Funny how there are so many types of tax practices. Not a single one of my clients even mentioned not being able to pay me, even though quite a few fell into the Apr 15-Jul 15 filing window and beyond. And these were all returning clients from prior year. On the other hand, I don't have a banker, so there was no incentive for any bank to foist a loan onto me that I didn't really need.
"it is clear that Congress MEANT it to be totally free money, but just failed when writing things out. They specifically made it non-taxable, which to me means they meant it to be completely 'free' money."
Yes, exactly (except for the "failed" part). It is "free" money to the business, in that it neither increased taxable income nor added to tax deductions. The business owner had no out of pocket expenses, so no tax harm, no tax foul.
Shame on AICPA for confusing the issue, so that some (including Congresspeople) incorrectly think that somehow business owners are suffering some extra tax due to a Congressional drafting error.
A business owner who received government-funded pay as part of their operation faces about the same taxes as all the other employees who were the intended beneficiaries of the PPP.
Meanwhile, for a long time we've been told that "job creators" only need more tax cuts to create more jobs, and we'll be zooming along (the pre-2020 meaning of zoom). So, now via TCJA the businesses have huge corporate tax cuts, they have QBI (even the landlords!), and they have EIDL and PPP handouts. So when are they going to uphold their end of the bargain and start creating some jobs? Put another, more palatable way, was the PPP for job creators, or for job workers?
"it is clear that Congress MEANT it to be totally free money, but just failed when writing things out. They specifically made it non-taxable, which to me means they meant it to be completely 'free' money."
Yes, exactly (except for the "failed" part). It is "free" money to the business, in that it neither increased taxable income nor added to tax deductions. The business owner had no out of pocket expenses, so no tax harm, no tax foul.
Shame on AICPA for confusing the issue, so that some (including Congresspeople) incorrectly think that somehow business owners are suffering some extra tax due to a Congressional drafting error.
A business owner who received government-funded pay as part of their operation faces about the same taxes as all the other employees who were the intended beneficiaries of the PPP.
Meanwhile, for a long time we've been told that "job creators" only need more tax cuts to create more jobs, and we'll be zooming along (the pre-2020 meaning of zoom). So, now via TCJA the businesses have huge corporate tax cuts, they have QBI (even the landlords!), and they have EIDL and PPP handouts. So when are they going to uphold their end of the bargain and start creating some jobs? Put another, more palatable way, was the PPP for job creators, or for job workers?
Comment