ST. CROIX — A status report from a Chapter 7 bankruptcy trustee has provided details of alleged financial misconduct by St. Thomas businessman Brett “Mac” McClafferty, whose investment firm Mac Private Equity Inc. filed for bankruptcy in March 2025.
The trustee found no evidence that McClafferty ever invested any of his alleged victims’ funds and used corporate accounts to cover personal expenses.
The report, filed March 9 by Chapter 7 Trustee George Miller in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware, connects MPE’s Chapter 7 bankruptcy to McClafferty’s individual Chapter 13 bankruptcy case.
Mac Private Equity filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy on March 4, 2025. The first meeting of creditors, required under the Bankruptcy Code, was held on April 4, 2025. The meeting was continued multiple times because MPE failed to provide adequate documentation to the trustee.
When the meeting was finally reconvened on October 15, 2025, with counsel to certain creditors present, MPE was unable to adequately answer questions posed by the trustee, creditors’ counsel, or the creditors themselves.
Miller has issued subpoenas to nine banks and companies in his effort to reconstruct MPE’s financial history. As of the filing, records had been received from three of those entities, with the trustee continuing to pursue the remainder. According to the report, none of the records obtained to date demonstrate anything other than McClafferty using corporate funds for personal expenses.
Before the subpoenas were formally filed with the court on November 7, 2025, Miller sought voluntary document production from three financial institutions — The Waterfront Group, Choice Financial Group, and Mercury Technologies. Only Mercury cooperated. Documents received from Mercury in early October 2025 showed that MPE’s principal — McClafferty — was using the Mercury account as his personal checkbook.
The trustee’s investigation also revealed MPE never filed tax returns. Additionally, MPE had indicated that accounting giant KPMG provided tax services to the company — but when the trustee sought those records, KPMG had no record of ever servicing MPE.
When it comes to the financial stakes, Miller has filed a proof of claim in MPE’s bankruptcy proceeding for in excess of $3,618,000, thereby asserting on behalf of the creditors he represents that MPE owes them more than $3.6 million.
McClafferty is also the subject of a separate, individual Chapter 13 bankruptcy case in the same Delaware court. His proposed Chapter 13 repayment plan purports to rely in part on a distribution from the MPE estate — a premise the trustee is actively contesting.
Miller has also filed a proof of claim in the individual Chapter 13 case and has formally objected to the Chapter 13 plan. In the trustee’s view, the plan fails to account for the claims held by the trustee and does not grapple with the potential consequences of a nondischargeability action — a legal proceeding that, if successful, would prevent McClafferty from discharging certain debts through bankruptcy. Miller stated he is considering filing such an action, based on his conclusion that MPE committed fraud.
The McClafferty bankruptcy case has drawn participation from his alleged victims.
On March 20, 16 creditors — including 15 individuals and a company referred to in court filings as the “McClafferty victims” — filed a motion seeking to convert the Chapter 13 case to a Chapter 7 case. The victims argued that conversion would provide a single forum for a global resolution of claims. Their filing, submitted by attorneys Mark Eckard and Michael Sheesley, alleged that there is no evidence McClafferty or MPE ever made a single investment using the victims’ funds; that McClafferty has lied under oath; that he has used the courts to hinder the victims’ recoveries; that he has still not turned over his personal tax returns; and that he filed the Chapter 13 case specifically to avoid ongoing collections processes in the Virgin Islands.
On April 10, McClafferty filed an objection to that motion, arguing that the victims have not met the legal burden required to establish either ineligibility or sufficient cause for conversion or dismissal, and that the motion should be denied.
In a separate but related action, the trustee has also filed a motion to dismiss the Chapter 13 case outright, contending that McClafferty’s debt levels exceed the statutory limits for Chapter 13 eligibility. McClafferty has objected to that motion as well, noting that proofs of claims have also been filed by the creditors identified in their filings as the “McClafferty victims.” McClafferty stated that those creditors are also creditors in the MPE Chapter 7 case and, at least to some extent, Miller’s claim would constitute an impermissible double recovery if both the Miller claim and the individuals creditors’ claims are counted in full against him.
Furthermore, McClafferty stated in his objection filed by attorney Robert Masten Jr. that he believes the creditors’ claims are substantially overstated and likely much less than has been enumerated in their respective proofs of claim. He noted none of the claims have been liquidated in the courts of the Virgin Islands or before the Delaware court, and that he intends to file objections to each of the claims, including the Miller claim.
Because the Miller claim and the claims filed by the individual creditors are disputed, unliquidated, and based upon unadjudicated allegations of liability, and because no court has determined that he is personally liable for any of the obligations, McClafferty stated that the claims cannot properly be counted toward his eligibility limits at this time. McClafferty stated that dismissal of his Chapter 13 case based upon the disputed and unliquidated claims would be premature and improper.
McClafferty, owner of St. Thomas Social restaurant, has been named in multiple civil lawsuits filed in both Superior Court and District Court alleging he operated a Ponzi scheme. The complaints — brought by several investors over the past year — claim McClafferty solicited funds for purported investments but failed to make any legitimate investments and instead used the money for personal expenses.
McClafferty was arrested February 21 on multiple fraud-related charges stemming from an alleged $888,500 counterfeit check scheme. Authorities say the charges — including grand larceny, forgery, obtaining money by false pretenses, and passing worthless checks — are tied to a series of fraudulent banking transactions involving counterfeit checks and returned drafts.
The arrest followed an investigation launched in June 2024 after suspicious activity was reported by Banco Popular de Puerto Rico, with an arrest warrant issued Dec. 30, 2025. McClafferty was later released on bail after posting a reduced cash bond and has pleaded not guilty to all charges, while denying wrongdoing and challenging the allegations in court.
McClafferty subsequently filed a civil lawsuit in Superior Court against Banco Popular, alleging the bank’s actions led to his arrest and criminal charges. The complaint accuses the bank of negligence, defamation, abuse of process, false arrest, and intentional infliction of emotional distress, claiming it accepted and initially cleared deposited checks tied to a proposed event before later returning them and reporting the transactions as fraudulent to law enforcement. McClafferty alleges the bank failed to properly investigate the deposits and provided inaccurate information to police, which he says resulted in his arrest in connection with the case. The lawsuit seeks compensatory and punitive damages.
