Budgets and Budgeting

More stories

  • 125 Shares149 Views

    in Economy

    Treasury's Janet Yellen Is Being Tested by Debt Limit Fight

    by

    The Treasury secretary must wade into a standoff between Democrats and Republicans over raising the debt limit.WASHINGTON — When Janet L. Yellen was Federal Reserve chair in 2014, she faced a grilling from Republicans about whether the federal government had a plan if the nation’s borrowing limit was breached and measures to keep paying the country’s bills were exhausted.Ms. Yellen, appearing at a congressional hearing, outlined a dire scenario in which financial institutions might try to make payments that they could not cover, because the Treasury Department was out of money, leading to a cascade of bounced checks. She pushed back against the notion held by some Republicans that an economic meltdown could be averted, warning that there was no secret contingency plan.“To the best of my knowledge, there is no written-down plan,” Ms. Yellen said at the time, adding that it was beyond her remit at the Fed. “That’s a matter that is entirely up to the Treasury.”Fending off such a calamity is now squarely the responsibility of Ms. Yellen, who is confronting the biggest test she has faced in her eight months as President Biden’s Treasury secretary. Mr. Biden chose Ms. Yellen to help steer the economy out of the pandemic downturn. But in the face of congressional dysfunction, she has been thrust into a political role, trying to convince reticent Republican lawmakers that their refusal to lift the debt cap — which limits the government’s ability to borrow money — could lead to a financial collapse.It is not a comfortable spot for Ms. Yellen, an economist by training who is now trying to navigate the rough political waters that she tends to avoid by countering legislative gamesmanship with economic logic.Over the past month, Ms. Yellen has reached out to Democrats and top Republican leaders, including Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the minority leader, and Representative Kevin Brady of Texas, the top Republican on the Ways and Means Committee. She has used those calls to convey the economic risks, warning that the Treasury’s ability to stave off default is limited and that failure to lift or suspend the debt cap by sometime next month would be “catastrophic.”Ms. Yellen has reminded Republicans in the calls that they have been willing to join Democrats in lifting the debt ceiling in the past, and that raising the cap allows the U.S. to pay its existing bills and does not authorize new spending.Thus far, Republicans seem unmoved by Ms. Yellen’s overtures.In a call with Ms. Yellen last week, Mr. Brady said he told the secretary that he would be happy to work with her on a bipartisan framework focused on financial stability and curbing government spending but, barring that, Democrats should not expect Republicans to help them address the debt limit.“They are playing a dangerous political game with our economy and it’s absolutely unnecessary,” Mr. Brady said on Wednesday.Mr. McConnell conveyed a similar message during a telephone conversation with Ms. Yellen last week, his spokesman said. Mr. McConnell’s former chief of staff, Brian McGuire, said the Kentucky Republican would not be persuaded by pressure tactics and suggested that the Treasury secretary should direct her economic warnings at Democrats.“If I were advising Secretary Yellen, I’d suggest she be highly skeptical of the Democratic strategy on the debt limit,” said Mr. McGuire, who was Treasury’s assistant secretary for legislative affairs from 2019 to 2020.On Thursday, Ms. Yellen appeared at a news conference with Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California and Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the majority leader. Ms. Pelosi assailed Republicans for refusing to join Democrats in covering costs that both parties have incurred, including the $1.5 trillion tax cuts that Republicans passed during the Trump administration.“This is a credit-card bill that we owe,” Ms. Pelosi said.Democrats wanted to pair the federal debt limit increase with legislation to keep the government funded through early December, which would require Republican support in the Senate. With no such agreement in sight, the White House’s Office of Management and Budget on Thursday alerted federal agencies to review their shutdown plans, given funding is scheduled to lapse next week.Democrats do have another legislative option for raising the borrowing cap — they could pair it with the $3.5 trillion spending bill that they are aiming to pass along party lines using a fast-track process known as budget reconciliation. However, that would impose procedural hurdles they are trying to avoid, and Democrats have yet to agree on what the spending bill should include or how to pay for it. Party leaders claimed progress toward a deal on Thursday, saying they had agreed upon an array of possible ways to pay for it. But they offered no details about what programs would be included or what the total cost would eventually be, and what they called a “framework agreement” appeared to be modest.With the debt limit increase becoming so contentious, Ms. Pelosi signaled for the first time on Thursday that Democrats could ultimately strip it from the government funding bill because of Republican opposition.“We will keep our government open by Sept. 30, which is our date, and continue the conversation about the debt ceiling, but not for long,” she said.Ms. Yellen, who has kept a low public profile in the last month, did not make a statement at the news conference and took no questions.In private, she has tried to amp up the pressure. Ms. Yellen has personally warned the chief executives of the nation’s largest banks and financial institutions about the very real risk of default. Over the past several days she has spoken to Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan Chase, David M. Solomon of Goldman Sachs, Brian T. Moynihan of Bank of America and Laurence D. Fink of BlackRock, telling them about the disastrous impact a default would have, according to people familiar with the calls.The banking industry traditionally wields significant influence with Republicans; the biggest financial services lobbying groups wrote a letter to top lawmakers earlier this month urging them to take action.“Any default would negatively impact the general economy, disrupt the operations of our financial markets, undermine confidence, and raise funding costs in the future,” they wrote.Ms. Yellen has also sought the counsel of her predecessors, including Steven T. Mnuchin, Jacob J. Lew, Timothy F. Geithner and Henry M. Paulson. Mr. Paulson, who served under President George W. Bush and maintains strong ties with Republican lawmakers, has echoed Ms. Yellen’s concerns about the impact of a default in conversations with Mr. McConnell, according to a person familiar with the matter.Earlier this week, six former Treasury secretaries sent a letter to top lawmakers, warning that a default would blunt economic growth, roil financial markets and sap confidence in the United States.“Failing to address the debt limit, and allowing an unprecedented default, could cause serious economic and national security harm,” they wrote in the letter that was published by Ms. Yellen’s Treasury Department.Ms. Yellen’s task has been complicated by the fact that while she can readily convey the economic risks of default, the debt limit has become wrapped up in a larger partisan battle over Mr. Biden’s entire agenda, including the $3.5 trillion spending bill.Republicans, including Mr. McConnell, have insisted that if Democrats want to pass a big spending bill, then they should bear responsibility for raising the borrowing limit. Democrats call that position nonsense, noting that the debt limit needs to be raised because of spending that lawmakers, including Republicans, have already approved.“This seems to be some sort of high-stakes partisan poker on Capitol Hill, and that’s not what her background is,” said David Wessel, a senior economic fellow at the Brookings Institution who worked with Ms. Yellen at Brookings.While lawmakers squabble on Capitol Hill, Ms. Yellen’s team at Treasury has been trying to buy as much time as possible. After a two-year suspension of the statutory debt limit expired at the end of July, Ms. Yellen has been employing an array of fiscal accounting tools known as “extraordinary measures” to stave off a default.Uncertainty over the debt limit has yet to spook markets, but Ms. Yellen is receiving briefings multiple times a week by career staff on the state of the nation’s finances. They are keeping her informed about the use of extraordinary measures, such as suspending investments of the Exchange Stabilization Fund and suspending the issuing of new securities for the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund, and carefully reviewing Treasury’s cash balance. Because corporate tax receipts are coming in stronger than expected, the debt limit might not be breached until mid- to late October, Ms. Yellen has told lawmakers.A Treasury spokeswoman said that Ms. Yellen is not considering fallback plans such as prioritizing debt payments if Congress fails to act, explaining that the only way for the government to address the debt ceiling is for lawmakers to raise or suspend the limit. However, she has reviewed some of the ideas that were developed by Treasury during the debt limit standoff of 2011, when partisan brinkmanship brought the nation to the cusp of default.A new report from the Bipartisan Policy Center underscored the fact that if Congress fails to address the debt limit, Ms. Yellen will be left with no good options. If the true deadline is Oct. 15, for example, the Treasury Department would be approximately $265 billion short of paying all of its bills through mid-November. About 40 percent of the funds that are owed would go unpaid.“Realistically, on a day-to-day basis, fulfilling all payments for important and popular programs would quickly become impossible,” the report said, pointing to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, defense, and military active duty pay.Tony Fratto, a Treasury official during the Bush administration, lamented that Ms. Yellen is operating without any leverage. Democrats, he said, appeared to have miscalculated when they thought that Republicans would be too ashamed to block a debt limit vote after supporting a suspension of the borrowing cap when President Donald J. Trump was in office.“I think that was in the ‘hope’ category,” Mr. Fratto said. “This is Washington in 2021 — your hopes will be dashed.”Lananh Nguyen More

  • 138 Shares149 Views

    in Economy

    A Last-Minute Add to Stimulus Bill Could Restrict State Tax Cuts

    by

    #masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }Personal TaxesNew Pandemic ChangesHelp for Working FamiliesEstate Tax PlanningSmall-Business TipsWorking RemotelyAdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyA Last-Minute Add to Stimulus Bill Could Restrict State Tax CutsRepublicans say Congress is infringing on state sovereignty by trying to limit the ability of local governments to control their finances.President Biden signing the $1.9 trillion economic relief plan into law on Thursday at the White House. The restriction is intended to ensure that states use federal funds to keep their local economies humming.Credit…Doug Mills/The New York TimesMarch 12, 2021Updated 7:02 p.m. ETWASHINGTON — A last-minute change in the $1.9 trillion economic relief package that President Biden signed into law this week includes a provision that could temporarily prevent states that receive government aid from turning around and cutting taxes.The restriction, which was added by Senate Democrats, is intended to ensure that states use federal funds to keep their local economies humming and avoid drastic budget cuts and not simply use the money to subsidize tax cuts. But the provision is causing alarm among some local officials, primarily Republicans, who see the move as federal overreach and fear conditions attached to the money will impede upon their ability to manage their budgets as they see fit.Officials are scrambling to understand what strings are attached to the $220 billion that is expected to be parceled out among states, territories and tribes and are already pressing the Treasury Department for guidance about the restrictions they will face if they take federal money.Under the new law, $25 billion will be divided equally among states, while $169 billion will be allocated based on a state’s unemployment rate. States can use the money for pandemic-related costs, offsetting lost revenues to provide essential government services, and for water, sewer and broadband infrastructure projects.But they are prohibited from depositing the money into pension funds — a key worry of Republicans in Congress — and cannot use funds to cut taxes by “legislation, regulation or administration” through 2024.Democrats slipped the new language into the legislation last week after several senators from the party’s moderate wing expressed concern that some states would seize on the opportunity to use emergency relief money to subsidize tax cuts. They worked with Senator Chuck Schumer, the majority leader, on language for the amendment, according to a Democratic Senate aide.Senator Joe Manchin III, Democrat of West Virginia, explained why he pushed for the language in a briefing this week, arguing that states should not be cutting taxes at a time when they need more money to combat the virus. He urged states to postpone their plans to cut taxes.“How in the world would you cut your revenue during a pandemic and still need dollars?” Mr. Manchin said.Senator Ron Wyden, Democrat of Oregon, said the funds were meant “to keep teachers and firefighters on the job and prevent the gutting of state and local services that we saw during the Great Recession.”“It’s important that there are guardrails to prevent these funds from being used to cut taxes for those at the top,” he added.But some Republican-led states are pointing to the apparent prohibition as a violation of their sovereignty and calling for that part of the law to be repealed. They see the requirement that states refrain from cutting taxes as an unusual intervention by the federal government in state tax policy.“It is an intrusion into what would traditionally be a state prerogative of how we balance our budget,” said Ben Watkins, the director of the Florida Division of Bond Finance. “If they want to give us this money to deal with Covid, then they should just give it to us with no strings attached.”Funding for state and local governments was one of the most contentious issues during stimulus talks, with Republicans saying Democrat-led states were being rewarded for mismanaging their finances and labeling the aid as a “blue-state bailout.”Those concerns were amplified in the latest legislation, which allocates money to a state based on a formula that considers its unemployment rate rather than its population. Conservative-leaning states, many of which had less onerous coronavirus restrictions and did not shut down as much business activity, claim they are essentially being penalized for prioritizing their economies during the pandemic.But early analyses of the bill show that both conservative-leaning and liberal-leaning states will receive big chunks of cash. California, Florida, New York and Texas will each get more than $10 billion in aid, according to a Tax Foundation tally.Still, the tax language has angered Republicans — none of whom voted for the rescue package — and on Thursday, Senator Mike Braun, Republican of Indiana, introduced legislation to reverse it.“Democrats are trying to ban states from cutting taxes with a sneaky amendment to the $1.9 trillion so-called Covid relief package,” Mr. Braun said. “Not only did this blue-state bailout bill penalize states for reopening by calculating state funds based on unemployment, now they are trying to use it as a back door to ban states from cutting taxes.”The restrictions have created a conundrum for states because, while many cities are facing budget crunches, state finances have turned out to be relatively healthy.A New York Times analysis this month found that, on balance, state revenues were generally flat or down slightly last year compared with 2019 as expanded unemployment benefits allowed consumer spending and tax revenues to keep flowing.“Idaho would potentially subsidize poorly managed states simply because we are using our record budget surplus to pursue historic tax relief for our citizens,” Gov. Brad Little of Idaho said this week. “We achieved our record budget surplus after years of responsible, conservative governing and quick action during the pandemic, and our surplus should be returned to Idahoans as I proposed.”Gov. Jim Justice, a Republican of West Virginia, criticized Mr. Manchin in an interview this week with CNN..css-yoay6m{margin:0 auto 5px;font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.125rem;line-height:1.3125rem;color:#121212;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-yoay6m{font-size:1.25rem;line-height:1.4375rem;}}.css-1dg6kl4{margin-top:5px;margin-bottom:15px;}.css-k59gj9{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-flex-direction:column;-ms-flex-direction:column;flex-direction:column;width:100%;}.css-1e2usoh{font-family:inherit;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-box-pack:justify;-webkit-justify-content:space-between;-ms-flex-pack:justify;justify-content:space-between;border-top:1px solid #ccc;padding:10px 0px 10px 0px;background-color:#fff;}.css-1jz6h6z{font-family:inherit;font-weight:bold;font-size:1rem;line-height:1.5rem;text-align:left;}.css-1t412wb{box-sizing:border-box;margin:8px 15px 0px 15px;cursor:pointer;}.css-hhzar2{-webkit-transition:-webkit-transform ease 0.5s;-webkit-transition:transform ease 0.5s;transition:transform ease 0.5s;}.css-t54hv4{-webkit-transform:rotate(180deg);-ms-transform:rotate(180deg);transform:rotate(180deg);}.css-1r2j9qz{-webkit-transform:rotate(0deg);-ms-transform:rotate(0deg);transform:rotate(0deg);}.css-e1ipqs{font-size:1rem;line-height:1.5rem;padding:0px 30px 0px 0px;}.css-e1ipqs a{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;}.css-e1ipqs a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}.css-1o76pdf{visibility:show;height:100%;padding-bottom:20px;}.css-1sw9s96{visibility:hidden;height:0px;}#masthead-bar-one{display:none;}#masthead-bar-one{display:none;}.css-1cz6wm{background-color:white;border:1px solid #e2e2e2;width:calc(100% – 40px);max-width:600px;margin:1.5rem auto 1.9rem;padding:15px;box-sizing:border-box;font-family:’nyt-franklin’,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;text-align:left;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-1cz6wm{padding:20px;width:100%;}}.css-1cz6wm:focus{outline:1px solid #e2e2e2;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-1cz6wm{border:none;padding:20px 0 0;border-top:1px solid #121212;}How Has the Pandemic Changed Your Taxes?Nope. The so-called economic impact payments are not treated as income. In fact, they’re technically an advance on a tax credit, known as the Recovery Rebate Credit. The payments could indirectly affect what you pay in state income taxes in a handful of states, where federal tax is deductible against state taxable income, as our colleague Ann Carrns wrote. Read more. Mostly.  Unemployment insurance is generally subject to federal as well as state income tax, though there are exceptions (Nine states don’t impose their own income taxes, and another six exempt unemployment payments from taxation, according to the Tax Foundation). But you won’t owe so-called payroll taxes, which pay for Social Security and Medicare. The new relief bill will make the first $10,200 of benefits tax-free if your income is less than $150,000. This applies to 2020 only. (If you’ve already filed your taxes, watch for I.R.S. guidance.) Unlike paychecks from an employer, taxes for unemployment aren’t automatically withheld. Recipients must opt in — and even when they do, federal taxes are withheld only at a flat rate of 10 percent of benefits. While the new tax break will provide a cushion, some people could still owe the I.R.S. or certain states money. Read more. Probably not, unless you’re self-employed, an independent contractor or a gig worker. The tax law overhaul of late 2019 eliminated the home office deduction for employees from 2018 through 2025. “Employees who receive a paycheck or a W-2 exclusively from an employer are not eligible for the deduction, even if they are currently working from home,” the I.R.S. said. Read more. Self-employed people can take paid caregiving leave if their child’s school is closed or their usual child care provider is unavailable because of the outbreak. This works similarly to the smaller sick leave credit — 67 percent of average daily earnings (for either 2020 or 2019), up to $200 a day. But the caregiving leave can be taken for 50 days. Read more. Yes. This year, you can deduct up to $300 for charitable contributions, even if you use the standard deduction. Previously, only people who itemized could claim these deductions. Donations must be made in cash (for these purposes, this includes check, credit card or debit card), and can’t include securities, household items or other property. For 2021, the deduction limit will double to $600 for joint filers. Rules for itemizers became more generous as well. The limit on charitable donations has been suspended, so individuals can contribute up to 100 percent of their adjusted gross income, up from 60 percent. But these donations must be made to public charities in cash; the old rules apply to contributions made to donor-advised funds, for example. Both provisions are available through 2021. Read more. “He’s hurting his own people in the state of West Virginia,” Mr. Justice said. “I do not condone it.”The provision is also raising questions about what actually constitutes a tax cut and whether the law could prevent states from other types of tax relief. The language of the legislation appears to offer states little wiggle room.Jared Walczak, the vice president for state projects at the Tax Foundation’s Center for State Tax Policy, said that the fine print in the law raised many complicated questions for states that, in some cases, would be awarded money for things that they either do not need or that they already had plans to pay for out of their budgets. It is not clear, for example, if a state could use aid money for an expense related to the coronavirus that it was already planning to pay for and then offer tax credits with the additional surplus.“If the federal government intends to forbid any sort of revenue negative tax policy, no matter what its size, because a state received some funding, that would be a radical federal entanglement in state fiscal policy that may go beyond what was intended,” Mr. Walczak said.Such questions will largely hinge on how Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen interprets the legislation and what guidance the Treasury Department gives to states.A department official noted that the law says that states and territories that receive the aid cannot use the funds to offset a reduction in net tax revenue as a result of tax cuts because the money is intended to be used to support the public health response and avoid layoffs and cuts to public services. More guidance on the matter is coming, the official said.The lack of clarity also raises the risk that states use the money for projects or programs that do not actually qualify under the law and then are forced to repay the federal government. States are required to submit regular reports to the Treasury Department accounting for how the funds are being spent and to show any other changes that they have made to their tax codes. The department will also be setting up a system of monitoring how the funds are being used.Emily Swenson Brock, the director of the Federal Liaison Center at the Government Finance Officers Association, said that the eligible uses of the federal aid appeared to be relatively limited for the states and that some might actually find it challenging to deploy the money in a useful way.“It’s complicated here for the states,” Ms. Brock said, adding that her organization had asked the Treasury Department for an explanation. “Congress is reaching in and telling these states how they can and can’t use that money.”Before they receive federal funds, states will have to submit a certification promising to use the money according to the law. They could also decline funding or, if they are set on tax cuts, they could offset them with other sources of revenue that do not include the federal funds.For many states, the federal money is welcome even if they do not necessarily need it for public health purposes.Melissa Hortman, the speaker of the Minnesota House of Representatives, said that she was hopeful that the federal government gives states the flexibility to use the money to make up for lost revenue from the virus. She suggested that the state should look to make new investments in education and transportation. Minnesota is expected to have a budget surplus for the next two years and will receive more than $2 billion in aid.“It’s not too much money,” said Ms. Hortman, a Democrat. “Our country has just lived through a once-in-a-hundred-year pandemic.”AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

  • 138 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Gov. Phil Murphy Unveils N.J. Budget Plan With No New Taxes

    by

    #masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }The Coronavirus OutbreakliveLatest UpdatesMaps and CasesRisk Near YouVaccine RolloutNew Variants TrackerAdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyHow New Jersey Averted a Pandemic Financial CalamityA $44.8 billion spending plan unveiled Tuesday by Gov. Phil Murphy calls for no new taxes and fully funds the state pension program for the first time since 1996.Gov. Philip D. Murphy of New Jersey released a $44.8 billion budget on Tuesday that shows better-than-expected revenue projections.Credit…Pool photo by Anne-Marie CarusoFeb. 23, 2021Updated 3:07 p.m. ETIt has been five months since New Jersey officials issued warnings about a coronavirus-related financial calamity. The dire outlook contributed to lawmakers’ decisions to increase taxes on income over $1 million and to become one of the first states to borrow billions to cover operating costs.But the doomsday forecast has since brightened considerably, officials said, enabling the Democratic governor, Philip D. Murphy, to unveil a $44.8 billion spending plan on Tuesday that calls for no new taxes, few cuts and tackles head-on a chronic problem — the state’s underfunded pension program — for the first time in 25 years.The governor also said there would be no increase in New Jersey Transit fares.“The news is less bad,” the state’s treasurer, Elizabeth Maher Muoio, said. “I wouldn’t say it’s good, but it’s less bad.”The governor’s election-year financial blueprint relies on better-than-expected revenue from retail sales and high-earners, who have lost fewer jobs during the pandemic than low-income workers and are reaping the benefits of a prolonged Wall Street rally.The $38 billion that New Jersey and its residents have received in federal stimulus funding, a short-term extension of a corporate tax and a $504 million windfall from the so-called millionaire’s tax also helped, Ms. Muoio said.The release of New Jersey’s proposed 2022 fiscal year budget comes as Congress continues to debate President Biden’s $1.9 trillion virus relief package. The proposed package includes considerable funds for states and municipalities as well as grant and loan programs for small businesses.Other states have seen similarly strong signs of an economic rebound even as cases of the virus have spiked nationwide over the last several months and the nation’s death toll surpassed 500,000 on Monday.Earlier this month, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office concluded that large sectors of the economy were adapting to the pandemic better than originally expected and that December’s economic aid package had helped.Mr. Murphy, who is running for re-election in November, said the spending plan was designed to not only enable the state to scrape through the pandemic, but to help it emerge stronger.“This is the time for us to lean into the policies that can fix our decades-old — or in some cases centuries-old — inequities,” the governor said Tuesday in a budget address, which he delivered virtually.A key pillar of the budget is a proposal to fully fund the state’s public sector pension obligations for the first time since 1996.The state has not set aside the full amount of its pension obligation for 25 years, leading $4 billion in extra debt to accrue over time, Ms. Muoio said. Under a deal brokered with the Legislature, Mr. Murphy had been on track to fully fund the state’s share by the 2023 fiscal year. But the spending plan released on Tuesday sets aside $6.4 billion for the pension system, accelerating full funding by a year.“New Jersey is done kicking problems down the road,” the governor said. “We are solving them.”Under the plan, the state’s surplus, which proved to be a vital resource during the first wave of the pandemic, would not grow, officials said, but would remain at about the same level it was at the end of 2020.The Coronavirus Outbreak More

  • 138 Shares179 Views

    in Economy

    States Try to Rescue Small Businesses as U.S. Aid Is Snarled

    by

    #masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }The Coronavirus OutbreakliveLatest UpdatesMaps and CasesBritain’s Vaccine RolloutVaccine TrackerFAQ: Vaccines and MoreAdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyStates Try to Rescue Small Businesses as U.S. Aid Is SnarledState governments are offering loans, grants and tax rebates, but budget constraints limit their impact.Kirk Meurer’s business installing office furniture in the Cleveland area dried up practically overnight when the pandemic began.Credit…Da’Shaunae Marisa for The New York TimesDec. 10, 2020, 5:00 a.m. ETWith the economic recovery faltering and federal aid stalled in Washington, state governments are stepping in to try to help small businesses survive the pandemic winter.The Colorado legislature held a special session last week to pass an economic aid package. Ohio is offering a new round of grants to restaurants, bars and other businesses affected by the pandemic. And in California, a new fund will use state money to backstop what could ultimately be hundreds of millions of dollars in private loans. Other states, led by both Republicans and Democrats, have announced or are considering similar measures.But there is a limit to what states can do. The pandemic has ravaged budgets, driving up costs and eroding tax revenues. And unlike the federal government, most states cannot run budget deficits.“We have done what we can do to pump money into small businesses so that people can continue to work,” said Gov. Mike DeWine of Ohio, a Republican. “From the jobs point of view and the economy point of view and the workers’ point of view and small businesses, we’ve got to get that help from the federal government. That’s the only place we can get it.”After months of false starts and on-again-off-again negotiations, there are signs of progress in Washington. Top Democrats last week embraced a $908 billion plan proposed by a bipartisan group of moderate senators. That plan would include nearly $300 billion in aid for small businesses, as well as smaller sums for unemployed workers, state and local governments and other groups. On Tuesday, the White House proposed its own $916 billion plan, which would include more than $400 billion for small businesses.But Democrats and Republicans still disagree on important issues, including aid for state and local governments and liability protection for businesses. Even if the two sides do reach a deal, it could be weeks before money starts flowing.Many small businesses say they can’t wait that long. A survey from the National Federation of Independent Business on Tuesday showed optimism falling and uncertainty rising as the nationwide surge in coronavirus cases leads governments to reimpose restrictions and consumers to pare their spending. Separate data from the Census Bureau shows an increasing share of small businesses cutting jobs, and other surveys have shown large numbers of businesses in danger of failing.If that happens, it could be a disaster for both state economies and state budgets. Local businesses are major sources of tax revenue — both directly and through their employees — and major drivers of economic activity. If they fail in large numbers, it will slow the economic recovery once the pandemic is over.“It becomes almost a death spiral if you can’t keep these businesses running,” said Tim Goodrich, executive director of state government relations for the National Federation of Independent Business.Kirk Meurer was on track to have one of his best years ever in his business installing office furniture in the Cleveland area. But when companies began sending their workers home last spring, his business dried up practically overnight.“Even though we didn’t have to shut down like the restaurants and bars and the travel industries, it didn’t matter,” he said. “The business wasn’t there.”After some delays, Mr. Meurer got money through the federal Paycheck Protection Program, which he thought would be enough to sustain him until business rebounded. But as the pandemic dragged on and offices pushed back their reopening dates to the summer, then to the fall, then into next year, it became clear the company would need more help to survive.“It’s amazing how fast you can burn through money when you’ve got nothing coming in and all the overhead to maintain,” Mr. Meurer said.In recent weeks, his company, Modular Systems Technicians, received a $10,000 grant from a new state fund to help small businesses. He also got money under a program that refunded $8 billion from the state workers’ compensation fund.“It helped,” Mr. Meurer he said. “It’s not nearly enough, but they did what they could.”The money for the Ohio grant program, and from some other recent state aid efforts, actually came from the federal government. As part of the $2.2 trillion CARES Act last spring, Congress created a $150 billion fund that states could tap in responding to the virus. They were given wide latitude in using the money — as long as they did so before the end of the year.As the pandemic has flared anew, however, it has become clear that the economic crisis will last well into next year, by which point the federal money will be gone and state budgets will be unable to pick up the slack. So states are racing to use what’s left of the CARES Act money to shore up their economies and build a buffer for the winter.“I think they’re terrified,” said Joseph Parilla, a fellow at the Brookings Institution who has studied state responses to the pandemic. “If they’re paying attention, they should be.”Eden Stein isn’t sure how much longer her San Francisco gallery and boutique can continue.Credit…Christie Hemm Klok for The New York TimesGov. Jared Polis of Colorado, a Democrat, recalled the legislature for a special session late last month to pass several relief measures, including a $57 million grant program for small businesses. In an interview, he cited Colorado’s slow recovery from the last recession a decade ago, when the failure to contain the foreclosure crisis left lasting scars on the state’s economy. Without further assistance — including federal aid — he fears a wave of business failures that would set off an equally damaging chain reaction, he said.“If we don’t help them get through this, will it ever come back?” Mr. Polis asked. “Sure, but it means years of boarded-up stores and restaurants on Main Streets across America if Democrats and Republicans can’t come together now to act.”Some states are trying creative ways to stretch resources. California last month established a “rebuilding fund,” which will use a comparatively small amount of public money to provide loan guarantees to encourage for-profit and nonprofit lenders to make low-interest loans to small businesses.The California program is aimed at the smallest businesses — most with fewer than 10 employees — and those in low-income and minority neighborhoods. Many were left out of the federal aid programs like the Paycheck Protection Program, which primarily helped somewhat larger employers.“P.P.P. never really served these kinds of businesses very well,” said Laura D. Tyson, an economist at the University of California, Berkeley, who helped design California’s program. “More and more of them are boarding up and closing down, and it’s a real hit to the community, a real hit to the quality of life in these communities.”Ms. Tyson said the loans should help businesses make investments to adapt to life during the pandemic — like investing in online ordering technology or outdoor dining — or to position themselves for the post-pandemic world. But the state can’t afford to cover day-to-day expenses the way the federal government did in the spring.Secession Art & Design, a gallery and boutique in San Francisco, has survived the first nine months of the pandemic through a combination of loans, donations from customers and an aggressive shift in strategy toward online sales, which had been only a small part of the business.But Eden Stein, who owns the 13-year-old business, said she wasn’t sure how long that could continue. California is reimposing restrictions on retail businesses, which could hurt sales during what she calls a make-or-break holiday season. Her lease is up in the spring, and she hasn’t decided whether to renew it.Ms. Stein is thinking of applying for a rebuilding loan from the state but is nervous about taking on more debt. She is applying for a grant under a separate state program, but that won’t be enough to sustain the business. She doesn’t know what the local economy will look like after the pandemic, she said, but it is essential for small businesses to have enough confidence to renew leases and plan for the long term.“I’m not concerned about how hard I can work, how I can connect with my customers or my community,” Ms. Stein said. “I am concerned that I will eventually run out of money.”AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

  • 138 Shares149 Views

    in Economy

    In Blue States and Red, Pandemic Upends Public Services and Jobs

    by

    #masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }The Coronavirus OutbreakliveLatest UpdatesMaps and CasesC.D.C. Shortens Quarantine PeriodsVaccine TrackerFAQAdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyIn Blue States and Red, Pandemic Upends Public Services and JobsAs a standoff over federal aid persists, state and local governments are making deep budget cuts. “Everything’s going to slow down,” one official said.Republican-led states that largely depend on energy-related taxes, like Wyoming, have been walloped by the sharp decline in oil prices.Credit…Stephen Speranza for The New York TimesBy More