New Hampshire Man Indicted for $700,000 California Unemployment Fraud
November 24, 2025 | JacobiJournal.com – A federal grand jury has returned a 10-count indictment against Anthony Mark Silva, 40, from Manchester, New Hampshire, for a massive California unemployment fraud scheme. Silva faces nine counts of bank fraud and one count of aggravated identity theft, related to false claims filed with the California Employment Development Department (EDD). How Silva Orchestrated the Fraud Between July 2020 and June 2021, Silva allegedly collected personally identifiable information—including names, birth dates, and Social Security numbers—to submit fraudulent unemployment claims. These claims targeted Pandemic Unemployment Assistance and other CARES Act benefits. Many “claimants” were not unemployed or eligible for California unemployment benefits, and Silva did not have authorization to file on their behalf. What the Scheme Cost Taxpayers EDD approved dozens of Silva’s fraudulent claims and authorized Bank of America to issue debit cards loaded with unemployment benefits. Silva reportedly activated these debit cards and spent the funds personally, resulting in actual losses exceeding $700,000. Why Authorities Are Taking Action This case was investigated by the U.S. Department of Labor Office of Inspector General and EDD’s Investigation Division. Prosecutors warn that COVID-19 relief programs remain a target for fraud, highlighting the need for robust identity verification and oversight. Silva faces a statutory maximum of 30 years in prison for the bank fraud counts and a mandatory two-year consecutive sentence for aggravated identity theft if convicted. Ensuring Stronger Safeguards in Unemployment Benefits Federal authorities continue to tighten fraud detection measures, particularly for programs like Pandemic Unemployment Assistance. The indictment serves as a reminder that unemployment benefits, while vital for Californians, are vulnerable to organized schemes. For more details on the case, visit the official U.S. Department of Justice press release here. FAQs: California Unemployment Fraud Who is charged in this California unemployment fraud case? Anthony Mark Silva, 40, of Manchester, New Hampshire, was indicted for nine counts of bank fraud or unemployment fraud and one count of aggravated identity theft. How much money was stolen in the scheme? Authorities report that Silva’s fraudulent claims caused losses exceeding $700,000. Which benefits were targeted in the unemployment fraud? Pandemic Unemployment Assistance and other CARES Act-related unemployment benefits. What penalties could Silva face if convicted? He faces up to 30 years in prison for bank fraud counts and an additional two-year mandatory sentence for aggravated identity theft, plus fines up to $1 million per count. Stay ahead of fraud schemes—subscribe to JacobiJournal.com for real-time investigative updates. 🔎 Read More from JacobiJournal.com:
JPMorgan’s $175M Frank Acquisition: A Cautionary Tale in Due Diligence
June 13, 2025 | JacobiJournal.com –JPMorgan Frank acquisition fraud became a high-profile case following JPMorgan Chase’s 2021 acquisition of the fintech startup Frank for $175 million. The bank aimed to enhance its services for college students seeking financial aid. However, the deal turned sour when it was revealed that Frank’s founder, Charlie Javice, had significantly inflated the company’s user base. This deception led to one of the most notable due diligence oversights in recent history and ultimately exposed the extent of the JPMorgan Frank acquisition fraud that shocked the finance and tech industries alike. The Acquisition and Its Fallout Frank was marketed as a platform simplifying the college financial aid process, boasting over four million users. JPMorgan saw this as an opportunity to tap into a younger demographic, particularly students navigating complex financial aid systems. The acquisition aimed to expand the bank’s digital footprint among Gen Z consumers and strengthen its financial services tailored for education financing. Yet, by December 2022, the bank filed a lawsuit against Javice, alleging that the actual number of users was closer to 300,000—far fewer than claimed. This discrepancy triggered internal reviews and public scrutiny, casting doubt on JPMorgan’s acquisition vetting process and raising questions about the accountability of startup founders in financial disclosures. The revelation prompted renewed industry discussions about the need for stronger verification of user data in merger and acquisition activities, especially in the rapidly evolving fintech space. JPMorgan Frank Acquisition Fraud: How the Scheme Worked Investigations uncovered that Javice had hired a data scientist to fabricate a list of fake users to support her inflated claims. This synthetic data was crafted to withstand basic due diligence checks and was presented during the acquisition process, misleading JPMorgan about Frank’s true reach. Federal prosecutors detailed how the falsified data was carefully structured to mimic genuine user records, making the deception harder to detect during the acquisition review. The scheme not only misled one of the world’s largest financial institutions but also revealed the vulnerabilities in high-stakes corporate transactions when data integrity is compromised. This case serves as a warning for both investors and regulatory bodies on the importance of digital data audits in financial acquisitions. For more on corporate fraud enforcement, visit the U.S. Department of Justice’s official page. Legal Consequences The JPMorgan Frank acquisition fraud case reached a critical point in March 2025 when Charlie Javice was convicted on multiple counts, including securities fraud, wire fraud, bank fraud, and conspiracy. The conviction underscored the seriousness of her deception in inflating Frank’s user data, which misled JPMorgan during the acquisition. She faces a maximum prison term of 30 years on the most serious count, reflecting the gravity of corporate fraud at this scale. This high-profile conviction in the JPMorgan Frank acquisition fraud saga sends a clear message to startup founders and financial institutions alike: misrepresentation and data manipulation in mergers and acquisitions carry severe legal repercussions. It also highlights the need for rigorous due diligence processes to prevent similar incidents in future financial transactions. Lessons Learned This case underscores the importance of thorough due diligence, especially in the fintech sector. Companies must go beyond surface-level evaluations and verify critical data to avoid costly mistakes. Conclusion The Frank acquisition serves as a stark reminder that in the fast-paced world of fintech, due diligence is not just a formality but a necessity. Organizations must implement rigorous verification processes to safeguard against fraud and protect their investments. FAQ: About the JPMorgan Frank Acquisition Fraud What was the main issue in the JPMorgan Frank acquisition fraud case? The primary issue in the JPMorgan Frank acquisition fraud case was the deliberate inflation of user data by Frank’s founder, Charlie Javice. She allegedly fabricated a database of fake users to mislead JPMorgan into believing the platform had over four million users, when the actual figure was closer to 300,000. This misrepresentation led to criminal charges including securities fraud, wire fraud, and conspiracy, ultimately resulting in her conviction in 2025. For more information on corporate fraud enforcement, visit the official website here. Stay updated on high-profile corporate fraud cases and enforcement actions. Subscribe to JacobiJournal.com for expert insights on financial investigations, due diligence risks, and regulatory updates. 🔎 Read More from JacobiJournal.com: