Category Archives: Paycheck Protection Program

The coronavirus is outlasting the stimulus

Posted on by • Posted in 2020 Election Issues, Coronavirus, Crisis, Crisis Management, Economic Crisis, Economic Stimulus, Economy, Employee Benefits, Employee Furlough, Employee Hiring Freeze, Employee Layoffs, Employee Pay Cuts, Employee Protections, Employer-Based Health Insurance, Health Insurance Coverage Adequacy, Health Policy, High Deductible Health Plans, High Drug Prices, High Premiums, High Prices, Infection Control, Infectious Virus, Job, Job Market, Job Search, Job Security, Out of Pocket Expenses, Pandemic, Paycheck Protection Program, Public Health, Public Safety, Quarantine, Social Distancing, Surprise Bills, The CARES Act, Underinsured, Unemployment, Unemployment Insurance, Uninsured • Leave a comment

https://www.axios.com/newsletters/axios-vitals-7038a5b1-74fa-44e3-ba7e-43c87052e1c5.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosvitals&stream=top

The coronavirus is outlasting the stimulus - Axios

The coronavirus pandemic is lasting longer than Congress and the White House anticipated when it committed hundreds of billions of dollars to individuals and small businesses, Axios’ Dan Primack and Alayna Treene report.

Why it matters: These bailouts were meant to stop the bleeding, to buy time while the wound cauterizes. Unfortunately, the injury was more severe than originally diagnosed.

Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin told CBS that “the entire package provides economic relief overall for about 10 weeks.”

  • The CARES Act was signed by President Trump on March 27.
  • Mnuchin’s 10-week window expires on June 5.
  • No one expects to see a Phase 4 stimulus by that date, nor a full-scale economic reopening.

Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loans require that small businesses maintain staffing levels for eight weeks. For early recipients, that means their payroll obligations could run out by month’s end.

  • Direct checks of up to $1,200 to individuals were only expected to help cover expenses for one month, even though many states already are well into their second month of locking down.

All of this makes economic reopening even more complicated.

  • The federal government has effectively created a “back to normal” deadline for small businesses, even though such decisions are supposed to be made by the states.

The bottom line: The small business loans and individual checks were designed as bridges to reopening, but if they only delayed layoffs and economic pain by a couple of months, then they may end up being remembered as bridges to nowhere.

 

 

 

 

Crisis begins to hit professional and public-sector jobs once considered safe

Posted on by • Posted in 2020 Election Issues, Economic Crisis, Economy, Health Insurance Coverage Adequacy, Job, Job Market, Job Search, Job Security, Out of Pocket Expenses, Pandemic, Paycheck Protection Program, Quarantine, Social Distancing, Underinsured, Unemployment, Unemployment Insurance, Uninsured • Leave a comment

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/04/30/jobless-claims-industry/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most

How COVID-19 Is Crashing On The Class Of 2020: Job Offers Already ...

As the novel coronavirus pandemic brought business to a halt, the pain rippled outward, blowing up sector after sector. According to a detailed analysis of unemployment claims, no industry was left untouched.

After that first chaotic week of lockdowns mid-March, as officials scrambled to slow the spread of the deadliest pandemic in more than a century, restaurants and theaters saw job losses slow while losses in other sectors, such as construction and supply-chain work, accelerated. Now, it appears the economic upheaval is hitting professional and public-sector jobs that some once regarded as safe.

The Labor Department doesn’t release jobless claims by industry. So, building on the work of economist Ben Zipperer and his colleagues at the Economic Policy Institute, we analyzed industry-specific new unemployment-benefit claims from 14 states that publish them. (For a full list, see the charts below.)

For that, we need to focus in on the weekly changes in jobless claims to distinguish between industries where claims are falling and those where claims are steady or increasing. The data can also help us estimate how the labor market will change in coming months.

Week 1, March 15 to 21: Full-contact industries

(Highest week-to-week change included: accommodation and food services; arts entertainment and recreation; hairdressers, auto mechanics and laundry workers)

The first week of closures slammed headfirst into industries that require the most face-to-face customer contact — America’s hospitality sector. More than 7 percent of all restaurant, hotel and bar workers filed for unemployment in this first week alone.

For public officials looking to enforce social distancing, bars, hotels and movie theaters were obvious targets: They’re discretionary spending and require significant human interaction. Another category, which the government calls “other services” but is primarily made up of hairdressers, auto mechanics and laundry workers, also suffered swift and significant losses.

The number of newly unemployed filers in all these high-contact industries fell off in subsequent weeks, but they remain the biggest casualties of the crisis. And unemployment claims probably understate the pain of lower-earning Americans. Low-wage workers often don’t qualify for benefits because they haven’t spent enough time on the job, or aren’t being paid enough, Zipperer said.

A survey released Tuesday by Zipperer and his colleague Elise Gould implies unemployment numbers may be significantly worse than government statistics show. For every 10 people who successfully applied for unemployment benefits during the crisis, they show, another three or four couldn’t get through the overloaded system, and two more didn’t even apply because the system is too difficult.

Week 2, March 22 to 28: The producers

(Highest week-to-week change included: manufacturing; construction; retail)

By the second week, the shutdown moved from businesses where the primary danger is interacting with customers to those, like construction and manufacturing, that require in-person interaction with large crews of colleagues.

On March 26, for example, Spokane, Wash.-area custom-cabinet maker Huntwood Industries, laid off around 500 employees, according to Thomas Clouse of the Spokesman-Review. As a manufacturer whose sales depend on the construction industry, it was hit doubly hard by the shutdowns.

“It is a scary time,” Amy Ohms, 37, told Clouse. “It’s kind of unfair. I think construction is essential. There is a lot of uncertainty.”

Manufacturers were among the first publicly traded companies to note travel and supply-chain risks related to the coronavirus outbreak in China in financial filings, according to a separate analysis by Oxford researchers Fabian Stephany and Fabian Braesemann and collaborators in Berlin. By March, manufacturers were noting domestic production issues.

Their analysis also shows that, in the middle of March, concern about the coronavirus and its disease, covid-19, from retail corporations eclipsed that of manufacturers. Indeed, retail struggled mightily in the second week of the crisis. More workers were told to stay home, and folks realized foot traffic was often incompatible with social distancing.

The retail sector wasn’t hit as quickly or as forcefully as food services or entertainment, presumably because the sector includes grocery stores and others who employ workers who were deemed essential.

Week 3, March 29 to April 4: The supply chain

(Highest week-to-week change included: wholesale trade; retail trade; administrative and waste management)

In the third week, the pain worked its way up the supply chain, as wholesale trade — a sector that includes some sales representatives, truck drivers and freight laborers — got slammed.

In theory, the lockdowns created near-perfect trucking conditions: traffic vanished, diesel keeps getting cheaper and the roads are safer than they have been in decades. Only one problem: There’s not much to haul right now.

Don Hayden, president of Louisville trucking firm M&M Cartage, feared he would have to lay off about 70 percent of his 400 employees — drivers, mechanics and office staff — in early April. Orders from his customers in heavy manufacturing evaporated.

But, just in time, he got a Payroll Protection Program loan through his local bank. He was shocked at how rapidly his loan was approved and the money arrived, and he said the Treasury Department had done an outstanding job.

“We’re good through May and into June,” he said. “We have a good workforce. We’re proud of them. We sure would like to retain them.”

At this point in the crisis, the focus shifted from huge, industry-eviscerating swings in jobless numbers to gradual weekly trends that help us guess where the jobless claims will settle in the weeks and months to come.

As industries fall like dominoes, policymakers need to realize the damage isn’t contained to a few specific sectors, said University of Tennessee economist Marianne Wanamaker, a former member of Trump’s Council of Economic Advisers.

She said there may be a temptation to extend benefits for difficult-to-reopen industries such as food service and hospitality, but “it doesn’t comport with the data because the damage is so widespread. It’s not fair to say, ‘Hotel and restaurant workers, you get these really generous packages and everybody else has to go back to work.’ ”

Week 4, April 5 to 11: White-collar workers

(Highest week-to-week change included: management; finance and insurance; public administration)

White-collar industries have been shedding jobs since mid-March, albeit at a much lower rate than lower-income sectors. But as losses in low-income sectors subsided, white-collar jobless claims stayed flat or even intensified. By week four, categories that contain managers, bookkeepers, insurance agents and bank tellers saw some of the worst weekly trends of any sector.

On April 9, the online review site Yelp laid off 1,000 workers and furloughed 1,100 more (about a third of its workforce) as traffic on the site plunged while businesses were locked down.

“The physical distancing measures and shelter-in-place orders, while critical to flatten the curve, have dealt a devastating blow to the local businesses that are core to our mission,” CEO Jeremy Stoppelman wrote at the time.

Jane Oates, president of the employment-focused nonprofit organization WorkingNation, used to oversee the Labor Department wing that coordinates unemployment claims and training. “The big difference between coronavirus and the Great Recession is that this has completely stopped the economy across so many sectors,” she said.

During the Great Recession, she and her team had the luxury of flooding support into areas that were being hit hardest in a particular week or month. They went from state to state and industry to industry, putting out fires as they arose.

The Labor Department can’t address individual problems like that during the coronavirus recession, she said, because everybody’s getting shellacked simultaneously.

Week 5, April 12 to 18: The public sector

(Highest week-to-week change included: oil, gas and mining; utilities; public administration)

In the week ending April 18, the most recent for which we have data, we can no longer avoid one of the most ominous trends in the entire analysis: a rise in public-sector layoffs. Utilities, public administration and education services — all of which have close implicit or explicit ties to state and local government, were among the worst-faring sectors on a weekly basis.

To stem the tide of what could be millions of job losses and furloughs, the National League of Cities is pushing for a $250 billion bailout of cities throughout the country, colleague Tony Romm reports.

In Broomfield, Colo., a Denver-area suburb of about 70,000 residents, 235 city and county employees were furloughed on April 22, according to Jennifer Rios in the Broomfield Enterprise.

“The impact of the COVID-19 coronavirus is more significant than any of us could have ever expected for our well-being, as well as our municipal financial stability,” Rios reports that officials wrote in a letter to furloughed employees.“

State and local governments are typically required to balance their budgets. Now that they’re staring down the barrel of a huge tax-revenue shortfall, “these revenue losses are going to cause government budgets to fall and they’re going to lay people off,” Zipperer said.

“You’re seeing the beginnings of a big contraction in the public sector,” he said. “That’s going to be the next huge thing.”

The public sector used to be the bulwark that kept the economy going while the private sector pulled back during a recession, Zipperer said. “Over the last couple of recessions, the public sector hasn’t played that traditional role,” Zipperer said. “As a result, we’ve seen steeper recessions and slower recoveries.”

 

 

 

 

Jobless claims: Another 3.84 million Americans file for unemployment benefits

Posted on by • Posted in 2020 Election Issues, Cash, Cash Reserves, Cash-Flow Improvements, Coronavirus, Crisis, Crisis Management, Economic Crisis, Economic Stimulus, Economy, Employer-Based Health Insurance, Health Insurance Coverage Adequacy, Job Market, Job Search, Job Security, Out of Pocket Expenses, Pandemic, Paycheck Protection Program, Preexisting Conditions, Public Health, Public Safety, Social Distancing, Underinsured, Unemployment, Unemployment Insurance, Uninsured • Leave a comment

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/coronavirus-covid-weekly-initial-jobless-claims-april-25-184820691.html

(David Foster/Yahoo Finance)

On the heels of worse-than-anticipated first-quarter GDP data, investors got additional economic data Thursday to reflect the ongoing damage being done to the U.S. economy as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The U.S. Labor Department released its weekly jobless claims figures Thursday morning, and another 3.839 million Americans filed for unemployment benefits during the week ending April 25. Economists were predicting 3.5 million claims for the week, and the prior week’s figure was revised higher to 4.44 million from 4.43 million. In just the previous six weeks, more than 30 million Americans have filed unemployment insurance claims.

Continuing claims, which lags initial jobless claims data by one week, totaled 17.99 million for the week ending April 18. The prior week’s record 15.98 million continuing claims was revised lower to 15.82 million.

“This is the fourth consecutive slowing in the pace of new jobless claims, but it is still horrible and underlines the severe economic consequences of the Covid-19 containment measures,” ING economist James Knightley wrote in a note Thursday.

“The re-opening of some states, including Georgia, Tennessee, South Carolina and Florida, appear to have gone fairly slowly. Consumers remain reluctant to go shopping or visit a restaurant due to lingering COVID-19 fears, while the social distancing restrictions placed on the number of customers allowed in restaurants do not make it economically justifiable for some to open. Evidence so far suggests very little chance of a V-shaped recovery, meaning that unemployment is unlikely to come down anywhere near as quickly as it has been going up,” Knightley added.

Certain states got hit harder than others last week as massive backlogs continued to pile up, and states that implemented shelter-in-place orders later than others saw an increase in claims. For the week ending April 25, Florida saw the highest number of initial jobless claims at an estimated 432,000 on an unadjusted basis, from 507,000 in the prior week. California reported 328,000, down from 528,000 in the previous week. Georgia had an estimated 265,000 and Texas reported 254,000. 

While consensus economists anticipate weekly jobless claims will be in the millions in the near term, a continued steady decline is largely expected going forward.

“We expect initial jobless claims to continue to decline on a weekly basis. Many workers affected by closures of nonessential businesses have likely already filed for benefits at this point,” Nomura economist Lewis Alexander wrote in a note April 27. “In addition, the strong demand for Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loans, part of the CARES Act passed on 27 March, suggests some room for labor market stabilization.”

However, Barclays warned that some recent data indicated that the decline in weekly claims could actually be slower than previously estimated.

“NYC 311 calls in the week ending April 24 were running about 30% higher than a week earlier and support our change in forecast,” Barclays economist Blerina Uruci wrote in a note Wednesday. “In particular, we find it concerning that after declining steadily in recent weeks, the number of calls related to unemployment rose again during the week ending April 24.”

The firm increased its estimate for weekly jobless claims to 4 million from the previously estimated 3.25 million for the week ending April 25. Bank of America also boosted its estimate for claims to 4.1 million from the previously forecast 3.5 million claims.

“Scanning through the local news, we were able to locate information about ten states + DC. We found that claims declined only 2.5% week-to-week NSA [not seasonally adjusted],” Bank of America said in a note Wednesday.

COVID-19 cases recently topped 3.2 million worldwide, according to Johns Hopkins University data. There were more than 1 million cases in the U.S. and 60,000 deaths, as of Thursday morning.

 

 

 

The U.S. plans to lend $500 billion to large companies. It won’t require them to preserve jobs or limit executive pay.

Posted on by • Posted in 2020 Election Issues, Accountability, Conflicts of Interest, Coronavirus, Crisis, Crisis Management, Economic Crisis, Economic Stimulus, Employee Furlough, Employee Hiring Freeze, Employee Layoffs, Employee Pay Cuts, Employee Protections, Executive Bonus, Executive Compensation, Federal Reserve, Oversight, Paycheck Protection Program, The CARES Act • Leave a comment

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/04/28/federal-reserve-bond-corporations/?fbclid=IwAR21PBlVqLVVDVf8CeVxGpTuHgxXbDqy49K49BpeeYav-KmKYxS_xfnAX5A&platform=hootsuite

DownWithTyranny!: April 2020

The Fed’s coronavirus aid program lacks restrictions Congress placed on companies seeking financial help under other programs.

A Federal Reserve program expected to begin within weeks will provide hundreds of billions in emergency aid to large American corporations without requiring them to save jobs or limit payments to executives and shareholders.

Under the program, the central bank will buy up to $500 billion in bonds issued by large companies. The companies will use the influx of cash as a financial lifeline but are required to pay it back with interest.

Unlike other portions of the relief for American businesses, however, this aid will be exempt from rules passed by Congress requiring recipients to limit dividends, executive compensation and stock buybacks and does not direct the companies to maintain certain employment levels.

Critics say the program could allow large companies that take the federal help to reward shareholders and executives without saving any jobs. The program was set up jointly by the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department.

“I am struck that the administration is relying on the good will of the companies receiving this assistance,” said Eswar Prasad, a former official at the International Monetary Fund and economist at Cornell University. “A few months down the road, after the government purchases its debt, the company can turn around and issue a bunch of dividends to shareholders or fire its workers, and there’s no clear path to get it back.”

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin defended the corporate aid program, saying that the lack of restrictions on recipients had been discussed and agreed to by Congress. “This was highly discussed on a bipartisan basis. This was thought through carefully,” he said in an interview with The Washington Post. “What we agreed upon was direct loans would carry the restrictions, and the capital markets transactions would not carry the restrictions.”

Democrats asked for restrictions on how companies can use the money from the central bank’s bond purchases but were rebuffed by the administration during negotiations about the Cares Act, said a spokesman for Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.). The spokesman said Democrats won meaningful concessions from the administration on reporting transparency in the final agreement. (Transparency requirements do not apply to the small-business loans, the biggest business aid program rolled out to date.)

Mnuchin also said the program had already bolstered investor confidence in U.S. capital markets, which in turn helped firms raise capital they used to avoid layoffs.

“The mere announcement of these facilities, quite frankly, led to a reopening of a lot of these capital markets,” Mnuchin said in an interview. “Even before these facilities are up and running, they’ve had their desired impact of having stability in the markets. Stability in the markets allows companies to function, and raise money and allows them to keep and retain workers and get back to work.”

The corporate debt purchases by the Fed stand in stark contrast with other portions of the federal aid for U.S. businesses that come with requirements to protect jobs or limit spending.

The Paycheck Protection Program, which offers $659 billion for small businesses, requires companies to certify that the money will be used to “retain workers and maintain payroll or make mortgage payments, lease payments, and utility payments.”

The “Main Street” program offering up to $600 billion to “midsize” businesses — with 500 to 10,000 employees — forbids companies from issuing dividends and places limits on executive compensation, according to a term sheet issued by the Fed. Those restrictions are in effect until 12 months after the loan is no longer outstanding. The companies must also “make reasonable efforts” to maintain payroll and retain employees.

Likewise, the $46 billion program for airlines, air cargo companies and national security forbids dividends and limits executive pay. Its requirement on retaining employment is more rigorous, however. Companies are supposed retain at least 90 percent of their employees.

The first version of the Fed program to buy bonds from large companies, known as the Primary Market Corporate Credit Facility, probably would have compelled recipients of the aid to limit executive pay and dividends. That version of the program, described in a March 23 term sheet issued by the Fed, offered direct loans and bond purchases to companies. Under the Cares Act, the federal programs offering direct loans must set restrictions on company dividends and CEO pay; those that buy only corporate bonds do not. Both are forms of lending, although bonds are more easily resold.

But on April 9, the Fed altered the design of the program to exclude direct corporate lending. The Fed program will still essentially lend money to large companies — by buying their bonds — but the Fed will not be compelled by the Cares Act to ensure that companies abide by the divided and CEO pay rules.

“The change to the term sheet between March and April is the smoking gun on the Fed’s own culpability here,” said Gregg Gelzinis, a senior policy analyst at the Center for American Progress, a left-leaning think tank. “The basic principle of the Cares Act was that if we’re going to provide taxpayer funding to private industry, we need conditions to make sure it is in the public interest. This violates that principle.”

Bharat Ramamurti, an aide to Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) who was appointed to the board overseeing the bailout, said in a statement: “Big corporations have shown time and again that they will put their shareholders and executives ahead of their workers if given the choice. That’s why I’m so concerned that the Treasury and the Fed have chosen to direct hundreds of billions of dollars to big companies with no strings attached.”

A spokesman for the Federal Reserve declined to comment. The Fed’s board of governors unanimously approved the new bond purchasing program on March 22. The Fed has said it will purchase only the bonds of firms above a certain grade. The issuer of the bond also must meet the conflicts-of-interest requirements in the Cares Act, which preclude federal lawmakers or their relatives from benefiting financially from the government bailout.

In the interview, Mnuchin also said many companies are ceasing stock buybacks and are likely to use the additional capital to retain workers.

“A lot of companies have stopped their share buybacks and slashed their dividends, because they need that capital to invest in their business. Even though these restrictions don’t necessarily apply, that’s already happening,” he said.

Some experts disputed that assertion. “Some companies have ceased buybacks and dividends and some haven’t. We shouldn’t have to keep our fingers crossed,” Gelzinis said.

It is unknown what the terms will be for the Fed lending under the program, or how favorable they will be for recipients. The term sheet says only that they will depend on the company and be “informed” by market conditions.

Companies selling their bonds to the central bank are expected to be primarily investment grade, publicly traded firms and therefore subject to more disclosure and oversight than those that are privately held. Patricia C. Mosser, a former senior official at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, said these corporations are scrutinized by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, private investors and the credit rating agencies.

“It’s true that there’s nothing stopping these companies from continuing to pay stock dividends. You may not like that, and I have sympathy for that position,” said Mosser, now a professor at Columbia University. “But it’s easier to unmask bad behavior in public companies. Large companies certainly don’t do everything right, but they have to admit publicly how they pay top executives, where their profits go and how they use them. That history of disclosure and oversight means the risk of not being repaid is lower.”

The weaker restrictions on recipients of the Fed’s lending program may be partly justified, said Nathan Tankus, research director at the Modern Money Network, which studies monetary policy. The corporate bonds that the Fed is purchasing from companies can be resold, whereas direct loans establish an agreement between the company and the government that makes the asset less valuable to the central bank, he said.

“Purchases of debt are a slightly more arm’s-length transaction than the loan, which is forming a bilateral relationship,” Tankus said. “But this is really just the fig leaf the Fed can use to justify lifting the restrictions.”

 

 

 

CMS suspends advance payments to providers, is reevaluating accelerated payments for hospitals

Posted on by • Posted in 2020 Election Issues, Cash, Cash Reserves, Cash-Flow Improvements, Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), Coronavirus, Crisis, Crisis Management, Dept of Health and Human Services (HHS), Economic Crisis, Economic Stimulus, Health Policy, Health System, Hospital, Hospital Industry, Medicare, Paycheck Protection Program, Physician, Physician Practice Management, Supply Chain, The CARES Act • Leave a comment

https://www.fiercehealthcare.com/hospitals-health-systems/cms-suspends-accelerated-payment-program?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiWXpNMlpXUTVaakpoTmpJMSIsInQiOiJzU3ViK3ZwV0oyMUxOS3N5T0tXY3h1anlUSW5ndTJ0MDlEMkE1S3BGRDg1Mlc1eDdpY3hGaHRCV0U1eUpFbWxhR3ZoSVlRdlU5M1NCek5FamxZZ0NLMEhxQ25teFwvNVwvSFEzYnlETEpuMnlZM0FJYThWeEhTcUFodElZUEcwS1RlIn0%3D&mrkid=959610

CMS suspends advance payments to providers, is reevaluating ...

The Trump administration is suspending a program that offered advanced payments to providers and reevaluating another program that offered accelerated payments to health systems after doling out about $100 billion. 

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) announced over the weekend it is immediately suspending its Advance Payment Program to Medicare Part B suppliers such as doctors, non-physician practitioners and durable medical equipment suppliers.

The agency is reevaluating the amounts that will be paid under its Accelerated Payment Program, which have been made available to fee-for-service Medicare providers such as hospitals in light of the $100 billion already sent to providers through the program.

CMS had expanded the loan programs to ensure providers and suppliers had resources needed to combat COVID-19 as many began furloughing or laying off workers due to sharp revenue drops from elective care amid the COVID-19 response.

CMS approved more than 24,000 applications under the program and advanced more than $40 billion to Part B suppliers in the last several weeks. It approved 21,000 applications for accelerated payments, totaling nearly $60 billion in payments to hospitals.

Prior to COVID-19, the agency had only approved just over 100 of such requests.

The advanced and accelerated payments are not grants, but instead payments that are required to be paid back within one year, officials said.  

In a release, CMS officials said the actions are also being taken “in light of the $175 billion recently appropriated for healthcare provider relief payments,” the agency said, referring to $100 billion allocated in the CARES Act as well as $75 billion allocated to providers through the Paycheck Protection Program and Health Care Enhancement Act.

The Department of Health and Human Services is distributing that money through the Provider Relief Fund. Those funds will be used to support healthcare-related expenses or lost revenue attributable to the COVID-19 pandemic and to ensure uninsured Americans can get treatment for COVID-19, officials said.

Among the recipients of the funding, HCA Healthcare said it benefited from about $4 billion in accelerated Medicare payments provided under the CARES Act, saying that money will be repaid over an eight-month period beginning in August. HCA also received about $700 million of funds from the first phase of the public health and social services emergency fund.

Those two pieces of economic assistance have had the greatest impact in stabilizing the health system’s financials amid challenges presented by COVID-19, HCA officials said during a recent conference call with analysts.

 

 

 

Large, Troubled Companies Got Bailout Money in Small-Business Loan Program

Posted on by • Posted in 2020 Election Issues, Accountability, Coronavirus, Crisis, Crisis Management, Dept of Justice (DOJ), Economic Crisis, Economic Stimulus, Federal Bailout Funding, Governance, Oversight, Pandemic, Paycheck Protection Program, Slush Fund • Leave a comment

Large, Troubled Companies Got Bailout Money in Small-Business Loan ...

Companies with accounting problems or in trouble with the government received millions in federal loans.

A company in Georgia paid $6.5 million to resolve a Justice Department investigation — and, two weeks later, received a $10 million federally backed loan to help it survive the coronavirus crisis.

Another company, AutoWeb, disclosed last week that it had paid its chief executive $1.7 million in 2019 — a week after it received $1.4 million from the same loan program.

And Intellinetics, a software company in Ohio, got $838,700 from the government program — and then agreed, the following week, to spend at least $300,000 to purchase a rival firm.

The vast economic rescue package that President Trump signed into law last month included $349 billion in low-interest loans for small businesses. The so-called Paycheck Protection Program was supposed to help prevent small companies — generally those with fewer than 500 employees in the United States — from capsizing as the economy sinks into what looks like a severe recession.

The loan program was meant for companies that could no longer finance themselves through traditional means, like raising money in the markets or borrowing from banks under existing credit lines. The law required that the federal money — which comes at a low 1 percent interest rate and in some cases doesn’t need to be paid back — be spent on things like payroll or rent.

But the program has been riddled with problems. Within days of its start, its money ran out, prompting Congress to approve an additional $310 billion in funding that will open for applications on Monday. Countless small businesses were shut out, even as a number of large companies received millions of dollars in aid.

Some, including restaurant chains like Ruth’s Chris and Shake Shack, agreed to return their loans after a public outcry. But dozens of large but lower-profile companies with financial or legal problems have also received large payouts under the program, according to an analysis of the more than 200 publicly traded companies that have disclosed receiving a total of more than $750 million in bailout loans.

Another dozen or so collected money even though they have recently reported being able to raise large sums through private means. Several others have recently showered top executives with seven-figure pay packages.

The government isn’t disclosing who receives aid, leaving it up to individual companies to decide whether to disclose that they obtained loans. That makes a full accounting of the loan program impossible.

“It’s outrageous,” said Amanda Ballantyne, the executive director of Main Street Alliance, an advocacy group for small businesses. She added that there were countless small business owners “who have laid off all their staff, are trying to file for unemployment and will go bankrupt because of the problems with the way this Paycheck Protection Program was designed.”

Applicants for loans do not need to provide evidence that they have been harmed by the pandemic. They simply need to certify that “current economic uncertainty makes this loan request necessary” to support their operations.

Instead of having the Small Business Administration, which is guaranteeing the loans, decide which companies get funding, the process was essentially outsourced to banks. The banks collect fees for each loan they make but don’t have to monitor whether the recipients use the money appropriately.

For small business owners shut out of the program, watching big companies collect loans while their applications languish has been infuriating.

“It has been beyond frustrating,” said Diane Burgio, a single mother who runs a design business in New York City that employs four people. She was one of more than 280,000 applicants who sought, and did not get, a loan from JPMorgan Chase.

The New York Times identified roughly a dozen publicly traded companies that had recently boasted about their access to ample capital — and then applied for and received millions of dollars in the federal loans.

Legacy Housing, a Texas company that manufactures premade homes, announced on April 1 that it had access to a new $25 million credit line. Curtis D. Hodgson, Legacy’s executive chairman, told investors that he expected any damage from the coronavirus to be short-lived. “Our order book is still strong, and we are well-positioned once the situation begins to normalize,” he said.

Less than two weeks later, on April 10, the company announced that a local lender, Peoples Bank, had approved it for $6.5 million under the S.B.A. loan program.

In an interview on Sunday, Mr. Hodgson said that an inquiry from The Times led the company to decide to give back the money it borrowed, though he defended seeking the loan in the first place. “Legacy is a highly leveraged company without cash on hand,” he said. “Here was a way to get a cash infusion.”

Escalade Sports, which makes things like table tennis tables and basketball hoops, already had a $50 million credit line from JPMorgan Chase. The company’s chief executive, Dave Fetherman, told investors this month that the company, based in Evansville, Ind., had “a strong balance sheet” and was seeing rising demand for its products, with so many Americans cooped up in their homes.

Days earlier, Escalade got a $5.6 million federally backed loan. A spokesman for Escalade said the company “fully met all required conditions at the time we applied for the P.P.P. loan.”

Executives at some companies said applying for the loans made clear business sense. The loans are essentially free money: They have rock-bottom interest rates and can be forgiven if, among other things, the borrower maintains the size of its work force. In some cases, executives said, their bankers encouraged them to apply for the loans.

At least seven companies that received a total of $45 million in loans under the federal government’s program have recently had serious scrapes with the federal government.

MiMedx Group, a biopharmaceutical company in Marietta, Ga., got a $10 million loan on April 21. On April 6, the company had agreed to pay the Justice Department $6.5 million to resolve allegations that it violated federal law by knowingly overcharging the Department of Veterans Affairs for medical supplies.

MiMedx, which makes and sells human tissue grafts, also ran into problems with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Last year, the agency sued MiMedx, accusing the company of exaggerating its revenue to investors over several years. MiMedx agreed to settle the case for $1.5 million, without admitting wrongdoing. Two of its former top executives were indicted last year by federal prosecutors in Manhattan on charges of accounting fraud.

A MiMedx spokeswoman, Hilary Dixon, said the company was trying to move past its accounting scandal. “We don’t have the option of raising capital in the public markets owing to our financial restatement process,” she said.

Another company, US Auto Parts Network, which received a $4.1 million loan through the program, has been in a heated dispute in recent years with Customs and Border Protection. The agency has seized some of the company’s imported products, claiming they are counterfeit.

US Auto Parts Network didn’t respond to requests for comment.

At least two companies that received federally backed loans have previously borrowed heavily from their own executives or others close to the firms — meaning that the new loans could help the companies repay their insiders.

Infinite Group, a cybersecurity firm in Pittsford, N.Y., had been borrowing hundreds of thousands of dollars from its board members and the brother of a top executive at annual interest rates as high as 7.5 percent. This month, Infinite secured a nearly $1 million federally backed loan whose 1 percent interest rate could allow the company to dramatically lower its funding costs. Company officials didn’t respond to requests for comment.

Intellinetics, the company that announced that it was buying a rival days after it received its emergency loan of $838,700, borrowed nearly $400,000 last fall from two brothers who run a small New York brokerage firm, Taglich Brothers. If the money isn’t repaid by May 15, Intellinetics will need to give the brothers stock in the company or start paying a steep 12 percent interest rate. (Some of that debt has already been converted into stock.)

“Securing the PPP funding gives us extra confidence and ability to restart and hit the ground running,” James F. DeSocio, the company’s chief executive, said in a news release.

Infinite Group and Intellinetics have not said precisely how they intend to use the loan proceeds.

A number of other companies have had serious accounting problems. The chief financial officer of CPI Aerostructures, an aerospace manufacturer that got a $4.8 million loan, resigned in February after the company disclosed major problems with how it reported revenue.

And several firms have been paying their top executives millions of dollars despite financial problems that predate the coronavirus crisis.

For example, AutoWeb’s chief executive, Jared Rowe, got $4.7 million in total compensation over the past two years — including $1.7 million in 2019 — even as its stock price plummeted more than 70 percent. The company declined to comment.

And Manning & Napier, an investment firm in Fairport, N.Y., that has about $20 billion in assets under management, disclosed in March that its chief executive, Marc O. Mayer, earned nearly $5 million last year. On April 19, the company was approved for $6.7 million in the paycheck protection loans — even as the company said it would pay out a quarterly dividend to its shareholders.

Last week, amid mounting public anger toward large recipients of the rescue loans, Manning & Napier said it had decided not to take the money.

While the federal loan program is supposed to help companies avoid layoffs, some of the large recipients of loans have already dramatically reduced their workforces — and not always because of the coronavirus.

Harvard Bioscience, based in Holliston, Mass., has been trying since last year to pacify an activist investor that is pressuring management to boost the company’s stock price. The company closed facilities in North Carolina and Connecticut and said in February, before the coronavirus upended the economy, that it was laying off about 10 percent of its work force.

This month, Harvard Bioscience received a $6.1 million loan through the paycheck protection program. In a securities filing disclosing the loan, the company didn’t say why it sought the money or how it would use it. A spokesman didn’t respond to requests for comment.

A number of relatively large companies with connections to Mr. Trump also received millions of dollars in loans.

Phunware, a data-collection company that received a $2.9 million loan this month, counts Mr. Trump’s re-election campaign and Fox News as two of its biggest clients.

Continental Materials, a heating and air conditioning and construction material supplier based in Chicago, got a $5.5 million loan. The firm’s chief executive, James Gidwitz, is a major Trump donor, and his brother Ronald was appointed ambassador to Brussels by Mr. Trump after serving as Illinois campaign finance chairman for the 2016 Trump campaign.

It isn’t clear whether political considerations helped Phunware and Continental Materials get their loans approved. Neither company responded to requests for comment.

 

 

 

 

4.4 million Americans sought jobless benefits last week, as economic pain continued across the United States

Posted on by • Posted in 2020 Election Issues, Bankruptcy, Coronavirus, Crisis, Crisis Management, Economic Crisis, Economic Stimulus, Economy, Employee Benefits, Employee Furlough, Employee Layoffs, Employee Pay Cuts, Employee Protections, Employer-Based Health Insurance, Health Insurance Coverage Adequacy, Health Policy, Job Market, Job Search, Job Security, Out of Pocket Expenses, Pandemic, Paycheck Protection Program, Preexisting Conditions, Underinsured, Unemployment, Unemployment Insurance, Uninsured • Leave a comment

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/04/23/economy-coronavirus-unemployment/?fbclid=IwAR3EbJpE7nmIUWOM4HUrZVOKaBmls7Uh3gL5ewCP98q7So0s38JlPdTT-SI&utm_campaign=wp_main&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook

4.4 million Americans sought jobless benefits last week, as ...

The White House and Congress have tried to arrest the downturn, but the coronavirus pandemic keeps pushing Americans out of the labor force.

More than 4.4 million Americans filed for unemployment benefits last week, according to the Labor Department, a signal the tidal wave of job losses continues to grow during the coronavirus pandemic.

It’s the fifth straight week that job losses were measured in the millions. From March 15 to April 18, 26.5 million people have probably been laid off or furloughed. The number of jobs lost in that brief span effectively erased all jobs created after the 2008 financial crisis. Jobless figures on this scale haven’t been seen since the Great Depression.

The new weekly total comes on top of 22 million Americans who had sought benefits in previous weeks, a volume that has overwhelmed state systems for processing unemployment claims. Economists estimate the national unemployment rate sits between 15 and 20 percent, much higher than it was during the Great Recession in 2008 and 2009. The unemployment rate at the peak of the Great Depression was about 25 percent.

The new weekly jobless claims figure came in around economists’ predictions, which were expected “to be staggering, but not growing, which is a small mercy,” said Julia Pollak, a labor economist at ZipRecruiter. For comparison, 5.2 million people filed unemployment claims for the week ending April 11.

As the coronavirus began spreading in the United States earlier this year, many businesses rapidly began to close. Hotels, restaurants, and airlines were hit particularly hard, but few businesses were immune from the economic toll. The problems have only worsened each week, as more Americans reduced their spending and more businesses cut workers because income has fallen so sharply.

Pollack said many businesses quickly “cut to the bone” when they realized how the pandemic would gut sales. Now, many of the new layoffs stem from businesses like news organizations and tech companies that weren’t directly affected by people staying home but are suffering the consequences of vanishing ad revenue and paid subscriptions.

“We see declines across every major industry and state, although the declines hit industries at different times,” Pollak said.

Meanwhile, consumer spending, the engine behind the longest economic expansion in U.S. history, has evaporated. If they’re still operating, many offices are working with skeleton staffs and staring down months of dismal revenue.

The White House and Congress have tried to intervene, but with limited impact so far.

New funding for small businesses in a $2 trillion March emergency spending package quickly dried up in the face of overwhelming demand, prompting the Senate to expand funding by $310 billion on Tuesday. The bill would direct an additional $60 billion to a separate small-business emergency grant and loan program. The House is slated to vote on the measure Thursday afternoon.

Even with all the new government spending, hopes for a sharp economic rebound are fading, overtaken by the public fear of going back to restaurants, movie theaters, schools and gyms. The growing possibility of a “W”-shaped recovery — in which a resurgence of the virus, or a spike in defaults and bankruptcies, triggers another downturn — has analysts reframing what a reopened or rehabilitated economy might look like.

This year defies historical comparison. In 2020, 28.9 million people have filed for unemployment benefits. Halfway through the fourth month of the year, the figure has already eclipsed the full-year totals of every year but 1982 (30.4 million) and 2009 (29.8 million). At this rate, it will overtake both within a week or so.

Less than half of working-age Americans will be earning a wage next month, said James Knightley, ING Chief International Economist.

“In an election year, this means that the call for politicians to reopen the economy is only going to get louder, irrespective of the health advice,” Knightley said.

In five weeks, 9.4 percent of the working-age population has filed for unemployment insurance, said Nick Bunker, Indeed Hiring Lab’s director of economic research. That’s about twice the share of the population that lost a job during the Great Recession. In some states, such as Michigan, about one in four workers has filed an unemployment claim in the past few weeks.

“The numbers detailing the shock to the U.S. labor market are so large, and cover such a short time, that your first reaction is that they’re a typo,” Bunker said.

Employers are also unlikely to be hiring at the same levels they were before the pandemic. As of April 16, job postings on Indeed were down 34 percent compared with last year, Bunker said.

The job losses, like the epidemic itself, haven’t fallen evenly across the country. In three states — Hawaii, Kentucky and Michigan — about 1 in 4 workers have filed for unemployment benefits in the past 5 weeks. In Michigan, plant shutdowns and furloughs have ravaged the manufacturing economy, which had only recently recovered all the jobs it lost in the Great Recession.

On the opposite of the ledger sits South Dakota, where Gov. Kristi L. Noem (R) has resisted calls to lock down the state’s businesses to slow the spread of the coronavirus. Only 6 percent of the state’s labor force has applied for unemployment benefits. It may be a regional trend: Neighboring Wyoming and Nebraska, and nearby Utah, also have unusually low claims numbers.

As part of its sprawling stimulus package, Washington has rolled out relief for millions of households and small businesses struggling to make ends meet. But money for struggling businesses quickly ran dry, and system glitches have prevented $1,200 stimulus checks from reaching some of the neediest.

On Tuesday, the Senate passed a bill to expand the Paycheck Protection Program for small businesses by $310 billion, and flood a separate small-business emergency grant and loan initiative by an additional $60 billion.

Meanwhile, many low-income veterans and Social Security recipients still haven’t received the stimulus money in their bank accounts, while other IRS checks are going to dead people. People who didn’t file tax returns last year or don’t have direct-deposit information may have weeks more to wait.

In the wake of the Great Recession, the number of unemployed — about 15 million — was significantly higher than the number who claimed benefits, and the unemployment rate still peaked at just 10 percent. Economists expect the United States to blow by that figure when April’s jobs data are released on May 8.

Granted, this comes as unemployment eligibility and benefits have been greatly expanded. The government has relied on the unemployment insurance system to deliver relief to out-of-work Americans as it forces millions of businesses to close during temporary stay-at-home orders. The soaring numbers are, for once, a sign of the system working as intended.

 

 

 

 

Operating margins plummet at US hospitals, Kaufman Hall says

Posted on by • Posted in Cash, Cash Reserves, Cash-Flow Improvements, Coronavirus, Crisis, Crisis Management, Elective Procedures, Elective Surgery, Employee Benefits, Employee Furlough, Employee Layoffs, Employee Pay Cuts, Employer-Based Health Insurance, Health Insurance Coverage Adequacy, Health Policy, Health System, Infection Control, Infectious Virus, Net Income, Operating Expenses, Operating Income, Operating Margin, Operating Performance, Operating Revenue, Out of Pocket Expenses, Pandemic, Paycheck Protection Program, Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), Supply Chain, Underinsured, Unemployment, Unemployment Insurance, Uninsured • Leave a comment

https://www.healthcaredive.com/news/Kaufman-hospitals-operating-margin-decline/576491/

Third Quarter Investment Report: Moving Into Choppy Waters « CPEA ...

Dive Brief:

  • Operating margins at the nation’s hospitals have plummeted due to large-scale volume and revenue declines coupled with flat to rising expenses, according to a new report from Kaufman Hall.
  • Based on March data from more than 800 U.S. hospitals, average operating margins dropped 150% year over year, plunging non-profit hospitals, which historically operate on already thin margins, into troublesome territory.
  • The data paint a dire picture for U.S. hospitals. “These initial numbers only reflect the first two weeks of the COVID-19 response and likely indicate more negative results in the future,” Jim Blake, managing director at Kaufman Hall, said in a statement.

Dive Insight:

Hospitals depend heavily on elective surgeries for revenue, but had to cancel or postpone many of them starting last month in order to preserve coveted COVID-19 resources such as personal protective equipment, beds and staff.

Those measures have upended the financial health of the entire industry in a matter of just weeks, according to new data and analysis from Kaufman Hall.

“We anticipate April will be significantly worse, and at this point, no one knows how long hospitals will continue on their current path,” Blake said.

Despite the ongoing pandemic, patient volumes overall have plunged. During March, the median hospital occupancy rate was 53%, with operating room minutes down 20% year-over-year and emergency room visits down 15% year over year, according to the report.

At the same time, hospitals’ labor expenses were up 3% year over year, and non-labor expenses were up 1%. In order to rein in operating costs, some health systems have begun to furlough or lay off workers.

While non-profit systems are especially vulnerable given their razor-thin margins, major for-profit systems are also struggling financially.

HCA Healthcare, Community Health Systems and Tenet Healthcare have all pulled their 2020 guidance in response to the pandemic. In its first quarter report Tuesday, HCA attributed a steep decrease in volumes and 45% drop in profit to the pandemic.

And Jefferies analyst wrote in a note Tuesday they are reducing their volume and earnings expectations for those companies for this year and 2021 based on the pandemic. “Our belief is that high unemployment translates to reduced commercial insurance coverage and disposable income to fund co-pays/deductibles, which results in fewer physician visits and procedures,” they wrote.

Under these circumstances, the federal government has attempted to financially support struggling hospitals through ongoing coronavirus relief legislation.

First came accelerated Medicare payments based on reimbursement data, in the form of loans that providers will have to pay back.

Separately, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act passed by Congress in March benchmarked $100 billion in funding to provide financial support to struggling hospitals.

A $30 billion first round was announced April 8 and given to providers based on historic Medicare payments. A second round of CARES act funding for systems in hot spots is next, although the timing is unclear.

On Tuesday the Senate approved a separate $484 billion aid package, the Paycheck Protection Program and Health Care Enhancement Act, that would send an additional $75 billion in emergency funds to hospitals. It also allocates $25 billion to expand testing for the virus across the country.

The White House expressed support for the package. It still needs House approval, which could happen as soon as this week.

The latest package comes in response to depleted funding for the Small Business Administration’s Paycheck Protection Program. Upon replenishing those funds, smaller health systems may be eligible for forgivable PPP loans used to meet payroll and other operating costs, but only if they have 500 or fewer employees.