Billions in 9/11 loans went to businesses not hurt by attacks


    Most companies interviewed about the government-backed Sept. 11
    loans they received have told investigators they weren’t hurt by the
    suicide attacks and didn’t know they were getting terrorism assistance,
    an internal government investigation found.

    The Small Business
    Administration’s inspector general also reported Wednesday that lenders
    who doled out billions of dollars in such loans failed — 85 percent of
    the time — to document that recipients were actually hurt by the
    terrorism attacks and therefore eligible for the federal aid.

    The
    IG, the agency’s internal watchdog, concluded only nine loan recipients
    in the 59 cases sampled appeared to be qualified for the special
    disaster loans. The report said SBA officials told lenders they would
    not be questioned on how they gave out money.

    “We believe these
    communications were intended to, and did, send a message to lenders
    that the agency would not question lender eligibility determinations,”
    the inspector general reported.

    The investigative report
    substantiates key findings of an Associated Press story in September
    that found similar problems with the SBA’s Supplementary Terrorist
    Activity Relief (STAR) program.

    The AP found that terrorism
    recovery loans went to businesses including a South Dakota radio
    station, a Virgin Islands perfume shop, a Utah dog boutique, and more
    than 100 Dunkin’ Donuts and Subway sandwich shops in various locations.

    Meanwhile, small businesses near Ground Zero in New York couldn’t get the assistance they desperately sought.

    SBA
    Administrator Hector Barreto put the best face on the findings, saying
    the audit did not find that loan recipients were unqualified for the
    program, although he did note that lender documentation could have been
    better.

    His statement, however, was contradicted by Sen. Olympia
    Snowe, R-Maine, chairwoman of the Senate committee that oversees the
    Small Business Administration.

    “These initial findings are
    troubling and the committee … will continue with its own
    investigation of the STAR program to get at the truth and inform
    Congress for the future,” she said.

    Snowe, who heads the
    Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, said if abuses are
    discovered, “many questions must be answered by the parties involved,
    beginning with: How and why was this allowed to happen?”

    The IG’s report found:

    • Only 2 of 42 borrowers interviewed were aware they had obtained a STAR loan.
    • In
      cases where eligibility could not be established, 25 of 34 borrowers
      interviewed said they were not adversely affected by the terrorist
      attacks.
    • Thirty-six of 42 borrowers questioned said they were
      not asked, or could not recall if they were asked, about the impact of
      the attacks on their businesses.

    The report said IG investigators
    were told by lenders that their participation originally was low
    because of unclear requirements.

    SBA officials then embarked on a
    vigorous marketing campaign, and lenders interpreted their remarks to
    mean “that every small business could claim it was somehow impacted by
    the attacks, and therefore, eligible to receive a STAR loan,” the
    report said.

    © 2005 The Associated Press