When Congress reauthorized the State Small Business Credit Initiative (SSBCI) under the American Rescue Plan Act, it did not simply write a check for $10 billion and walk away. It built in some serious teeth. States, territories, tribal governments, private lenders providing matching capital, and the small businesses that ultimately receive SSBCI-backed funds are all operating inside a compliance perimeter that the Treasury Office of Inspector General (“Treasury OIG”) is fully entitled to inspect, and increasingly willing to enforce now that many programs are more than halfway through their deployment period.
The Legal Architecture of Oversight
Every jurisdiction that signs an SSBCI Allocation Agreement grants Treasury, the Treasury OIG, and the Government Accountability Office timely and unrestricted access to books, documents, papers, and other records pertinent to the jurisdiction’s allocation, for purposes of audits, investigations, examinations, and copying of documents. This is not boilerplate. It is a standing subpoena-equivalent that survives the life of the award.
Record retention obligations reinforce that access right. Participating jurisdictions must preserve statistical records and all other records pertinent to the SSBCI allocation for three years from the date the final quarterly report is submitted, unless a longer federal retention rule applies. In loan participation structures, private lenders inherit similar obligations directly. Template SSBCI 2.0 loan participation agreements require lenders to make available to Treasury, the Treasury OIG, and their agents detailed loan records, with that obligation surviving until the later of July 31, 2031, or as otherwise required under federal cost principles regulations, and lenders must cooperate with any enforcement or compliance review activity, including investigation, arbitration, mediation, litigation, and monitoring, and comply with information requests and onsite compliance reviews.
How Treasury Actually Tests Compliance
The audit function is not purely reactive. Before releasing the second and third tranches of a jurisdiction’s allocation, Treasury reviews the jurisdiction’s certification and performs targeted compliance testing on supporting documentation related to the jurisdiction’s prior use of disbursed funds and will not disburse the next tranche until that review is complete. If Treasury later determines that transactions counted toward the 80% deployment threshold were not actually compliant, it can exclude those transactions and, if the jurisdiction falls below the threshold as a result, terminate the jurisdiction’s remaining allocated funds unless compliant alternatives can be identified.
The consequences for a genuine audit finding are spelled out with unusual bluntness in the Allocation Agreement itself. If the Treasury OIG finds, through an audit, any intentional or reckless misuse of allocated funds by a participating state, Treasury will find that state in default of the Allocation Agreement, and Treasury is then obligated to recoup the misused funds. Short of default, Treasury retains discretion to withhold future disbursements pending correction, or reduce, suspend, or terminate its disbursement commitment entirely.
Where the Real Teeth Are: False Claims Act Exposure
Recoupment is the polite version of the risk. The sharper edge is the federal False Claims Act (FCA). Lenders and program administrators that submit certifications to a federal program based on representations that are false, withheld, or fraudulent, and those certifications are relied upon in the payment or disbursement process, can trigger FCA liability, which carries treble damages and per-claim penalties. Congress and oversight bodies have shown no hesitation extending this framework to pandemic-era small business programs like Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loans, and members of Congress specifically pressed the Treasury OIG to treat SSBCI funds as vulnerable to waste, fraud, and abuse given the scale of the capital infusion. Do not assume SSBCI’s smaller footprint compared to PPP means less scrutiny. It means less forgiveness for sloppiness, because the file is smaller and easier to audit line by line.
Practical Steps to Stay Off the OIG’s Desk
For jurisdictions and matching-fund lenders, the defense is unglamorous but effective: documentation discipline. Maintain loan-level files that map every disbursement to an eligible use, retain records well past the three-year floor if the loan participation agreement imposes a longer survival period, and respond to Treasury’s pre-tranche compliance testing requests before Treasury has to ask twice. For companies accepting SSBCI-backed capital, insist that your lender’s certifications to Treasury are accurate and keep your own parallel records, because a lender’s false certification can draw attention to the underlying transaction in a recoupment action even if the borrower acted in good faith, though Treasury has signaled that a lender’s faulty certification is an issue for the lender to rectify, especially if the borrower has provided everything that the lender has requested.
The bottom line is this: SSBCI money is not free money, and it is not quiet money. It comes with a standing right of Treasury and its Inspector General to walk through the front door of your files at any time. Build your compliance file as if that visit is scheduled for next week, because under this framework, it effectively always is.
This article may be reproduced, in whole or in part, with the prior permission of Thompson Hine LLP and acknowledgement of its source and copyright. This publication is intended to inform clients about legal matters of current interest. It is not intended as legal advice. Readers should not act upon the information contained in it without professional counsel.
This document may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions.
© 2026 THOMPSON HINE LLP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.