Eleventh Circuit Finds SBA Can Deny Payment Protection Program Loans to Debtors in Bankruptcy

30 December 2020 Coronavirus Resource Center:Back to Business Blog
Author(s): Ann Marie Uetz Andrew T. McClain

The Eleventh Circuit recently affirmed the U.S. Small Business Administration's (“SBA”) rule that makes bankruptcy debtors ineligible for a Payment Protection Program (“PPP”) loan under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (“CARES Act”).  In its comprehensive opinion, the Eleventh Circuit determined that the SBA’s rule is not an unreasonable interpretation of the CARES Act and is not arbitrary and capricious.1  The Eleventh Circuit joins the Fifth Circuit, which similarly held in June 2020 that a bankruptcy court exceeded its authority when it required the SBA to make a PPP loan available to a debtor in bankruptcy.2

The Eleventh Circuit reversed a bankruptcy court’s finding that the SBA exceeded its authority and acted arbitrarily and capriciously when it adopted the rule.  The bankruptcy court determined that the rule was unenforceable to the extent it disqualified the debtor from participating in the PPP.  The bankruptcy court also issued an injunction requiring the SBA to guarantee the loan if the applicant met all other requirements (other than not being in bankruptcy) and restricting the SBA from conditioning loan forgiveness on the applicant not being in bankruptcy. The Eleventh Circuit’s analysis focused on the SBA’s authority to adopt the rule and the fact that PPP loans are subject to existing eligibility requirements for SBA loans.

The CARES Act granted the SBA emergency rule-making authority to issue regulations to carry out the PPP.  At issue is the SBA’s rule that states “If the applicant or the owner of the applicant is the debtor in a bankruptcy proceeding, either at the time it submits the application or at any time before the loan is disbursed, the applicant is ineligible to receive a PPP loan.”The SBA’s explanation for this rule is that providing a PPP loan to a debtor in bankruptcy “present[s] an unacceptably high risk of an unauthorized use of funds or non-repayment of unforgiven loans.”

In reversing the bankruptcy court’s decision, the Eleventh Circuit emphasized that the Payment Protection Program is not a new standalone loan program for the SBA.  Rather, PPP loans fall under the existing category of SBA loans known as “section 7(a) loans.”Section 7(a) loans are subject to established eligibility requirements, one of which is the “sound value” requirement.  This means that all Section 7(a) loans “shall be of such sound value or so secured as reasonably to assure repayment[.]”The SBA considers a Section 7(a) applicant’s bankruptcy status or history as part of this analysis. 

Although a PPP loan technically falls under the umbrella of Section 7(a) loans, the CARES Act both expands and relaxes certain Section 7(a) requirements for PPP loans.  For instance, the CARES Act waives the requirement that an applicant be unable to obtain credit elsewhere.  Importantly, the Eleventh Circuit emphasizes that the CARES Act does not “do away with the sound value requirement.”  Rather, Congress left it up to the SBA to determine how to apply the sound value requirement to PPP loans and that includes specifying eligibility requirements. 

The Eleventh Circuit’s holding is limited to states in that circuit.  However, other courts may look to this decision and the Fifth Circuit’s decision for guidance when presented with similar issues.  It is also worth noting that, the most recent Bipartisan-Bicameral Omnibus COVID Relief Deal signed by President Trump on December 27, 2020 does not expressly address the SBA’s rule.  The new law does temporarily amend the bankruptcy code to permit PPP loans to certain debtors in bankruptcy.  However, this amendment only becomes effective if the SBA agrees to allow PPP loans in bankruptcies.  An in-depth analysis of the law is available here.  For more information, please contact your Foley relationship partner or the Foley authors listed below.  

Companies in all sectors of the economy continue to be impacted by COVID-19. Foley is here to help our clients effectively address the short- and long-term impacts on their business interests, operations, and objectives. Foley provides insights and strategies across multiple industries and disciplines to deliver timely perspectives on the wide range of legal and business challenges that companies face conducting business while dealing with the impact of the coronavirus. Click here to stay up to date and ahead of the curve with our key publications addressing today’s challenges and tomorrow’s opportunities. To receive this content directly in your inbox, click here and submit the form.


1 The case is In re Gateway Radiology Consultants, P.A., No. 20-13462 (11th Cir. Dec. 22, 2020) and a copy of the opinion is available here 

2 The Fifth Circuit case is In re Hidalgo County Emergency Service Foundation, 962 F.3d 838 (5th Cir. 2020) and a copy of the opinion is available here

85 Fed. Reg. 23,450, 23,451 (Apr. 28, 2020).

15 U.S.C. § 636(a).

15 U.S.C. § 636(a)(6).

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.

Related Services