Understanding The Classification Between PPP Loans and ERC
Paycheck Protection Program
The PPP incentivized small businesses to keep employees on the payroll...
3 mins
3993 Huntingdon Pike Suite 110 Huntingdon Valley, PA 19006 Mon - Fri: 8:30AM - 5:00PM
3993 Huntingdon Pike Suite 110 Huntingdon Valley, PA 19006 Mon - Fri: 8:30AM - 5:00PM
To claim the Employee Retention Credit, employers must be eligible by having met one of three requirements during the indicated period of the COVID-19 pandemic:
The second qualification is often referred to as the suspension test. The language regarding eligibility is ambiguous at best, leaving employers to interpret the ruling and make 'best guess' assumptions about their eligibility.
Common scenarios that lead to confusion surround businesses that were forced to close during COVID-19 due to non-critical supply chain issues or staffing issues rather than government orders. These scenarios don't necessarily meet the eligibility criteria for the Employee Retention Credit because government orders didn't drive closures.
If an employer can prove that they partially or fully stopped operations as a direct result of a government order, they must demonstrate that they were more than nominally impacted. This is called nominal portion and nominal effect.
Clear guidance is provided for determining whether the full or partial closure had more than a nominal effect on a business. The nominal portion test is satisfied if either of the following occurs:
If an employer did not suspend operations, they might qualify via the nominal effect route. A nominal effect occurs when operations are modified by government order rather than suspended, and the employer's ability to provide services or goods is decreased by at least 10% as a result. There are no clear guidelines around nominal effect, making it much more difficult to articulate and calculate.
The employer cannot qualify under both standards; those whose services were suspended must prove the impact was more than a nominal portion, while those whose services were modified must prove a more than nominal effect.
Here's an example to illustrate the difference:
A salon owner is required to close for three months during the peak of COVID-19 because of governmental shutdown orders. During this period, the salon can still sell and ship salon products online but cannot provide any services to its clients. During the same quarter in 2019, salon services comprised 85% of their gross receipts. The salon is eligible for the Employee Retention Credit because the government-mandated suspension impacted more than a nominal portion.
The next quarter, the salon reopens for services, but mask mandates have required them to modify their operations, so two services are not performed: facials and upper lip waxes. During the same quarter in 2019, employees spent 4% of their total hours on these two services. The salon can't prove that the modification has had more than a nominal effect and will not qualify for the Employee Retention Credit this quarter.
Any law that can be interpreted so broadly puts employers at risk. Misinterpreting ERC guidelines can lead to audit and assessment of fines and back taxes. The IRS has made it clear that they intend to scrutinize ERC credits claimed to ensure guidelines were reasonably interpreted and followed.
If you haven't claimed the Employee Retention Credit and are wondering if you're eligible, there's still time to review and claim any available credits—up to $26,000 per employee. Schedule your ERC review today to get started.
The PPP incentivized small businesses to keep employees on the payroll...
3 mins
During the uncertain times of the COVID-19 lockdown era, small and mid-size businesses sought...
5 mins
The employee retention credit ended in late 2021 when Congress enacted a new program to replace it...
4 mins
Exact Payroll Inc
3993 Huntingdon Pike Suite 110
Huntingdon Valley, PA 19006
Mon - Fri: 8:30AM - 5:00PM
Company
Subscribe to Newsletter