4 ms·

This is false, the plan specifically targeted small businesses: https://www.sba.gov/page/coronavirus-covid-19-small-business-guidance-loan-resources https://www

This is false, the plan specifically targeted small businesses: https://www.sba.gov/page/coronavirus-covid-19-small-business-guidance-loan-resources https://www.sba.gov/page/coronavirus-covid-19-small-business...

techntoke 7y ago
You mean the money being managed by the person Trump just fired?
- techntoke 7y ago
  Here, would you like proof? https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2020-04-07/trump-upends-virus-oversight-removing-key-official https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2020-04-07/trump-...
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
notyourday 7y ago
The plan is a death spiral financing which puts a small business into a worse position after taking it than before. They have no revenue due to a government action, loan is based on the value of their payroll with the revenue and the the small business is required to spend 75% of the loan for payroll while being closed. The fact that banks claimed that 0.5% interest is not enough for them to make it worth it so the Treasury bumped the number and cut repayment schedule is the clearest demonstration yet that it is another hand out to banks.
- chasd00 7y ago
  isn't the loan forgiven if it's spent on payroll during the shelter-in-place orders?
  - notyourday 7y ago
    Only the part that went into the payroll. So a business owner with no revenue borrowed money he did not need and got saddled with the payments. Oh, and as the vast majority of the loans it is personally guaranteed. Compare this with: Don't get the loan. Shut it down. Not owe more money than the owner would owe already.
    - chasd00 7y ago
      "Only the part that went into the payroll" why else would you ask for the loan? the whole point is to keep employees on the payroll while they're under shelter-in-place orders.
      - notyourday 7y ago
        Because while payroll is a cost it is not the only cost that a business that no longer has any revenue needs to cover. The maximum amount of a loan is 2.5 times the verified payroll. That's 2.5 months of pay. The rest of costs still need to be paid, except there's zero guarantees that the revenue of a business is going to recover immediately after the stay at home is lifted [it won't immediately recover] and it is unknown when the stay at home would be lifted. Lets presume that all other costs of running a business are added to some other loan. That loan is not 0% and it is personally guaranteed. This means that by taking this loan and spending it on a payroll for next 2.5 months, the owner of the business in a month number 3 is in a worse position than the owner of the business would have been today if the owner were to simply lay off everyone. The only winners in this are banks making a percentage of a zero risk loan that can be serviced at an incremental cost of a couple of dollars (electronic payments). It is, frankly, disgusting that the congress yet another time took small business loans as a base and made it a money stream for banks.
        miked85 7y ago
        > This means that by taking this loan and spending it on a payroll for next 2.5 months, the owner of the business in a month number 3 is in a worse position than the owner of the business would have been today if the owner were to simply lay off everyone. How is that true? The loan is forgiven if it is used to pay employees. Yes there are other costs, but assuming a business doesn't want to just close up shop entirely, keeping their employees would be preferable to losing all employees and their entire business.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

techntoke 7y ago

You mean the money being managed by the person Trump just fired?

techntoke 7y ago
Here, would you like proof? https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2020-04-07/trump-upends-virus-oversight-removing-key-official https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2020-04-07/trump-...
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

notyourday 7y ago

The plan is a death spiral financing which puts a small business into a worse position after taking it than before. They have no revenue due to a government action, loan is based on the value of their payroll with the revenue and the the small business is required to spend 75% of the loan for payroll while being closed. The fact that banks claimed that 0.5% interest is not enough for them to make it worth it so the Treasury bumped the number and cut repayment schedule is the clearest demonstration yet that it is another hand out to banks.

chasd00 7y ago
isn't the loan forgiven if it's spent on payroll during the shelter-in-place orders?
- notyourday 7y ago
  Only the part that went into the payroll. So a business owner with no revenue borrowed money he did not need and got saddled with the payments. Oh, and as the vast majority of the loans it is personally guaranteed. Compare this with: Don't get the loan. Shut it down. Not owe more money than the owner would owe already.
  - chasd00 7y ago
    "Only the part that went into the payroll" why else would you ask for the loan? the whole point is to keep employees on the payroll while they're under shelter-in-place orders.
    - notyourday 7y ago
      Because while payroll is a cost it is not the only cost that a business that no longer has any revenue needs to cover. The maximum amount of a loan is 2.5 times the verified payroll. That's 2.5 months of pay. The rest of costs still need to be paid, except there's zero guarantees that the revenue of a business is going to recover immediately after the stay at home is lifted [it won't immediately recover] and it is unknown when the stay at home would be lifted. Lets presume that all other costs of running a business are added to some other loan. That loan is not 0% and it is personally guaranteed. This means that by taking this loan and spending it on a payroll for next 2.5 months, the owner of the business in a month number 3 is in a worse position than the owner of the business would have been today if the owner were to simply lay off everyone. The only winners in this are banks making a percentage of a zero risk loan that can be serviced at an incremental cost of a couple of dollars (electronic payments). It is, frankly, disgusting that the congress yet another time took small business loans as a base and made it a money stream for banks.
      - miked85 7y ago
        > This means that by taking this loan and spending it on a payroll for next 2.5 months, the owner of the business in a month number 3 is in a worse position than the owner of the business would have been today if the owner were to simply lay off everyone. How is that true? The loan is forgiven if it is used to pay employees. Yes there are other costs, but assuming a business doesn't want to just close up shop entirely, keeping their employees would be preferable to losing all employees and their entire business.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]