Powerful business special interests are pushing the state to enact a double-dip tax break scheme that would take
Lawmakers should reject the business lobby's efforts to secure more tax breaks at a time of increased hardship for families and communities, according to a new analysis published by MECEP.
* PPP was meant to help vulnerable workers, not give another tax break to corporations
The Paycheck Protection Program was created in
* A double tax break on PPP is unfair
The business lobby, led by the
Mills' original conformity proposal took a sensible, tax-neutral approach to PPP grants. Businesses would claim the grants as income but would be allowed to write off business expenses funded by the federal relief funds, resulting in no net tax impact for PPP grants. The Chamber is demanding policymakers let businesses double dip for tax breaks on both sides of the ledger: One tax break for the grant coming in, and another for spending it.
"Businesses are asking for special tax treatment that no other recipient of federal relief funds receives. For example, workers laid off during the recession will still pay taxes on their UI benefits," Austin said.
* The double tax break would do little to help small businesses most likely to be struggling
While PPP helped a number of small businesses in
The double tax break on PPP grants is poorly targeted to help the small businesses that may need additional support. Because the double tax break for PPP would be tied to the size of grants received and can only be used to reduce taxable profit, the scheme would give the biggest benefit to large businesses that turned large profits.
For context, half of
Just because the federal government created a new tax break does not mean
To read Austin's full analysis on MECEP's blog, click here (https://mecep.us16.list-manage.com/track/click?u=471ba17c0034e316952c97923&id=e1537ba22e&e=bd3da3279e).