Copied from the IRS FAQs:
"59. Are wages paid by an employer to employees who are related individuals considered qualified wages?
No. Wages paid to related individuals, as defined by section 51(i)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code (the "Code"), are not taken into account for purposes of the Employee Retention Credit. A related individual is any employee who has of any of the following relationships to the employee's employer who is an individual:
A child or a descendant of a child;
A brother, sister, stepbrother, or stepsister;
The father or mother, or an ancestor of either;
A stepfather or stepmother;
A niece or nephew;
An aunt or uncle;
A son-in-law, daughter-in-law, father-in-law, mother-in-law, brother-in-law, or sister-in-law.
In addition, if the Eligible Employer is a corporation, then a related individual is any person that bears a relationship described above with an individual owning, directly or indirectly, more than 50 percent in value of the outstanding stock of the corporation.
If the Eligible Employer is an entity other than a corporation, then a related individual is any person that bears a relationship described above with an individual owning, directly or indirectly, more than 50 percent of the capital and profits interests in the entity.
If the Eligible Employer is an estate or trust, then a related individual includes a grantor, beneficiary, or fiduciary of the estate or trust, or any person that bears a relationship described above with an individual who is a grantor, beneficiary, or fiduciary of the estate or true."
If related individuals do not qualify, I think we should assume that owners don't qualify.
In addition, if you look deeper into the FAQs regarding what constitutes qualifying wages and what doesn't,
I really don't see how wages paid to an owner would meet the definition of qualifying wages.
would ever qualify.