$1.4 Billion in PPP Loans to Big Firms

[Lee B]

"Congress bailed out large, white shoe, professional firms with billions of taxpayer dollars during the pandemic. Yet, the vast majority of these firms had no demonstrated financial hardship.Our auditors at OpenTheBooks.com found an astonishing $1.4 billion in forgiven PPP loans that flowed to the largest and most successful law and accounting firms across America. In fact, 126 law firms in the Top 300 took $809 million in forgiven PPP loans and 236 accounting firms in the Top 300 received $635 million in forgiven PPP loans."

The rich get richer

[jklcpa]

This is disgusting, meanwhile some here worry about raising fees by $10 per return.

[Donnarae]

So sickening. 

[RitaB]

None of my seven clients that I know received PPP funds experienced a hardship.  All had increased sales 2020, increased again in 2021.  They are not wealthy, and that means nothing to me; I am still aggravated when I think about it.  One questioned me raising his monthly bookkeeping fee $25 recently, and a lot of words barely managed to stay in that thought bubble over my head.

[Medlin Software, Dennis]

Received PPP. Put off a planned price increase for a year. Less overall revenue over the pandemic, but it seemed proper to use the amount by “giving” the PPP to customers, which are mostly mom and pops; although some are medium service providers.

I suspect for many, it was a good bene. The problem was no real check for need, which appears to be a result of the desire for expediency. 

[Medlin Software, Dennis]

On the other hand, we lost many customers who were forced to close because of the pandemic. No or not enough revenue to even consider selling or giving to employee(s). Some of the stories are heartbreaking. 

[joanmcq]

I was completely virtual before the pandemic and completely virtual during.  No change whatsoever.  Didn’t apply for any of the loans.

[jklcpa]

I personally know of only one business that received a PPP loan and that did save it (a retailer with 2 stores) from going out of business while it suffered major losses of during the pandemic shutdown. 

By some miracle, my other business clients were of the types whose businesses were not affected by the shutdown, continued operating, and did not even consider applying for any PPP funds.

My own practice was unaffected other than to tell clients that they would definitely be using the drop box and would not be seeing me in person at pickup. 

[Lion EA]

My clients needed to pay me over time, and had a couple clients die, so my cash flow was slowed. I did receive small PPP loans. My banker actually was the first to notice my bank balance less than prior years and contacted me to apply! Otherwise, I wouldn't have been able to renew my software at the early price.

[mcbreck]

Will commercial real estate ever return to where it was prior to Covid? I read San Fran commercial space is 40% unused. Locally we are probably in the same situation but they are saying a BUNCH of the buildings are off-market so they aren't included in the available space. I had to go to our downtown for a jury duty appearance last March and I thought it would be a great time to eat at one of the restaurants I used to eat at every week when I worked down there. None of them were in business still. The buildings are mostly empty so all the restaurants are closed.

 

[Terry D EA]

I had one customer get the PPP loan and did experience a loss in revenue and in my opinion, the loan was justified and served its purpose. I do remember, the first round was absorbed quickly, and I seem to remember it being reported that a lot of big firms got the first round who really didn't suffer at all. Those companies should be forced to return the funds or pay taxes on the funds received if the fraudulently applied and didn't meet the criteria. Like Judy said, I am one of those folks who is always concerned about raising prices. 

[Medlin Software, Dennis]

The first round had zero requirement to show need.  IIRC, the qualifier (which were stepped up for the later rounds) for the first round was something along the lines of "may" have losses. Every business should have applied for round 1 as any business "may" have had losses.  For corps, it could conceivably be a dereliction of duty to the corp not to have applied.  Since the funds were not fully awarded (again, IIRC), it is tough to show anyone who received funds kept others from receiving funds.  Of course, the round 1 process was possibly tilted by the processing entities, but the later rounds were likely handled better, so those who really had need could have and likely been funded.  The complaint would be if it could be showed the processing entities did play favorites in round 1, and a business could have met the "may" requirement of round 1, but not the revised requirements of later rounds.

The above is just dollars and rules, just as tax processing is all about paying the required amount, but not one penny more.

Morally, the decision, that is an entirely different process.  For non corps, easy, decide and move on.  For a corp, if all directors, officers, etc. can get a waiver of fiduciary duty, then they could make a moral decision, otherwise, they likely were obligated to apply, and if they failed, could be personally liable.