Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Looking for options if sales collapse due to Coronavirus.

1235

Comments

  • #122
    mogilvie
    Registered Users Posts: 87 ✭✭mogilvie


    Hi all,
    Revenue released Version 2 of their FAQ guide https://www.revenue.ie/en/employing-people/documents/pmod-topics/guidance-on-operation-of-temporary-covid-wage-subsidy-scheme.pdf in their Hot Topics section.

    The following key clarificatoins were introduced.
    - The new version scraps the reference to 30%, and instead allows top-ups to 100% of the Revenue Net Wage value.
    - Directors are eligible for the scheme.
    - The worked solutions are a bit better.

    Note that anomalies do exist.

    - A Revenue Net wage of €586 is subsidised by €410. But if you earn 1c more then it drops to €350 flat. Above €960 nothing is subsidised.
    - It is also true that those on lower equivalent net wages, or even self employed above the €960 may be better off financially on the €350 COVID Pandemic Unemployment Payment.

    The Revenue net wage is the employees Gross less IT/USC/PRSI ee from Jan and Feb submitted pay runs. These are cast in stone via PMOD submissions. There's no fudging these values and no room for negotiation with Revenue. They effectively cap an employees earnings during the scheme.

    Note also that the while Subsidy Scheme refund is tax free in the pay run, but the amounts are considered taxable income and will become taxable at year end.
    BIK is also suspended for the duration of the scheme, but not forgiven. The BIK will need to be accounted for at year end and taxes paid.

    So considerations for the employer are:
    1) Do you expect to meet entitlement criteria for the business (25% reduction in turnover etc)
    2) Do you want to be on the public list of scheme members?
    3) Are your staff actually going to be working during the period. (If so then they cannot go onto the Pandemic Unemployment Payment)
    4) Are the Revenue net wage values useful for you, and the capped income acceptable for your staff? For instance someone may have received a bonus in Jan which boosted the Revenue net wage and put them outside of the scheme threshold. Similarly, somone may have had some low earnings weeks which means their rate is artificially low.
    5) Does the staff member want to be on the scheme? They might be better off on the pandemic unemployment payment at home, not working.

    In both schemes the employee stays on your books as an employee. You do not need to cease their employment.

    Hope this helps.

    Regards
    Mark Ogilvie
    Parolla Payroll


  • #123
    capefear
    Registered Users Posts: 771 ✭✭✭capefear


    Thanks a million Mark that info is a big help


  • #124
    treascon
    Registered Users Posts: 237 ✭✭treascon


    mogilvie wrote: »
    Hi all,
    Revenue released Version 2 of their FAQ guide https://www.revenue.ie/en/employing-people/documents/pmod-topics/guidance-on-operation-of-temporary-covid-wage-subsidy-scheme.pdf in their Hot Topics section.

    The following key clarificatoins were introduced.
    - The new version scraps the reference to 30%, and instead allows top-ups to 100% of the Revenue Net Wage value.
    - Directors are eligible for the scheme.
    - The worked solutions are a bit better.

    Note that anomalies do exist.

    - A Revenue Net wage of €586 is subsidised by €410. But if you earn 1c more then it drops to €350 flat. Above €960 nothing is subsidised.
    - It is also true that those on lower equivalent net wages, or even self employed above the €960 may be better off financially on the €350 COVID Pandemic Unemployment Payment.

    The Revenue net wage is the employees Gross less IT/USC/PRSI ee from Jan and Feb submitted pay runs. These are cast in stone via PMOD submissions. There's no fudging these values and no room for negotiation with Revenue. They effectively cap an employees earnings during the scheme.

    Note also that the while Subsidy Scheme refund is tax free in the pay run, but the amounts are considered taxable income and will become taxable at year end.
    BIK is also suspended for the duration of the scheme, but not forgiven. The BIK will need to be accounted for at year end and taxes paid.

    So considerations for employer are:
    1) Do you expect to meet entilment criteria for the business (25% reduction in turnover etc)
    2) Do you want to be on the public list of scheme members?
    3) Are your staff actually going to be working during the period. (If so then they cannot go onto the Pandemic Unemployment Payment)
    4) Are the Revenue net wage values workable for your staff? For instance someone may have received a bonus in Jan which boosted the Revenue net wage and put them outside of the scheme threshold. Similarly, somone may have had some low earnings weeks which means their rate is artificially low.
    5) Does the staff member want to be on the scheme? They might be better off on the pandemic unemployment payment at home, not working.

    In both schemes the employee says on your books as an employee. You do not need to crease their employment.

    Hope this helps.

    Regards
    Mark Ogilvie
    Parolla Payroll

    I have been following this thread. Thank you, this info is very helpful


  • #125
    jos28
    Registered Users Posts: 7,187 ✭✭✭jos28


    Thanks a million for that, very clear analysis. Does that mean we can re-do the payrolls that were run on Friday and avail of the new limits ?


  • #126
    mogilvie
    Registered Users Posts: 87 ✭✭mogilvie


    jos28 wrote: »
    Thanks a million for that, very clear analysis. Does that mean we can re-do the payrolls that were run on Friday and avail of the new limits ?


    Forgive me if I stay silent on that one..
    Submissions are supposed to accurately reflect the situation at the time that payment was made


  • Advertisement
  • #127
    jos28
    Registered Users Posts: 7,187 ✭✭✭jos28


    mogilvie wrote: »
    Forgive me if I stay silent on that one..
    Submissions are supposed to accurately reflect the situation at the time that payment was made

    ;)


  • #128
    PickYourName
    Registered Users Posts: 412 ✭✭PickYourName


    mogilvie wrote: »
    Forgive me if I stay silent on that one..
    Submissions are supposed to accurately reflect the situation at the time that payment was made

    There's an explicit statement in the document you referenced that "No, once a submission is made to Revenue with a J9 PRSI class, it cannot be deleted or amended".

    Many thanks for posting that, by the way. For anyone who saw the previous version the new one (dated the next day!) has additions highlighted.

    Unfortunately, the two biggest issues remain:

    1. If you are a higher earner, you get less. This is very hard to understand; it is obviously unfair. Why not have everyone on a cap of €410 or everyone on €350?

    2. Many lower-paid will be better off the on the €350 unemployment payment. This is an incentive for companies to lay off workers in preference to keeping them on the payroll, the exact opposite of the reason for the scheme in the first place.

    Because this became apparent so late in the day, our decision was to put everyone on the scheme, topping anyone who needed it up to €350 - I’d spent the previous two weeks telling everyone not to apply for the COVID-19 Unemployment payment. As it happened, most (all?) of them got some tax refund, so very few needed any top-up and then only by small amounts. I’m not sure this will happen next week, but it does buy us some time to decide what to do.

    If you or indeed anyone has any direct communication from Revenue on this, please post here.


  • #129
    jos28
    Registered Users Posts: 7,187 ✭✭✭jos28


    I couldn't understand the tax refund :confused:


  • #130
    mogilvie
    Registered Users Posts: 87 ✭✭mogilvie


    PickYourName wrote: »
    There's an explicit statement in the document you referenced that "No, once a submission is made to Revenue with a J9 PRSI class, it cannot be deleted or amended".

    Correct, this is because Revenue will refund employers for any J9 PRSI class submission 2 days after receiving it. They don't yet have a mechanism for submissions that get deleted, or changed, as the money has already been sent.


    Although, a non J9 PRSI class submission (ie a normal one, not in the scheme) can be deleted or resubmitted.

    PickYourName wrote: »
    2. Many lower-paid will be better off the on the €350 unemployment payment. This is an incentive for companies to lay off workers in preference to keeping them on the payroll, the exact opposite of the reason for the scheme in the first place.


    Both schemes keep the employees linked to the company, they haven't been made redundant. The Pandemic Unemployment Payment is a temporary layoff. The Employee RPN and EmploymentID are still linked to the company.


    DM me if you have any questions.


  • #131
    PickYourName
    Registered Users Posts: 412 ✭✭PickYourName


    mogilvie wrote: »
    Both schemes keep the employees linked to the company, they haven't been made redundant. The Pandemic Unemployment Payment is a temporary layoff. The Employee RPN and EmploymentID are still linked to the company.

    Surely there's a fundemental difference: you cannot work (including for your original emplyer) if you are claiming the Pandemic Unemployment Payment?

    There's also the statement on the MyWelfare site that: “The Covid-19 Pandemic Unemployment Payment is an emergency payment of €350 per week introduced by the Government for a 12 week period and intended to compensate those workers whose employers cannot retain them on their payroll”


  • Advertisement
  • #132
    mogilvie
    Registered Users Posts: 87 ✭✭mogilvie


    A lay-off is a temporary thing, where employers do not have enough work for an employee. They are still on the employers books and not made redundant.
    https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/employment/unemployment_and_redundancy/redundancy/lay_off_short_time_working_and_redundancy.html#l50316
    In its first iteration, this scheme was a means of DEASP paying employees via the Employer with Revenue refunding the amount. It was called the COVID-19 Employer Refund Scheme. The value was €203 and period for 6 weeks. The Employer Refund Scheme was then upgraded to become the Wage Subsidy Scheme.
    However the Pandemic Unemployment Payment is a continuation of the original benefit run by the DEASP. Its value was also increased to €350, and the duration extended to the duration of the pandemic. It is only limited to 12 weeks because that is the duration before which it needs to be considered for renewal by the Minister.

    You are correct that there is a difference. If you continue working you are not elegible for the Pandemic Unemployment Payment. But your employer may be eligible for the Wage Subsidy Scheme, and may choose to top that up to your Revenue net wage.

    Unfortunatly there is a bit of mixed messaging coming out of DEASP/Revenue/Department of Finance. You can come of the Pandemic Unemployment Payment and return to your job. There is an entire section devoted to it here:
    https://www.gov.ie/en/service/a5aed9-how-to-close-a-covid-19-pandemic-unemployment-payment/


  • #133
    PickYourName
    Registered Users Posts: 412 ✭✭PickYourName


    mogilvie wrote: »
    A lay-off is a temporary thing, where employers do not have enough work for an employee. They are still on the employers books and not made redundant.
    https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/employment/unemployment_and_redundancy/redundancy/lay_off_short_time_working_and_redundancy.html#l50316
    In its first iteration, this scheme was a means of DEASP paying employees via the Employer with Revenue refunding the amount. It was called the COVID-19 Employer Refund Scheme. The value was €203 and period for 6 weeks. The Employer Refund Scheme was then upgraded to become the Wage Subsidy Scheme.
    However the Pandemic Unemployment Payment is a continuation of the original benefit run by the DEASP. Its value was also increased to €350, and the duration extended to the duration of the pandemic. It is only limited to 12 weeks because that is the duration before which it needs to be considered for renewal by the Minister.

    You are correct that there is a difference. If you continue working you are not elegible for the Pandemic Unemployment Payment. But your employer may be eligible for the Wage Subsidy Scheme, and may choose to top that up to your Revenue net wage.

    Unfortunatly there is a bit of mixed messaging coming out of DEASP/Revenue/Department of Finance. You can come of the Pandemic Unemployment Payment and return to your job. There is an entire section devoted to it here:
    https://www.gov.ie/en/service/a5aed9-how-to-close-a-covid-19-pandemic-unemployment-payment/

    Thanks for that! I'm no expert, just trying to do the right thing here!

    I'm slow to criticise Revenue, by the way: it's truly remarkable they've got anything remotely usable up and running in the timescale.

    The simple thing to do would be just to lay everyone off and ask them to claim the new payment themselves. The problem with this is that what we were planning, as soon as we’re permitted, was to open in a very restrictive way, gradually bringing in more staff when (not if!) things improve. I can’t do this if they are claiming a benefit that says they are not working. Moving people between the two schemes might be possible, but at a significant administrative overhead and with a risk that some weeks no payment would be forthcoming.

    The frustrating thing is that both issues are very easy to fix: I just hope they will be.


  • #134
    mogilvie
    Registered Users Posts: 87 ✭✭mogilvie


    @PickYourName
    I've followed up with Revenue on the Pandemic Unemployment Payment this morning and they're on the DEASP line now.
    Employees applying for the DEASP COVID-19 Pandemic Unmployment Payment DO need to be ceased in the payroll software.


  • #135
    PickYourName
    Registered Users Posts: 412 ✭✭PickYourName 


    

    

    mogilvie wrote: »
    

    @PickYourName
    
I've followed up with Revenue on the Pandemic Unemployment Payment this morning and they're on the DEASP line now.
    
Employees applying for the DEASP COVID-19 Pandemic Unmployment Payment DO need to be ceased in the payroll software.
    

    

    
OK, thanks, that's useful.

    
I don't suppose there's any explicit statement on that anywhere? Don't take this the wrong way, but telling Revenue that some person from the Internet suggested I do this lacks a certain something..... :) 
    

    

    

     



    


     
     
    

    

    

    

    

    • 

  • 

    

    


    

    

    

#136

 

     

    

    

    

    


mogilvie




    
Registered Users Posts: 87 ✭✭mogilvie 
    

    

     
    

    

    



    

    


    

    


    

    

    

    
Not that I know of.
    
The person that I asked chair's the current daily teleconferences between Revenue and the Payroll Software Developers Association. They also have input from DEASP and Dept of Finance. 
    

    

    

     



    


     
     
    

    

    

    

    

    • 

  • 

    

    


    

    

    

#137

 

     

    

    

    

    


scwazrh




    
Registered Users Posts: 2,591 ✭✭✭scwazrh 
    

    

     
    

    

    



    

    


    

    


    

    

    

    
the gov.ie website says that if an employee is temporary laid off they can apply for the payment.Does this not mean that the employer keeps the employee on the payroll and issues a zero hour payment payslip but the employee receives the €350 from DEASP? 
    

    

    

     



    


     
     
    

    

    

    

    

    • 

  • 

    

    


    

    

    

#138

 

     

    

    

    

    


mogilvie




    
Registered Users Posts: 87 ✭✭mogilvie 
    

    

     
    

    

    



    

    


    

    


    

    

    

    
Up until four hours ago, that was my interpretation as well.
    
However, I've been told by Revenue that to apply DEASP for the COVID-19 Pandemic Unemployment Payment they should be ceased.
    
If they're not to be ceased then they may be eligible for the COVID-19 Wage Subsidy Scheme via payroll. 
    

    

    

     



    


     
     
    

    

    

    

    

    • 

  • 

    

    


    

    

    

#139

 

     

    

    

    

    


PickYourName




    
Registered Users Posts: 412 ✭✭PickYourName 
    

    

     
    

    

    



    

    


    

    


    

    

    

    

    

    mogilvie wrote: »
    

    Up until four hours ago, that was my interpretation as well.
    
However, I've been told by Revenue that to apply DEASP for the COVID-19 Pandemic Unemployment Payment they should be ceased.
    
If they're not to be ceased then they may be eligible for the COVID-19 Wage Subsidy Scheme via payroll.
    

    

    
I ran our (weekly) payroll last Friday. I had three people in this position: I just marked them as "do not pay" (i.e. as if they were on unpaid leave) and asked them to apply for the COVID-19 Pandemic Unemployment Payment as a matter of urgency (having told them previously not to).

    
Based on what you've said, this is probably wrong.

    
My intention now is to wait until the next pay run on Friday before deciding what to do.

    
I assume this is a reasonable approach?

    
I would also like to issue a clarifying email to everyone (those on the Wage Subsidy scheme and the 3 mentioned above) to let them know their exact position, but I'm a bit reluctant, having already previously said something that turned out not to be true.

    
Edit to add: I rang Revenue a while go in the hope of getting some answers, but got a recording to say that due to the latest restrictions, they're not providing phone answers. No response to my ROS query put in last week as yet. 
    

    

    

     



    


     
     
    

    

    

    

    

    • 

  • 

    

    


    

    

    

#140

 

     

    

    

    

    


scwazrh




    
Registered Users Posts: 2,591 ✭✭✭scwazrh 
    

    

     
    

    

    



    

    


    

    


    

    

    

    

    

    mogilvie wrote: »
    

    Up until four hours ago, that was my interpretation as well.
    
However, I've been told by Revenue that to apply DEASP for the COVID-19 Pandemic Unemployment Payment they should be ceased.
    
If they're not to be ceased then they may be eligible for the COVID-19 Wage Subsidy Scheme via payroll.
    

    

    
We’ve been in touch with revenue and they have confirmed to us as you explained it . We have to let the staff go so that they can apply for covid 19 unemployment payment or pay them inline with wage subsidy scheme. 
    

    

    

     



    


     
     
    

    

    

    

    

    • 

  • 

    

    


    

    

    

#141

 

     

    

    

    

    


PickYourName




    
Registered Users Posts: 412 ✭✭PickYourName 
    

    

     
    

    

    



    

    


    

    


    

    

    

    

    

    scwazrh wrote: »
    

    We’ve been in touch with revenue .
    

    

    
Just out of curiosity: how? 
    

    

    

     



    


     
     
    

    

    

    

    

    • 

  • 

    

    Advertisement
    

    

    

    • 

  • 

    

    


    

    

    

#142

 

     

    

    

    

    


scwazrh




    
Registered Users Posts: 2,591 ✭✭✭scwazrh 
    

    

     
    

    

    



    

    


    

    


    

    

    

    

    

    PickYourName wrote: »
    

    Just out of curiosity: how?
    

    

    
Rang the employers helpline 
    

    

    

     



    


     
     
    

    

    

    

    

    • 

  • 

    

    


    

    

    

#143

 

     

    

    

    

    


jos28




    
Registered Users Posts: 7,187 ✭✭✭jos28 
    

    

     
    

    

    



    

    


    

    


    

    

    

    
I'm still concerned about the tax rebate situation. I'm tempted to put everyone on a week one basis but that would contravene their RPNs. How have others handled this ? 
    

    

    

     



    


     
     
    

    

    

    

    

    • 

  • 

    

    


    

    

    

#144

 

     

    

    

    

    


PickYourName




    
Registered Users Posts: 412 ✭✭PickYourName 
    

    

     
    

    

    



    

    


    

    


    

    

    

    

    

    jos28 wrote: »
    

    I'm still concerned about the tax rebate situation. I'm tempted to put everyone on a week one basis but that would contravene their RPNs. How have others handled this ?
    

    

    
I just ran the payroll as normal, with gross wage set to €0.01 and an untaxed component of 70% of average wages over the first 9 weeks of the year (capped at €350 or €410 as appropriate).

    
Pretty much everyone got a tax rebate, which brought their net up. I paid the indicated net amount. So far the refund has exceeded the amount paid (which I understand will be the case until later this month).

    
I've done this two weeks now: the latest refund arrived today.

    
Now, whether that was the right thing to do, I don't know, but I think it's certainly defensible if anyone challenges it. 
    

    

    

     



    


     
     
    

    

    

    

    

    • 

  • 

    

    


    

    

    

#145

 

     

    

    

    

    


mogilvie




    
Registered Users Posts: 87 ✭✭mogilvie 
    

    

     
    

    

    



    

    


    

    


    

    

    

    

    

    jos28 wrote: »
    

    I'm still concerned about the tax rebate situation. I'm tempted to put everyone on a week one basis but that would contravene their RPNs. How have others handled this ?
    

    


    
Don't put people on week1/month1. This has been asked of Revenue directly and it has been confirmed to leave them on the method defined in their RPN.

    

    PickYourName wrote: »
    

    I just ran the payroll as normal, with gross wage set to €0.01 and an untaxed component of 70% of average wages over the first 9 weeks of the year (capped at €350 or €410 as appropriate).

    
Pretty much everyone got a tax rebate, which brought their net up. I paid the indicated net amount. So far the refund has exceeded the amount paid (which I understand will be the case until later this month).

    
I've done this two weeks now: the latest refund arrived today.

    
Now, whether that was the right thing to do, I don't know, but I think it's certainly defensible if anyone challenges it.
    

    


    
Most people on cumulative basis will get a tax refund initially. This is because the employer contribution is the only taxable component of the pay in the payslip. This does bring their take home pay up. This is desired behavior in that it injects more cash into the economy.


    
The tax will still be due on the earnings at the end of the year. Although depending on the amounts, and timing of the pandemic, revenue may spread that tax bill over a couple of years by modifying an individuals Standard Rate Cut Off Point and Tax Credits.



    
It's OK for the takehome pay to be higher than the Average Weekly Net Pay if this is due to refunds of USC and Income Tax. Just so long as employer pay and the subsidy combined do not exceed the AWNP. There should be no other benefits or earnings that tip the employee above the AWNP.

    
Where the employer might slighly overpay their contribution, then Revenue will reduce the value of the subsidy refund. So you want to get this right. If the employer wants to pay more than the AWNP, then the refund will reduce to 0. There are some good examples in the Revenue FAQ document here.


    
Mark Ogilvie
    Parolla 
    

    

    

     



    


     
     
    

    

    

    

    

    • 

  • 

    

    


    

    

    

#146

 

     

    

    

    

    


jos28




    
Registered Users Posts: 7,187 ✭✭✭jos28 
    

    

     
    

    

    



    

    


    

    


    

    

    

    
Thanks a million folks, I was on the right track but the tax refund thing threw me. There'll be fun and games at the end of year :eek: 
    

    

    

     



    


     
     
    

    

    

    

    

    • 

  • 

    

    


    

    

    

#147

 

     

    

    

    

    


PickYourName




    
Registered Users Posts: 412 ✭✭PickYourName 
    

    

     
    

    

    



    

    


    

    


    

    

    

    

    

    mogilvie wrote: »
    

    Most people on cumulative basis will get a tax refund initially. This is because the employer contribution is the only taxable component of the pay in the payslip. This does bring their take home pay up. This is desired behavior in that it injects more cash into the economy.
    

    

    
I know this is a how long is a piece pf string type of question, but can you give any indication how long the tax refunds are likely to continue? Presumably, because we're still relatively near the start of the year, they will end at some point: is it likely to be before the end of the 12-week length of the scheme?

    
The tax refunds in several cases take staff to over the €350 amount where below which they'd be better off being laid off.

    
Many thanks for your post by the way, which was very useful. 
    

    

    

     



    


     
     
    

    

    

    

    

    • 

  • 

    

    


    

    

    

#148

 

     

    

    

    

    


mogilvie




    
Registered Users Posts: 87 ✭✭mogilvie 
    

    

     
    

    

    



    

    


    

    


    

    

    

    

    

    PickYourName wrote: »
    

    I know this is a how long is a piece pf string type of question, but can you give any indication how long the tax refunds are likely to continue? Presumably, because we're still relatively near the start of the year, they will end at some point: is it likely to be before the end of the 12-week length of the scheme?
    

    
The tax refunds are just a byproduct of the cumulative tax calculation method. It's not a purposely instructed COVID response measure. It happens by default depending on how much tax the employee has already paid this year, and whether their credits exceed the tax due on their taxable income.

    

    PickYourName wrote: »
    

    The tax refunds in several cases take staff to over the €350 amount where below which they'd be better off being laid off.
    

    
The desire of the govt is that staff are retained on the Wage Subsidy Scheme, and that employers contribute with employer payments where possible.
    
The decision to retain staff on the TWSS should be made in conjunction with the employee, because like you state, some people are better off financially on the Pandemic Unemployment Payment. However, it is important to note that the refunds are the employees money being returned to them from Revenue via the employer. So don't include the IT/USC refund when weighing the financial difference between PUP or TWSS. 
    

    

    

     



    


     
     
    

    

    

    

    

    • 

  • 

    

    


    

    

    

#149

 

     

    

    

    

    


PickYourName




    
Registered Users Posts: 412 ✭✭PickYourName 
    

    

     
    

    

    



    

    


    

    


    

    

    

    

    

    mogilvie wrote: »
    

    The tax refunds are just a byproduct of the cumulative tax calculation method. It's not a purposely instructed COVID response measure. It happens by default depending on how much tax the employee has already paid this year, and whether their credits exceed the tax due on their taxable income.
    

    

    
I understand that; as you say, it's unrelated to the scheme, and indeed happens all the time in other circumstances.

    
I was hoping to get some idea of how long it might last, though, short of trying to work it out in detail for an example case. Any ideas?
    

    mogilvie wrote: »
    

    The desire of the govt is that staff are retained on the Wage Subsidy Scheme, and that employers contribute with employer payments where possible.
    
The decision to retain staff on the TWSS should be made in conjunction with the employee, because like you state, some people are better off financially on the Pandemic Unemployment Payment. However, it is important to note that the refunds are the employees money being returned to them from Revenue via the employer. So don't include the IT/USC refund when weighing the financial difference between PUP or TWSS.
    

    

    
That's a good point about the tax refund being just that - a refund that is payable in both cases. I will look into it and discuss with those affacted. 
    

    

    

     



    


     
     
    

    

    

    

    

    • 

  • 

    

    


    

    

    

#150

 

     

    

    

    

    


scwazrh




    
Registered Users Posts: 2,591 ✭✭✭scwazrh 
    

    

     
    

    

    



    

    


    

    


    

    

    

    
Aside from what’s in place to help the employees is there any assistance available to the business ? Our business has zero sales now but still has insurances , rents , vehicle leases , equip payments to try and cover. 
    

    

    

     



    


     
     
    

    

    

    

    

    • 

  • 

    

    Advertisement
    

    

    

    • 

  • 

    

    


    

    

    

#151

 

     

    

    

    

    


PickYourName




    
Registered Users Posts: 412 ✭✭PickYourName 
    

    

     
    

    

    



    

    


    

    


    

    

    

    

    

    scwazrh wrote: »
    

    Aside from what’s in place to help the employees is there any assistance available to the business ? Our business has zero sales now but still has insurances , rents , vehicle leases , equip payments to try and cover.
    

    

    
See: Government supports for COVID-19 impacted businesses

    
Some of these are new, announced earlier today. 
    

    

    

     



    


     
     
    

    

    

    

    

    • 
















Advertisement