Towanda Braxton and Tamar Braxton are two of the sisters featured on the reality-TV series Braxton Family Values. The family’s finance and legal difficulties have been publicly documented over years, including bankruptcies, lawsuits, and internal disputes.
In recent episodes (Season 2, Episode 4) of the show, Tamar accused Towanda of owing her money: Tamar claims she lent Towanda $50,000 to help with a house down payment, while Towanda contends the amount was $35,000 and that the money was a gift, not a loan. At the same time, tensions escalated over other financial issues (like credit-card usage) and accusations of mistrust between the sisters.
Key Facts of the DisputeTamar alleges that the $50K was a loan (with expectation of repayment) given to Towanda for the down payment on a house.

Towanda says the money was a gift (or at most $35K) and denies the repayment obligation.

The episode revealed deeper family strife: Tamar discovered her credit card allegedly was used by Towanda on a six-line family phone plan. Towanda denies wrongdoing.Towanda has a documented history of financial troubles: she filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy, listing assets of ~$277K versus liabilities of ~$547K, including the amount owed to Tamar (~$35K).

Her bankruptcy case was later dismissed due to allegations she misrepresented assets/income, accused of hiding bank accounts and royalties.

Could Criminal Charges Be Possible?From a legal standpoint, there are several possible angles to consider if criminal liability might arise—but a lot depends on jurisdiction (which is likely U.S.), the nature of the alleged misconduct, and whether prosecutors believe any laws were broken. Below is a breakdown of potential theories, the hurdles, and whether they’re likely.

Possible Theories of Criminal LiabilityFraud or misrepresentation

If Towanda accepted money as a loan but falsely claimed it was a gift (or vice versa), and that misrepresentation caused Tamar to act, a fraud theory might be considered.

Additionally, if Towanda knowingly concealed assets/income in her bankruptcy filing (as has been alleged in separate litigation) that could support a fraud charge.

Hurdle: To bring criminal charges, a prosecutor must prove beyond a reasonable doubt the defendant knowingly intended to deceive and obtain a benefit through that deception. Family loans/gifts are tricky because many transactions are informal and consensual.

Embezzlement or theft by deception

If Towanda used Tamar’s credit card without authorization (as Tamar alleges) or misused funds that were loaned, it might be viewed as theft or unauthorized use.

Hurdle: It must be proven that the use was unauthorized and intended to permanently deprive the owner. In family disputes, intent and authorization are often contested.

Bankruptcy fraudTowanda’s earlier bankruptcy was dismissed because a judge found she may have hidden income/assets. Bankruptcy fraud is a federal crime.

While the $50K loan/gift dispute may not itself trigger bankruptcy fraud, the broader pattern of misrepresentation may assist federal investigators in other contexts.

Likelihood & Practical Considerations

At present no credible public source indicates that prosecutors are pursuing criminal charges specifically over the $50K dispute between Towanda and Tamar. All public documents reflect this as acivil/contractual family dispute (loan vs. gift) rather than a criminal indictment.

Family financial disputes rarely escalate to criminal chargesunless there is clear evidence of deception, documentation of unauthorized use of funds, or a pattern of fraud. Based on the current publicly-available facts, the case appears more likely to proceed in civil court (lawsuit, asset claims) rather than criminal court.

The media coverage suggests the conflict is primarily on the show (TV drama) and in the court of public opinion, rather than in the justice system. For instance, commentary emphasizes emotional drama, accusations and trusts rather than formal charges.

If prosecutors were to pursue a case, they would likely need documentation (loan agreement, bank transfers, communications) showing: the money was given as a loan, repayment was expected, Towanda did not intend to repay, and misrepresented that fact. Without that, proving criminal intent becomes difficult.

ConclusionWhile the dispute between Towanda Braxton and Tamar Braxton over the alleged $50,000 might look dramatic and contentious,criminal charges appear unlikely at this time based on publicly available information. The situation more naturally fits into the category of a civil family dispute (loan vs. gift) with financial accountability, not necessarily criminal wrongdoing.

However, the presence of Towanda’s prior financial and bankruptcy issues (including allegations of misrepresentation) means the threshold for criminal investigation is somewhat lower, so if new evidence emerged—such as documents showing fraud, unauthorized credit card use, or asset hiding—it could prompt a criminal probe.
For now:Tamar can likely pursue a civil claim to recover the funds (if she can show it was a loan).

Towanda could defend it being a gift or dispute the amount.

The criminal route remains speculative absent evidence of intent to defraud or deception.

If you like, I can check court filings and public records in the jurisdiction where Towanda is (Georgia or California) to see if there is any hidden indictment or investigation underway — would you like me to do that?