on loan amounts, someone who coached you on what to say – your part of that network. Your helpers arrest isnt the end of the investigation. Its the beginning of your investigation.

Every client file becomes evidence. Every payment becomes a conspiracy connection. Every application becomes a count of wire fraud.

The Digital Trail You Thought Didnt Exist

You paid your helper in cash specificaly to avoid a paper trail. Or maybe you used Venmo, Cash App, Zelle – thinking those were more private then a check. Heres what you didnt understand: every digital payment is documented. Every text message is stored. Every email is recoverable.

When federal agents arrest your helper, they seize there phone. Every text conversation. Every DM. Every email about PPP applications. If you discussed your application over text – if you asked about the numbers, if you talked about the money, if you sent documents they needed – investigators have those messages now.

The payment you sent through Venmo? Venmo keeps records. Grand jury subpoenas go to Venmo. The $500 or $2,000 you paid shows up with your name, there name, and a timestamp. The memo field – wheather you wrote “PPP help” or tried to be clever with “consulting” – dosent matter. The payment exists. The connection is documented.

You thought using an informal helper avoided paper trails. In reality, you created a digital trail thats even easier to trace then traditional documentation. Bank subpoenas, phone seizures, social media records – investigators piece together exactly what happened, who paid who, and when.

The texts you sent about “getting the numbers right” or “making sure it goes through” – those arent casual messages anymore. There evidence of your knowing participation in fraud. And there sitting in federal custody right now, being organized into an exhibit for your prosecution.

What to Do When Someone Else Prepared Your Application

At Spodek Law Group, Todd Spodek and the federal defense team handle exactly this situation. Clients come to us after learning there helper is under investigation, wondering wheather there next. Heres the advice we give.

First, understand that having someone else prepare your application dosent protect you – it potentialy exposes you. The informal nature of your arrangement, the cash payment, the lack of documentation – these arent defenses. There evidence.

Second, gather your records. Find your copy of the PPP application if you have one. Find your tax returns from 2019 and 2020. Compare the numbers. You need to know wheather the application contained false information before investigators document those discrepencies.

Third, dont contact your helper. Any communication after you learn about an investigation can be characterized as witness tampering or conspiracy. If your helper is cooperating, anything you say to them goes directly to prosecutors.

Fourth, dont destroy anything. Emails, texts, Venmo records, any documentation of your arrangement – keep all of it. Destroying evidence after learning about an investigation is obstruction. Obstruction often carries worse penalties then the underlying fraud.

Fifth, consult a federal defense attorney immediatly. Not next week. Now. An attorney can assess your actual exposure, advise you on your rights, and potentialy begin discussions with prosecutors if early cooperation makes sense.

If someone else prepared your PPP application and your worried about investigation, call Spodek Law Group at 212-300-5196. The consultation is confidential. We can help you understand wheather your arrangement created criminal exposure, what your helper might be telling investigators, and what options you have while you still have options.

Your helper made there choice. There cooperating. There naming names. There explaining exactly how each application was prepared and what each client knew. The question is wheather you wait for investigators to reach your name on that list – or wheather you get ahead of the situation while you still can.

The person who prepared your application didnt protect you. They created a conspiracy. And now the only question is how you respond to a situation you never saw coming – but one that prosecutors have been building toward for months. The defense you thought you had – “someone else did it” – is the very evidence being used against you. The arrangement you thought was clever is what proves you knew exactly what was happening. Your window to respond is closing faster then you realize.