thefiscaltimes--2020-06-15--Kudlow Says $600 Unemployment Benefit Boost Will End in July

Larry Kudlow , director of President Trump ’ s National Economic Council , said on Sunday that the $ 600 in extra weekly unemployment benefits provided by the federal government as part of coronavirus response efforts are creating a “ disincentive ” for some workers to return to their jobs and will end in late July .
`` Unemployment benefits will not stop in August , '' Kudlow said , clarifying that regular state benefits will continue .
`` The $ 600 plus up , that 's above the state unemployment benefits that they will continue to receive , is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mean we 're paying people not to work .
... That might have worked for the first couple of months .
It will end in late July.
” Kudlow added that Trump and the administration are “ looking at a reform measure that will still provide some kind of bonus for returning to work , but it will not be as large and it will create an incentive to work . ''
Lawmakers are debating whether to continue the $ 600 payments , which Democrats want to extend through January 2021 .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if the payments were extended for six months , about five out of six workers on unemployment would earn more in jobless benefits than their potential earnings through work .
The likely result , CBO said , would be that employment levels would be lower over the second half of this year and in 2021 .
At the same time , CBO said that extending the benefits would help the economy by increasing demand for goods and services .
“ The additional $ 600 per week in unemployment benefits under current law allows @ @ @ @ @ @ @ services that they might otherwise be unable to afford and to save for future contingencies , ” the budget scorekeeper said .
The Labor Department said earlier this month that 21 million Americans were unemployed in May .

Larry Kudlow, director of President Trump’s National Economic Council, said on Sunday that the $600 in extra weekly unemployment benefits provided by the federal government as part of coronavirus response efforts are creating a “disincentive” for some workers to return to their jobs and will end in late July.
"Unemployment benefits will not stop in August," Kudlow said, clarifying that regular state benefits will continue. "The $600 plus up, that's above the state unemployment benefits that they will continue to receive, is in effect a disincentive, or I mean we're paying people not to work. ... That might have worked for the first couple of months. It will end in late July.”
Kudlow added that Trump and the administration are “looking at a reform measure that will still provide some kind of bonus for returning to work, but it will not be as large and it will create an incentive to work."
Lawmakers are debating whether to continue the $600 payments, which Democrats want to extend through January 2021.
The Congressional Budget Office projected this month that if the payments were extended for six months, about five out of six workers on unemployment would earn more in jobless benefits than their potential earnings through work. The likely result, CBO said, would be that employment levels would be lower over the second half of this year and in 2021. At the same time, CBO said that extending the benefits would help the economy by increasing demand for goods and services. “The additional $600 per week in unemployment benefits under current law allows people to continue to consume goods and services that they might otherwise be unable to afford and to save for future contingencies,” the budget scorekeeper said.
The Labor Department said earlier this month that 21 million Americans were unemployed in May.


thefiscaltimes--2020-06-15--The Fed Fires Up Its $600 Billion Main Street Lending Program

The Federal Reserve Bank has finally opened its highly anticipated lending program for small and medium-sized businesses .
Using $ 75 billion provided by Congress through the Coronavirus Aid , Relief , and Economic Security ( CARES ) Act in March , the Fed announced in April that it would lend up to $ 600 billion through the Main Street Lending Program ( MSLP ) to provide relief to businesses struggling during the coronavirus crisis .
On Monday , the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston opened for banks to register as lenders within the program .
“ The Main Street @ @ @ @ @ @ @ flow to small and medium-sized businesses that were in sound financial condition prior to the COVID-19 pandemic but now face cash flow interruptions , ” the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston said in a statement .
Eligible businesses can have as many as 15,000 employees or up to $ 5 billion in annual revenues .
Loans will range from $ 250,000 to $ 300 million , with five-year terms and floating interest rates .
No interest is due in the first year , and no principal is due for two years .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the loans , with the goal of reducing risk to enable lenders to make more loans .

The Federal Reserve Bank has finally opened its highly anticipated lending program for small and medium-sized businesses.
Using $75 billion provided by Congress through the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act in March, the Fed announced in April that it would lend up to $600 billion through the Main Street Lending Program (MSLP) to provide relief to businesses struggling during the coronavirus crisis. On Monday, the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston opened for banks to register as lenders within the program.
“The Main Street Lending Program is designed to help credit flow to small and medium-sized businesses that were in sound financial condition prior to the COVID-19 pandemic but now face cash flow interruptions,” the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston said in a statement.
Eligible businesses can have as many as 15,000 employees or up to $5 billion in annual revenues. Loans will range from $250,000 to $300 million, with five-year terms and floating interest rates. No interest is due in the first year, and no principal is due for two years.
The Federal Reserve will purchase 95% of the loans, with the goal of reducing risk to enable lenders to make more loans.


thefiscaltimes--2020-06-16--Bernanke, Yellen and More Than 140 Top Economists Call for Massive New Coronavirus Relief Bill

A group of more than 140 top economists , including former Federal Reserve chairs Ben Bernanke and Janet Yellen as well as Nobel laureates and former chairs of the Council of Economic Advisers , is calling on Congress to pass another aggressive coronavirus relief package .
“ Congress must pass another economic recovery package before most of the support in the CARES Act expires this summer , ” the economists write in a letter to congressional leaders published Tuesday by the Washington Center for Equitable Growth , a think-tank focused on inequality .
“ Given current projections of economic need @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at a minimum , continued support for the unemployed , new assistance to states and localities , investments in programs that preserve the employer-employee relationship , and additional aid to stabilize aggregate demand .
While the signers of this letter have different views on the optimal size and composition of the package , we all agree that an adequate response must be large , commensurate with the nearly $ 16 trillion nominal output gap our economy faces over the next decade , according to CBO estimates.
” Besides Bernanke and Yellen , other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Goolsbee and Christina Romer , who led the Council of Economic Advisers under President Obama ; Martin Neil Baily , who headed the council under President Clinton ; Alan Blinder and Donald Kohn , who were vice chairs of the Fed ; and economists Heather Boushey , J. Bradford DeLong , Emmanuel Saez , Robert Solow and Cecilia Rouse .
The economists warn that , absent further congressional action , “ state and local governments face potentially disastrous budget shortfalls ” and the unemployment rate is projected to stay in double-digit territory through @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , they say , lawmakers should try to learn from the response to the 2008-2009 recession : “ Insufficiently bold congressional policy responses to the Great Recession unnecessarily prolonged suffering and stunted economic growth .
Congress should not make this mistake again .
… Congress should address this risk , and the already occurring economic damage , by passing , as soon as possible , a multifaceted relief bill of a magnitude commensurate with the challenges our economy faces.
” Conservatives say it ’ s time to stop spending on coronavirus relief : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ same day that a group of 20 conservative leaders , some with close ties to the White House , urged President Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to stop deficit spending on coronavirus relief .
“ Government spending – and policies such as paying millions of workers more money to stay unemployed than to go back to work , and paying states more money to enable them to stay shut down – is inhibiting the fast recovery we want in jobs and incomes , not stimulating it , ” the conservatives wrote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , runaway government spending is the new virus afflicting out [ sic ] economy.
” The conservatives , including economists Stephen Moore and Arthur Laffer , anti-tax activist Grover Norquist and Tea Party Patriots co-founder Jenny Beth Martin , write that a repeal of the payroll tax would be “ the best way to supercharge the economy.
” President Trump has pushed for a payroll tax holiday , though the idea has met with resistance from lawmakers in both parties .
Congress and the administration have provided $ 4 trillion in emergency coronavirus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democrats say more is needed , and both Trump and McConnell have indicated that another round of pandemic legislation is likely , though lawmakers are still debating the proper size and scope of an additional package .
White House trade adviser Peter Navarro told cable news networks in recent days that Trump wants the next bill to be “ at least $ 2 trillion.
” Formal negotiations on the next bill are expected to begin next month .

A group of more than 140 top economists, including former Federal Reserve chairs Ben Bernanke and Janet Yellen as well as Nobel laureates and former chairs of the Council of Economic Advisers, is calling on Congress to pass another aggressive coronavirus relief package.
“Congress must pass another economic recovery package before most of the support in the CARES Act expires this summer,” the economists write in a letter to congressional leaders published Tuesday by the Washington Center for Equitable Growth, a think-tank focused on inequality.
“Given current projections of economic need, this new bill should provide, at a minimum, continued support for the unemployed, new assistance to states and localities, investments in programs that preserve the employer-employee relationship, and additional aid to stabilize aggregate demand. While the signers of this letter have different views on the optimal size and composition of the package, we all agree that an adequate response must be large, commensurate with the nearly $16 trillion nominal output gap our economy faces over the next decade, according to CBO estimates.”
Besides Bernanke and Yellen, other notable signatories include Jason Furman, Austan Goolsbee and Christina Romer, who led the Council of Economic Advisers under President Obama; Martin Neil Baily, who headed the council under President Clinton; Alan Blinder and Donald Kohn, who were vice chairs of the Fed; and economists Heather Boushey, J. Bradford DeLong, Emmanuel Saez, Robert Solow and Cecilia Rouse.
The economists warn that, absent further congressional action, “state and local governments face potentially disastrous budget shortfalls” and the unemployment rate is projected to stay in double-digit territory through the end of the year. And, they say, lawmakers should try to learn from the response to the 2008-2009 recession:
“Insufficiently bold congressional policy responses to the Great Recession unnecessarily prolonged suffering and stunted economic growth. Congress should not make this mistake again. … Congress should address this risk, and the already occurring economic damage, by passing, as soon as possible, a multifaceted relief bill of a magnitude commensurate with the challenges our economy faces.”
Conservatives say it’s time to stop spending on coronavirus relief: The economists’ statement comes on the same day that a group of 20 conservative leaders, some with close ties to the White House, urged President Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to stop deficit spending on coronavirus relief.
“Government spending – and policies such as paying millions of workers more money to stay unemployed than to go back to work, and paying states more money to enable them to stay shut down – is inhibiting the fast recovery we want in jobs and incomes, not stimulating it,” the conservatives wrote in a letter. “In short, runaway government spending is the new virus afflicting out [sic] economy.”
The conservatives, including economists Stephen Moore and Arthur Laffer, anti-tax activist Grover Norquist and Tea Party Patriots co-founder Jenny Beth Martin, write that a repeal of the payroll tax would be “the best way to supercharge the economy.” President Trump has pushed for a payroll tax holiday, though the idea has met with resistance from lawmakers in both parties.
Congress and the administration have provided $4 trillion in emergency coronavirus relief so far. Many economists and Democrats say more is needed, and both Trump and McConnell have indicated that another round of pandemic legislation is likely, though lawmakers are still debating the proper size and scope of an additional package. White House trade adviser Peter Navarro told cable news networks in recent days that Trump wants the next bill to be “at least $2 trillion.” Formal negotiations on the next bill are expected to begin next month.


thefiscaltimes--2020-06-16--Coronavirus Spending Will Add $2.4 Trillion to Deficit: CBO

The four pieces of legislation Congress passed in March and April to provide relief and stimulus during the coronavirus pandemic @ @ @ @ @ trillion to the deficit , the Congressional Budget Office said Tuesday .
The CARES Act @ @ @ @ @ relief checks for many adults , enhanced unemployment benefits of $ 600 a week and @ @ @ @ @ small businesses , among other things – accounts for most of the deficit spending , @ @ @ @ @ The recent extension of the small business loan program will add another $ 483 billion @ @ @ @ @ earlier bills , which focused on assisting health care providers and funding the medical response @ @ @ @ @ increase the deficit by about $ 200 billion .

The four pieces of legislation Congress passed in March and April to provide relief and stimulus during the coronavirus pandemic will add about $2.4 trillion to the deficit, the Congressional Budget Office said Tuesday.
The CARES Act – which provided $1,200 relief checks for many adults, enhanced unemployment benefits of $600 a week and billions in forgivable loans for small businesses, among other things – accounts for most of the deficit spending, roughly $1.7 trillion. The recent extension of the small business loan program will add another $483 billion, CBO said.
Two earlier bills, which focused on assisting health care providers and funding the medical response and further research, will increase the deficit by about $200 billion.


thefiscaltimes--2020-06-16--The $2,315 Coronavirus Test

The $2,315 Coronavirus Test

In April , an otherwise ordinary medical test facility outside of Dallas , Texas , was charging unusually high prices for coronavirus tests , with some patients receiving bills of $ 2,315 for a single procedure .
Many major labs charge about $ 100 for the same analysis .
While the lab has since said that the pricing — which was applied to more than 100 tests , with 23 of those being paid in full — was the result of “ human error ” and dropped its standard fee to a still-high $ 500 , Sarah Kliff of The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ high charges are not unusual in the U.S. due to one simple factor : the lack of government regulation in health care pricing .
That lack of regulation produces two outcomes that crop up again and again in the health care system , Kliff says .
The first is that prices tend to be much higher for all kinds of procedures in the U.S. than in other wealthy countries .
The second is that there is massive variation in prices between providers .
( Kliff cites one study that found prices in California @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1,529 to $ 182,955 . )
Currently , the data show considerable variation in prices for coronavirus tests — though it ’ s hard to be sure how much is actually being paid , since much of the payment information is private .
What is clear is that all of the tests are basically the same , even though some individuals and insurers are paying much more than others .
“ There is little evidence that higher prices correlate with better care , ” Kliff says .
“ What ’ s different about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ve set higher prices for their services .
”

In April, an otherwise ordinary medical test facility outside of Dallas, Texas, was charging unusually high prices for coronavirus tests, with some patients receiving bills of $2,315 for a single procedure. Many major labs charge about $100 for the same analysis.
While the lab has since said that the pricing — which was applied to more than 100 tests, with 23 of those being paid in full — was the result of “human error” and dropped its standard fee to a still-high $500, Sarah Kliff of The New York Times says that such shockingly high charges are not unusual in the U.S. due to one simple factor: the lack of government regulation in health care pricing.
That lack of regulation produces two outcomes that crop up again and again in the health care system, Kliff says. The first is that prices tend to be much higher for all kinds of procedures in the U.S. than in other wealthy countries. The second is that there is massive variation in prices between providers. (Kliff cites one study that found prices in California for a basic appendectomy ranging from $1,529 to $182,955.)
Currently, the data show considerable variation in prices for coronavirus tests — though it’s hard to be sure how much is actually being paid, since much of the payment information is private. What is clear is that all of the tests are basically the same, even though some individuals and insurers are paying much more than others. “There is little evidence that higher prices correlate with better care,” Kliff says. “What’s different about the more expensive providers is that they’ve set higher prices for their services.”


thefiscaltimes--2020-06-18--Poll of the Day: Americans Fear Drug Companies Will Use Covid to Raise Prices

Nearly 90 % of Americans are concerned that drug companies will use the Covid-19 pandemic to raise prices , according to a new poll by Gallup and West Health , a non-profit organization focused on health care costs .
More than half ( 55 % ) of adults surveyed said they are very concerned that the pharmaceutical industry will leverage the pandemic to raise prices .
Another 33 % said they are somewhat concerned .
Nearly nine in 10 Americans also said they support allowing the government to negotiate prices directly with the manufacturer of any approved Covid-19 treatment .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Americans report being very or somewhat concerned about their health insurance premiums going up and 84 % are very or somewhat concerned about the general cost of care rising .
More than half give low marks to U.S. coronavirus response : Asked to rate the national response to the pandemic relative to U.S. spending on health care , more than half of Americans called the response poor ( 34 % ) or fair ( 23 % ) .
About one in 10 ( 9 % ) rated the response as excellent and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ good .
The pollsters surveyed 1,016 American adults in interviews conducted May 11-22 .
Why it matters : There has been speculation that the coronavirus pandemic and the race for a vaccine or treatment may present an opportunity for the pharmaceutical industry to burnish its dismal reputation .
A Harris poll from mid-May found that 40 % of Americans have a more positive view of the industry than they did before the pandemic hit .
But as Beth Snyder Bulik wrote this week at Fierce Pharma , pricing remains a potential landmine for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` If a vaccine or treatment exists , but Americans can ’ t afford to get it , especially the most vulnerable or at risk populations—for example , lower income , minority , or living in more densely populated areas—it will likely be a major issue , '' Harris Poll Managing Director Rob Jekielek told Fierce Pharma .

Nearly 90% of Americans are concerned that drug companies will use the Covid-19 pandemic to raise prices, according to a new poll by Gallup and West Health, a non-profit organization focused on health care costs. More than half (55%) of adults surveyed said they are very concerned that the pharmaceutical industry will leverage the pandemic to raise prices. Another 33% said they are somewhat concerned.
Nearly nine in 10 Americans also said they support allowing the government to negotiate prices directly with the manufacturer of any approved Covid-19 treatment.
The poll also found that 79% of Americans report being very or somewhat concerned about their health insurance premiums going up and 84% are very or somewhat concerned about the general cost of care rising.
More than half give low marks to U.S. coronavirus response: Asked to rate the national response to the pandemic relative to U.S. spending on health care, more than half of Americans called the response poor (34%) or fair (23%). About one in 10 (9%) rated the response as excellent and another 14% described it as very good.
The pollsters surveyed 1,016 American adults in interviews conducted May 11-22.
Why it matters: There has been speculation that the coronavirus pandemic and the race for a vaccine or treatment may present an opportunity for the pharmaceutical industry to burnish its dismal reputation. A Harris poll from mid-May found that 40% of Americans have a more positive view of the industry than they did before the pandemic hit.
But as Beth Snyder Bulik wrote this week at Fierce Pharma, pricing remains a potential landmine for drugmakers looking to reset their reputations. "If a vaccine or treatment exists, but Americans can’t afford to get it, especially the most vulnerable or at risk populations—for example, lower income, minority, or living in more densely populated areas—it will likely be a major issue," Harris Poll Managing Director Rob Jekielek told Fierce Pharma.


thefiscaltimes--2020-06-17--Poll of the Day: Voters Don’t Want Unemployment Benefits Cut

With Congress likely heading for a fight over an extension of enhanced unemployment benefits , voters in a new poll @ @ @ @ @ t want those payments to be cut .
The survey by Politico and Morning Consult @ @ @ @ @ registered voters say the government should increase unemployment benefits to workers who lost their jobs @ @ @ @ @ .
Another 35 % said jobless benefits should stay the same .
Just 13 % @ @ @ @ @ cut .
The poll of 1,987 registered voters was conducted June 12-14 and has a @ @ @ @ @ percentage points .
Trump administration officials and leading Republican lawmakers have said that the current @ @ @ @ @ 600 weekly boost provided as part of emergency coronavirus relief legislation , is a problem @ @ @ @ @ for workers to go back to their jobs .
Democrats have proposed extending the $ @ @ @ @ @ expire at the end of July , by six months .

With Congress likely heading for a fight over an extension of enhanced unemployment benefits, voters in a new poll overwhelmingly say they don’t want those payments to be cut.
The survey by Politico and Morning Consult found that four in 10 registered voters say the government should increase unemployment benefits to workers who lost their jobs due to the coronavirus pandemic. Another 35% said jobless benefits should stay the same. Just 13% said the payments should be cut.
The poll of 1,987 registered voters was conducted June 12-14 and has a margin of error of 2 percentage points.
Trump administration officials and leading Republican lawmakers have said that the current benefits, including a $600 weekly boost provided as part of emergency coronavirus relief legislation, is a problem since it creates a disincentive for workers to go back to their jobs. Democrats have proposed extending the $600 increase, set to expire at the end of July, by six months.


thefiscaltimes--2020-06-17--Trump Wants $1 Trillion Infrastructure Plan. He’ll Have to Convince His Own Party

Senate Republicans are pushing back against the Trump administration ’ s still-developing plans for a $ 1 trillion infrastructure package designed to boost the coronavirus-ravaged economy — and the president ’ s reelection chances .
A draft of the plan is being prepared by the Department of Transportation , Bloomberg reported , and it focuses on typical infrastructure projects such as road and bridge construction over a 10-year period , though it also includes money for rural broadband and updated wireless infrastructure .
Conservative lawmakers are already saying the plan will be a tough sell for the administration , at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ think that ’ s a very heavy lift , ” Sen. Pat Toomey ( R-PA ) , who sits on the Finance Committee , told The Hill .
The big problem .
The objection to the plan is simple : it ’ s expensive , and the federal government is already spending trillions of deficit-funded dollars to address the coronavirus .
“ Nothing we ’ re doing right now is fiscally responsible , ” said Sen. Mike Enzi ( R-WY ) .
“ I ’ m much more inclined to stick to solving @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( R-KY ) rejected the idea of including infrastructure projects in the coronavirus relief bills then under discussion .
“ Infrastructure is unrelated to the coronavirus pandemic that we ’ re all experiencing and trying to figure out how to go forward , ” he said at the time .
McConnell is reportedly more focused on the five-year reauthorization of the Highway Trust Fund , a Senate version of which is expected to cost $ 287 billion — a far smaller sum than the Trump infrastructure plan , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deficit-focused upper chamber .
Senate Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley ( R-IA ) said he is still looking for ways to pay for $ 93 billion of the highway bill .
Room to maneuver ?
Still , there are some Republicans who are open to an infrastructure package .
Sen. Lisa Murkowski ( R-AK ) said she would like to work with the House , which is currently marking up a $ 500 billion package focused on surface transportation , to pass a bill that also addresses water infrastructure and new energy technologies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( R-AL ) has also said he is interested in a major infrastructure bill , though he has not discussed any details with the administration .
Democrats , however , may be wary of working with a White House that has repeatedly talked up infrastructure spending but done little to see a plan through .
As one Democrat told the Financial Times , “ Infrastructure has been like Lucy pulling away the football from Charlie Brown .
Every single time he thinks ‘ this time it ’ s real .
’ ”

Senate Republicans are pushing back against the Trump administration’s still-developing plans for a $1 trillion infrastructure package designed to boost the coronavirus-ravaged economy — and the president’s reelection chances.
A draft of the plan is being prepared by the Department of Transportation, Bloomberg reported, and it focuses on typical infrastructure projects such as road and bridge construction over a 10-year period, though it also includes money for rural broadband and updated wireless infrastructure.
Conservative lawmakers are already saying the plan will be a tough sell for the administration, at least in the Senate. “I think that’s a very heavy lift,” Sen. Pat Toomey (R-PA), who sits on the Finance Committee, told The Hill.
The big problem. The objection to the plan is simple: it’s expensive, and the federal government is already spending trillions of deficit-funded dollars to address the coronavirus. “Nothing we’re doing right now is fiscally responsible,” said Sen. Mike Enzi (R-WY). “I’m much more inclined to stick to solving the virus problem.”
In April, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) rejected the idea of including infrastructure projects in the coronavirus relief bills then under discussion. “Infrastructure is unrelated to the coronavirus pandemic that we’re all experiencing and trying to figure out how to go forward,” he said at the time.
McConnell is reportedly more focused on the five-year reauthorization of the Highway Trust Fund, a Senate version of which is expected to cost $287 billion — a far smaller sum than the Trump infrastructure plan, but a problem nevertheless in an increasingly deficit-focused upper chamber. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA) said he is still looking for ways to pay for $93 billion of the highway bill.
Room to maneuver? Still, there are some Republicans who are open to an infrastructure package. Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) said she would like to work with the House, which is currently marking up a $500 billion package focused on surface transportation, to pass a bill that also addresses water infrastructure and new energy technologies. Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Richard Shelby (R-AL) has also said he is interested in a major infrastructure bill, though he has not discussed any details with the administration.
Democrats, however, may be wary of working with a White House that has repeatedly talked up infrastructure spending but done little to see a plan through. As one Democrat told the Financial Times, “Infrastructure has been like Lucy pulling away the football from Charlie Brown. Every single time he thinks ‘this time it’s real.’”


thefiscaltimes--2020-06-16--1.5 Million Public Sector Employees Have Been Laid Off or Furloughed

State and local governments have shed about 1.5 million jobs since March , bringing employment in the sector to its lowest level since 2001 , according to a review of Labor Department data by the Pew Charitable Trusts .
Most of the job losses have been furloughs or temporary layoffs , with public education accounting for about two-thirds of the reductions .
As the coronavirus pandemic hit the economy in March , local “ governments issued hiring freezes , furloughed staff , or laid off seasonal employees , ” Pew says .
“ School districts made significant cuts to noninstructional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and maintenance workers .
Most of the hits to school payrolls so far resulted from closures , but any future downsizing would be driven primarily by budget cuts in the wake of the recession ... ” While many state and local officials view the job cuts as temporary , much depends on how schools reopen in the fall — and how quickly tax revenues return to pre-pandemic levels .
On Monday , the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities , a left-leaning think tank , released its latest estimates for state revenue losses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ governments face enormous losses in revenue that could last for many months .
CBPP estimates that states alone will see a $ 615 billion shortfall in revenues across three fiscal years from 2020 to 2022 — a much larger loss than in the previous two recessions .
The deepest shortfall will occur in the 2021 fiscal year , which begins on July 1 in many states .
“ The projected shortfall for the upcoming fiscal year ( 2021 ) is much deeper than the shortfalls faced in any year of the Great Recession @ @ @ @ @ @ @ figures underscore the continued urgency of the President and Congress enacting substantially more fiscal relief and maintaining it for as long as economic conditions warrant .
”

State and local governments have shed about 1.5 million jobs since March, bringing employment in the sector to its lowest level since 2001, according to a review of Labor Department data by the Pew Charitable Trusts. Most of the job losses have been furloughs or temporary layoffs, with public education accounting for about two-thirds of the reductions.
As the coronavirus pandemic hit the economy in March, local “governments issued hiring freezes, furloughed staff, or laid off seasonal employees,” Pew says. “School districts made significant cuts to noninstructional hourly staff, such as bus drivers and maintenance workers. Most of the hits to school payrolls so far resulted from closures, but any future downsizing would be driven primarily by budget cuts in the wake of the recession ...”
While many state and local officials view the job cuts as temporary, much depends on how schools reopen in the fall — and how quickly tax revenues return to pre-pandemic levels. On Monday, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a left-leaning think tank, released its latest estimates for state revenue losses, which indicate that state and local governments face enormous losses in revenue that could last for many months.
CBPP estimates that states alone will see a $615 billion shortfall in revenues across three fiscal years from 2020 to 2022 — a much larger loss than in the previous two recessions. The deepest shortfall will occur in the 2021 fiscal year, which begins on July 1 in many states.
“The projected shortfall for the upcoming fiscal year (2021) is much deeper than the shortfalls faced in any year of the Great Recession,” CBPP said. “These figures underscore the continued urgency of the President and Congress enacting substantially more fiscal relief and maintaining it for as long as economic conditions warrant.”


thefiscaltimes--2020-06-16--Paycheck Protection Program Saved 16 Million Jobs: Moody’s Analytics

The Paycheck Protection Program of loans to small businesses has safeguarded about 16 million jobs , or about 10 % @ @ @ @ @ force , according to a new analysis by Moody ’ s Analytics .
Moody ’ @ @ @ @ @ says the program , which has seen more than $ 500 billion in forgivable loans @ @ @ @ @ million businesses , likely fueled the surprising gains seen in the government ’ s May @ @ @ @ @ contributing between 9.2 million and 10.9 million jobs .
And the PPP gains could continue @ @ @ @ @ couple of million more jobs could show up in the June employment report thanks to @ @ @ @ @ Yaros said in a statement .
“ However , as small businesses that were the @ @ @ @ @ in the first half of April exhaust their PPP funds by mid-June , as many @ @ @ @ @ were rehired thanks to PPP could be at risk of layoffs .
”

The Paycheck Protection Program of loans to small businesses has safeguarded about 16 million jobs, or about 10% of the pre-pandemic U.S. labor force, according to a new analysis by Moody’s Analytics.
Moody’s Analytics economist Bernard Yaros says the program, which has seen more than $500 billion in forgivable loans approved to more than 4.5 million businesses, likely fueled the surprising gains seen in the government’s May labor market report, potentially contributing between 9.2 million and 10.9 million jobs. And the PPP gains could continue this month.
“A couple of million more jobs could show up in the June employment report thanks to residual PPP-induced rehiring,” Yaros said in a statement. “However, as small businesses that were the first to receive their loans in the first half of April exhaust their PPP funds by mid-June, as many as 4.5 million jobs that were rehired thanks to PPP could be at risk of layoffs.”


thefiscaltimes--2020-06-18--Coronavirus Layoffs Keep Coming as Jobless Claims Top 45 Million

About 1.5 million people filed for state unemployment benefits last week , the Department of Labor announced Thursday , bringing the 13-week total for first-time claims to more than 45 million .
Another 760,000 filed new claims for Pandemic Unemployment Assistance , a temporary program for workers such as independent contractors who ordinarily do not qualify for unemployment payments .
While new jobless claims continue to decline , falling for the 11th straight week , the numbers remain startlingly high relative to previous recessions , and some economists have expressed concerns that the labor market is not healing as rapidly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s not clear why claims are still so high , ” said Ian Shepherdson , chief economist at Pantheon Macroeconomics , in a note to clients .
“ [ I ] s it the initial shock still working its way up through businesses away from the consumer-facing jobs lost in the first wave , or is it businesses which thought they could survive now throwing in the towel , or both ?
” Shepherdson said the numbers suggest the economic recovery “ is going to take a long time , ” and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ still in such rough shape just weeks before the $ 600 weekly boost to unemployment befits is scheduled to expire .
With the labor market in a state of unprecedented turmoil , the data is coming in so quickly that it can be difficult to see the clear trendlines .
Heidi Shierholz of the Economic Policy Institute attempted to straighten out some of the crooked lines in a blog post Thursday .
In particular , Shierholz argued that delays in filing , processing and reporting jobless claims – along with the confusing two-tiered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – make it hard to get a handle on how many people are currently receiving unemployment benefits .
While the Labor Department reported Thursday that the number of people receiving unemployment benefits has plateaued at 20.5 million , there are millions more in limbo as they wait for their applications to be processed .
By Shierholz ’ s calculations ( see the chart below for a summary ) , about 34.5 million people are either receiving benefits – including 9.3 million in the Pandemic Unemployment Assistance program – or are in process within @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more than one in five workers are either on unemployment benefits or are waiting to get on , ” Shierholz said .

About 1.5 million people filed for state unemployment benefits last week, the Department of Labor announced Thursday, bringing the 13-week total for first-time claims to more than 45 million. Another 760,000 filed new claims for Pandemic Unemployment Assistance, a temporary program for workers such as independent contractors who ordinarily do not qualify for unemployment payments.
While new jobless claims continue to decline, falling for the 11th straight week, the numbers remain startlingly high relative to previous recessions, and some economists have expressed concerns that the labor market is not healing as rapidly as they had hoped.
“It’s not clear why claims are still so high,” said Ian Shepherdson, chief economist at Pantheon Macroeconomics, in a note to clients. “[I]s it the initial shock still working its way up through businesses away from the consumer-facing jobs lost in the first wave, or is it businesses which thought they could survive now throwing in the towel, or both?”
Shepherdson said the numbers suggest the economic recovery “is going to take a long time,” and expressed concern that the job market is still in such rough shape just weeks before the $600 weekly boost to unemployment befits is scheduled to expire.
Digging Into the Unemployment Numbers
With the labor market in a state of unprecedented turmoil, the data is coming in so quickly that it can be difficult to see the clear trendlines. Heidi Shierholz of the Economic Policy Institute attempted to straighten out some of the crooked lines in a blog post Thursday.
In particular, Shierholz argued that delays in filing, processing and reporting jobless claims – along with the confusing two-tiered system of state and federal benefit payments – make it hard to get a handle on how many people are currently receiving unemployment benefits. While the Labor Department reported Thursday that the number of people receiving unemployment benefits has plateaued at 20.5 million, there are millions more in limbo as they wait for their applications to be processed.
By Shierholz’s calculations (see the chart below for a summary), about 34.5 million people are either receiving benefits – including 9.3 million in the Pandemic Unemployment Assistance program – or are in process within the system. That means that “more than one in five workers are either on unemployment benefits or are waiting to get on,” Shierholz said.


thefiscaltimes--2020-06-18--Bailout Oversight Committee Sounds a Warning

The government watchdog responsible for monitoring $ 2.4 trillion in coronavirus-related bailout funds warned Wednesday that the size and speed of the various rescue programs present significant challenges for proper oversight .
In its first report , the Pandemic Response Accountability Committee reviewed the main issues facing the Offices of Inspector General at the 37 federal agencies receiving emergency funds .
“ Key areas of concern include both the need for accurate information concerning pandemic-related spending and the significant amount of money federal agencies may lose as the result of improper payments , ” the report said .
One specific @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by The New York Times is the $ 150 billion fund intended to help state and local governments .
The report said that some aid had been distributed already “ without agreements or terms and conditions establishing requirements for the use of funds and reporting on such uses.
” The report also said the $ 660 billion Paycheck Protection Program run by the Small Business Administration lacks proper controls , leading to “ increased vulnerability to fraud and unnecessary losses when SBA and its lending partners expedite loan transactions to provide quick relief.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a lack of transparency in the stimulus and relief programs .
Michael E. Horowitz , the acting chair of the oversight committee , told Congress that the Treasury Department was resisting efforts to disclose information on companies and individuals who have received federal funds .
Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said last week that he would not divulge the names of loan recipients in the Paycheck Protection Program , though he later said that he would work with Congress on the issue .

The government watchdog responsible for monitoring $2.4 trillion in coronavirus-related bailout funds warned Wednesday that the size and speed of the various rescue programs present significant challenges for proper oversight.
In its first report, the Pandemic Response Accountability Committee reviewed the main issues facing the Offices of Inspector General at the 37 federal agencies receiving emergency funds. “Key areas of concern include both the need for accurate information concerning pandemic-related spending and the significant amount of money federal agencies may lose as the result of improper payments,” the report said.
One specific program cited in the report and highlighted by The New York Times is the $150 billion fund intended to help state and local governments. The report said that some aid had been distributed already “without agreements or terms and conditions establishing requirements for the use of funds and reporting on such uses.”
The report also said the $660 billion Paycheck Protection Program run by the Small Business Administration lacks proper controls, leading to “increased vulnerability to fraud and unnecessary losses when SBA and its lending partners expedite loan transactions to provide quick relief.”
The report comes amid complaints about a lack of transparency in the stimulus and relief programs. Michael E. Horowitz, the acting chair of the oversight committee, told Congress that the Treasury Department was resisting efforts to disclose information on companies and individuals who have received federal funds. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said last week that he would not divulge the names of loan recipients in the Paycheck Protection Program, though he later said that he would work with Congress on the issue.


thefiscaltimes--2020-06-18--Opportunity Zones Mostly Help Real Estate Developers: Report

The 2017 Republican tax package created an Opportunity Zone program that provides tax breaks for real estate developers in specially @ @ @ @ @ President Trump has touted the program as a key part of his effort to combat @ @ @ @ @ new study from the Urban Institute says the program is falling well short of its @ @ @ @ @ were intended to foster equitable development outcomes — such as by creating quality jobs , @ @ @ @ @ like grocery stores , and improved quality of life for low-income people , ” the @ @ @ @ @ evidence suggests they need to be redesigned so government dollars are allocated effectively and help @ @ @ @ @ ” The main problem , the researchers found , is that low-income neighborhoods provide relatively @ @ @ @ @ Wealthy investors prefer the higher returns they can get on projects in neighborhoods closer to @ @ @ @ @ housing in appreciating neighborhoods therefore may receive much larger public support than , say , @ @ @ @ @ the report says .

The 2017 Republican tax package created an Opportunity Zone program that provides tax breaks for real estate developers in specially designated, low-income neighborhoods. President Trump has touted the program as a key part of his effort to combat racial inequality, but a new study from the Urban Institute says the program is falling well short of its goals.
“The incentives were intended to foster equitable development outcomes — such as by creating quality jobs, affordable housing, community-oriented amenities like grocery stores, and improved quality of life for low-income people,” the report says. “Our evidence suggests they need to be redesigned so government dollars are allocated effectively and help project sponsors achieve those outcomes.”
The main problem, the researchers found, is that low-income neighborhoods provide relatively modest returns on investment. Wealthy investors prefer the higher returns they can get on projects in neighborhoods closer to developed areas. “Luxury housing in appreciating neighborhoods therefore may receive much larger public support than, say, affordable housing projects,” the report says.


thefiscaltimes--2020-06-18--Conservative Groups Call for Tax Day to Be Delayed Until 2021

A coalition of more than 20 conservative and free-market groups wrote to Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin on Thursday asking that he defer the July 15 tax deadline into next year , saying that the payments due next month “ are a fiscal cliff endangering our economic recovery.
” The 22 groups include Americans for Tax Reform , FreedomWorks , the National Taxpayers Union Foundation and Tea Party Nation .
They say that the tax payments due next month could total $ 1 trillion or more .
“ This would represent an enormous financial burden at a time when many individuals @ @ @ @ @ @ @ meet due to the impacts of the COVID-19 crisis and the recent civil unrest , ” the groups say .
“ The case is clear that delaying payment deadlines – including estimated taxes and excise taxes – must be an immediate priority.
” Why it matters : At Politico ’ s Morning Tax , Bernie Becker summed it up smartly .
“ Let ’ s not act like conservative groups angling to let people keep their tax dollars is wildly out of character , ” he wrote .
“ But it is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump has promised the economy will come roaring back before November — so it ’ s probably fair to wonder how much of a political debate this will become in the coming weeks.
” Becker notes that the National Treasury Employees Union has also called for the July 15 deadline to be pushed back for the safety of IRS employees .
But the American Institute of CPAs , for now at least , says the deadline should stay , in part because the group doesn ’ t expect states to offer another delay @

A coalition of more than 20 conservative and free-market groups wrote to Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin on Thursday asking that he defer the July 15 tax deadline into next year, saying that the payments due next month “are a fiscal cliff endangering our economic recovery.”
The 22 groups include Americans for Tax Reform, FreedomWorks, the National Taxpayers Union Foundation and Tea Party Nation. They say that the tax payments due next month could total $1 trillion or more.
“This would represent an enormous financial burden at a time when many individuals and businesses are struggling to make ends meet due to the impacts of the COVID-19 crisis and the recent civil unrest,” the groups say. “The case is clear that delaying payment deadlines – including estimated taxes and excise taxes – must be an immediate priority.”
Why it matters: At Politico’s Morning Tax, Bernie Becker summed it up smartly. “Let’s not act like conservative groups angling to let people keep their tax dollars is wildly out of character,” he wrote. “But it is a presidential election year, and President Donald Trump has promised the economy will come roaring back before November — so it’s probably fair to wonder how much of a political debate this will become in the coming weeks.”
Becker notes that the National Treasury Employees Union has also called for the July 15 deadline to be pushed back for the safety of IRS employees. But the American Institute of CPAs, for now at least, says the deadline should stay, in part because the group doesn’t expect states to offer another delay.


thefiscaltimes--2020-06-18--Pelosi, Dems Look to ‘Go Big’ With $1.5 Trillion Infrastructure Bill

House Democrats on Thursday unveiled a $ 1.5 trillion infrastructure bill , arguing that the need to rebuild crumbling roads and bridges , expand broadband access in rural areas and invest in clean energy has been made more urgent by the coronavirus pandemic and its economic fallout .
“ It 's job-creating in its essence , but it 's also commerce-promoting .
So it grows the economy of our country , ” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said , according to The Hill .
The bill , called the Moving Forward Act , reportedly would provide nearly $ 500 billion in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as well as $ 100 billion for low-income schools , $ 100 billion for affordable housing , $ 100 billion for broadband , $ 70 billion for the electric grid , $ 65 billion for water projects , $ 30 billion for hospitals and $ 25 billion for the Postal Service .
Pelosi said she would push to pass the bill before Congress leaves town for its July 4 recess , and she noted that President Trump has spoken of the need for new infrastructure investment .
“ The president , we understand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” she said .
“ He talks about it quite a bit , so now let ’ s get down to what that means.
” Pelosi reportedly added that low interest rates mean that “ there 's never been a better time for us to go big.
” The White House has reportedly discussed a $ 1 trillion infrastructure stimulus package , but congressional Republicans have expressed concern about federal spending and the additional cost of any new stimulus package .
Democrats urged Trump to enter into negotiations on how to pay for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Means Chairman Richard Neal reportedly said that Democrats have proposed a combination of government-subsidized bonds , Private Activity Bonds and `` some borrowing '' to cover the cost of the legislation .
“ It ’ s time to have the conversation , it ’ s time to negotiate , ” Neal said , according to Bloomberg News .
“ We think on the revenue side we are open to some solutions and negotiations.
” Republicans have also objected to the green measures included in Democrats ’ previously released highway bill , which would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ package .
“ Republicans have been a bit critical at points during the mark up and saying this is Green New Deal 2.0 .
This is the application of the principles of the Green New Deal .
And this proves that we can both deal with climate change , fossil fuel pollution and actually create millions of new high-paying American jobs .
That is the promise of this legislation , ” Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman Peter DeFazio ( D-OR . )
said , according to The Hill .

House Democrats on Thursday unveiled a $1.5 trillion infrastructure bill, arguing that the need to rebuild crumbling roads and bridges, expand broadband access in rural areas and invest in clean energy has been made more urgent by the coronavirus pandemic and its economic fallout.
“It's job-creating in its essence, but it's also commerce-promoting. So it grows the economy of our country,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said, according to The Hill.
The bill, called the Moving Forward Act, reportedly would provide nearly $500 billion in highway and transportation funds over 10 years as well as $100 billion for low-income schools, $100 billion for affordable housing, $100 billion for broadband, $70 billion for the electric grid, $65 billion for water projects, $30 billion for hospitals and $25 billion for the Postal Service.
Pelosi said she would push to pass the bill before Congress leaves town for its July 4 recess, and she noted that President Trump has spoken of the need for new infrastructure investment. “The president, we understand, really wants an infrastructure bill,” she said. “He talks about it quite a bit, so now let’s get down to what that means.” Pelosi reportedly added that low interest rates mean that “there's never been a better time for us to go big.”
The White House has reportedly discussed a $1 trillion infrastructure stimulus package, but congressional Republicans have expressed concern about federal spending and the additional cost of any new stimulus package.
Democrats urged Trump to enter into negotiations on how to pay for an infrastructure bill. House Ways and Means Chairman Richard Neal reportedly said that Democrats have proposed a combination of government-subsidized bonds, Private Activity Bonds and "some borrowing" to cover the cost of the legislation. “It’s time to have the conversation, it’s time to negotiate,” Neal said, according to Bloomberg News. “We think on the revenue side we are open to some solutions and negotiations.”
Republicans have also objected to the green measures included in Democrats’ previously released highway bill, which would represent the largest part of the infrastructure package. “Republicans have been a bit critical at points during the mark up and saying this is Green New Deal 2.0. This is the application of the principles of the Green New Deal. And this proves that we can both deal with climate change, fossil fuel pollution and actually create millions of new high-paying American jobs. That is the promise of this legislation,” Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman Peter DeFazio (D-OR.) said, according to The Hill.


thefiscaltimes--2020-06-22--Trump Admin Agrees to Disclose More Details on PPP Bailout Loans

Facing congressional pressure , the Treasury Department and Small Business Administration said Friday that they will disclose details of most loans made through the Paycheck Protection Program , the $ 660 billion coronavirus rescue package for small businesses .
The Small Business Administration will provide names and other details of companies and nonprofits that received loans of $ 150,000 or more , which the administration says accounts for about 75 % of the loan dollars approved .
Loan amounts will be given in ranges rather than exact amounts .
But the new policy will only apply to a minority of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , as borrowers with loans below $ 150,000 will not be identified , though some general information , such as zip codes and industry types , will be released .
Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin had sparked controversy last week when he said that details of the loans would be proprietary and confidential .
Mnuchin said the new agreement with the bipartisan leaders of the Senate Small Business Committee “ will strike the appropriate balance of providing public transparency , while protecting the payroll and personal income information of small businesses , sole proprietors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Danielle Brian of the nonprofit Project on Government Oversight , charged that the new policy falls short .
“ This is absolutely not enough , ” Brian said .
“ By grouping the loan amounts [ into ranges ] we ’ re still not going to have the kind of information we need to ensure that money is going to the right people ... those who really need it.
” The PPP , which has made more than 4.6 million loans worth $ 514 billion , is scheduled to wind down at @ @ @ @ @

Facing congressional pressure, the Treasury Department and Small Business Administration said Friday that they will disclose details of most loans made through the Paycheck Protection Program, the $660 billion coronavirus rescue package for small businesses.
The Small Business Administration will provide names and other details of companies and nonprofits that received loans of $150,000 or more, which the administration says accounts for about 75% of the loan dollars approved. Loan amounts will be given in ranges rather than exact amounts. But the new policy will only apply to a minority of the more than 4.6 million loan recipients, as borrowers with loans below $150,000 will not be identified, though some general information, such as zip codes and industry types, will be released.
Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin had sparked controversy last week when he said that details of the loans would be proprietary and confidential. Mnuchin said the new agreement with the bipartisan leaders of the Senate Small Business Committee “will strike the appropriate balance of providing public transparency, while protecting the payroll and personal income information of small businesses, sole proprietors, and independent contractors.”
A critic, Danielle Brian of the nonprofit Project on Government Oversight, charged that the new policy falls short. “This is absolutely not enough,” Brian said. “By grouping the loan amounts [into ranges] we’re still not going to have the kind of information we need to ensure that money is going to the right people ... those who really need it.”
The PPP, which has made more than 4.6 million loans worth $514 billion, is scheduled to wind down at the end of June.


thefiscaltimes--2020-06-19--Not Much Help for Small Businesses, Local Governments From $500 Billion Relief Fund: Report

A $ 500 billion program intended to provide businesses and state and local governments with low-interest loans and grants during the coronavirus crisis has mostly benefited large companies so far , a congressional oversight group said Thursday .
Congress authorized the relief program in the CARES Act in March and put the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve Bank in charge of disbursing the funds .
The program includes $ 454 billion for emergency lending facilities targeting cash-starved companies , nonprofits and state and local governments , as well as $ 46 billion for airlines and national security contractors The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ says that the Fed has announced how it plans to use $ 195 billion of the funds in five lending areas , part of an effort that could support $ 2 trillion in loans .
But most of the lending facilities are not operational , and only $ 6.7 billion of the total package has been spent so far .
Bond market rebound : The Fed ’ s plan to buy corporate bonds has boosted the market , as investors snapped up corporate debt now backed by the Fed .
But the market @ @ @ @ @ @ @ outcome from the program so far , leaving smaller businesses and governments out in the cold .
“ In some areas of the economy , such as the ability of larger companies to issue debt to continue operations , the agencies ’ actions have had a clear and powerful impact , ” the commission wrote .
“ But there is less evidence that the actions of the Treasury and the Federal Reserve have been as beneficial for small and mid-sized businesses and state and local governments.
” The commission questioned whether the Fed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ given the more robust health of larger businesses , and suggested that the central bank should focus more on other entities that need help .
Little help for governments : The lending program targeting state and local governments , called the Municipal Liquidity Facility ( MLF ) , has only recently begun to operate and has made just one loan so far .
The Treasury is putting $ 35 billion into the fund , which will back as much as $ 500 billion in lending by the Fed .
But the only loan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where the Fed purchased $ 1.2 billion in notes .
And a key small business program has only just begun : The Fed is using $ 75 billion from the Treasury to back as much as $ 600 billion in lending to small and mid-sized businesses , defined as those with as many as 15,000 employees or up to $ 5 billion in annual revenues .
But the Main Street Lending Program just started taking applications this week and has yet to extend any loans .

A $500 billion program intended to provide businesses and state and local governments with low-interest loans and grants during the coronavirus crisis has mostly benefited large companies so far, a congressional oversight group said Thursday.
Congress authorized the relief program in the CARES Act in March and put the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve Bank in charge of disbursing the funds. The program includes $454 billion for emergency lending facilities targeting cash-starved companies, nonprofits and state and local governments, as well as $46 billion for airlines and national security contractors
The latest report from the Congressional Oversight Commission says that the Fed has announced how it plans to use $195 billion of the funds in five lending areas, part of an effort that could support $2 trillion in loans. But most of the lending facilities are not operational, and only $6.7 billion of the total package has been spent so far.
Bond market rebound: The Fed’s plan to buy corporate bonds has boosted the market, as investors snapped up corporate debt now backed by the Fed. But the market rebound seems to be the only significant outcome from the program so far, leaving smaller businesses and governments out in the cold.
“In some areas of the economy, such as the ability of larger companies to issue debt to continue operations, the agencies’ actions have had a clear and powerful impact,” the commission wrote. “But there is less evidence that the actions of the Treasury and the Federal Reserve have been as beneficial for small and mid-sized businesses and state and local governments.”
The commission questioned whether the Fed should continue to purchase corporate debt, given the more robust health of larger businesses, and suggested that the central bank should focus more on other entities that need help.
Little help for governments: The lending program targeting state and local governments, called the Municipal Liquidity Facility (MLF), has only recently begun to operate and has made just one loan so far. The Treasury is putting $35 billion into the fund, which will back as much as $500 billion in lending by the Fed. But the only loan so far has been in Illinois, where the Fed purchased $1.2 billion in notes.
And a key small business program has only just begun: The Fed is using $75 billion from the Treasury to back as much as $600 billion in lending to small and mid-sized businesses, defined as those with as many as 15,000 employees or up to $5 billion in annual revenues. But the Main Street Lending Program just started taking applications this week and has yet to extend any loans.


thefiscaltimes--2020-06-19--$1 Trillion? $2 Trillion? Trump White House Can’t Agree on Next Stimulus

At the beginning of the week , we pointed out that White House trade adviser Peter Navarro had said in a couple of television interviews last Friday and Saturday that President Trump wants a manufacturing-focused stimulus package “ on the order of at least $ 2 trillion.
” But this is Trumpworld , where fractious infighting is more than norm than planned and coordinated policy rollouts , so The Washington Post ’ s Jeff Stein reports that Navarro ’ s comments came as a surprise to other administration officials and “ appeared to be a sharp departure from what other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reports that congressional Republicans and administration officials downplayed Navarro ’ s television comments .
“ Navarro speaks for Navarro , ’ one unnamed senior administration official said .
Another offered this simple explanation : “ Peter went rogue.
” Two unnamed senior administration officials told the Post that the administration is more likely to support a stimulus plan costing around $ 1 trillion .
‘ Widening White House fissures ’ over a recovery plan : Navarro ’ s apparent freelancing , and the “ startled ” reaction to it , illustrate just how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ go to overcome what Stein calls “ widening White House fissures ” over the economic recovery and a next stimulus plan .
“ A number of advisers want to reconsider the tremendous amount of spending that they are pumping into the economy , but they face growing demands from economists and Federal Reserve Chair Jerome H. Powell to spend more to prop up the economy , ” Stein writes .
“ President Trump and his senior economic advisers have said they want to pass additional stimulus legislation , but jockeying over that package @ @ @ @ @ @ @ administration vie to shape it.
” Among those efforts , acting budget director Russell Vought and Mick Mulvaney , the former acting chief of staff , have reportedly proposed measures that would require long-term reductions in the deficit to be part of any plan .
Negotiating over the negotiators : The jockeying reportedly includes some pressure from conservative GOP lawmakers and activists to have Vice President Mike Pence or Chief of Staff Mark Meadows take on a bigger role in the dealmaking , amid complaints that the packages negotiated thus far with Treasury @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s point person “ have been too generous to Democrats and allowed spending and other policy changes that run counter to GOP priorities.
” The bottom line : At a point when many economists say the economy still needs significant additional support , we ’ re still a long way away from a next stimulus package .
Many of the White House ’ s priorities for the next bill aren ’ t clear , and those that are face substantial resistance .
“ At this point , there is not a concrete White @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economic advisers keep floating different — and at times contrasting — ideas , ” Stein writes .
“ The White House has not reached a final decision on whether it supports an infrastructure package ; aid to state and local governments ; another round of $ 1,200 stimulus checks ; delaying the tax filing deadline beyond July 15 ; and a fix to the coming expiration of additional unemployment benefits , among other issues .
Although it is clear Trump is eager to pass a payroll tax cut , a cut to taxes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the restaurant and entertainment industries , the administration has not formulated a concrete proposal , and these ideas have largely been dismissed by congressional lawmakers.
” Read more at The Washington Post .

At the beginning of the week, we pointed out that White House trade adviser Peter Navarro had said in a couple of television interviews last Friday and Saturday that President Trump wants a manufacturing-focused stimulus package “on the order of at least $2 trillion.”
But this is Trumpworld, where fractious infighting is more than norm than planned and coordinated policy rollouts, so The Washington Post’s Jeff Stein reports that Navarro’s comments came as a surprise to other administration officials and “appeared to be a sharp departure from what other White House officials were considering.” Stein reports that congressional Republicans and administration officials downplayed Navarro’s television comments. “Navarro speaks for Navarro,’ one unnamed senior administration official said. Another offered this simple explanation: “Peter went rogue.”
Two unnamed senior administration officials told the Post that the administration is more likely to support a stimulus plan costing around $1 trillion.
‘Widening White House fissures’ over a recovery plan: Navarro’s apparent freelancing, and the “startled” reaction to it, illustrate just how far the White House has yet to go to overcome what Stein calls “widening White House fissures” over the economic recovery and a next stimulus plan.
“A number of advisers want to reconsider the tremendous amount of spending that they are pumping into the economy, but they face growing demands from economists and Federal Reserve Chair Jerome H. Powell to spend more to prop up the economy,” Stein writes. “President Trump and his senior economic advisers have said they want to pass additional stimulus legislation, but jockeying over that package has intensified as ideological rivals within the administration vie to shape it.”
Among those efforts, acting budget director Russell Vought and Mick Mulvaney, the former acting chief of staff, have reportedly proposed measures that would require long-term reductions in the deficit to be part of any plan.
Negotiating over the negotiators: The jockeying reportedly includes some pressure from conservative GOP lawmakers and activists to have Vice President Mike Pence or Chief of Staff Mark Meadows take on a bigger role in the dealmaking, amid complaints that the packages negotiated thus far with Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin as the administration’s point person “have been too generous to Democrats and allowed spending and other policy changes that run counter to GOP priorities.”
The bottom line: At a point when many economists say the economy still needs significant additional support, we’re still a long way away from a next stimulus package. Many of the White House’s priorities for the next bill aren’t clear, and those that are face substantial resistance.
“At this point, there is not a concrete White House proposal, in part because different economic advisers keep floating different — and at times contrasting — ideas,” Stein writes. “The White House has not reached a final decision on whether it supports an infrastructure package; aid to state and local governments; another round of $1,200 stimulus checks; delaying the tax filing deadline beyond July 15; and a fix to the coming expiration of additional unemployment benefits, among other issues. Although it is clear Trump is eager to pass a payroll tax cut, a cut to taxes on capital gains, and deductions for the restaurant and entertainment industries, the administration has not formulated a concrete proposal, and these ideas have largely been dismissed by congressional lawmakers.”
Read more at The Washington Post.


thefiscaltimes--2020-06-23--A ‘Wacky’ Tax Credit Idea: $4,000 for Vacation

Sen. Martha McSally ( R-AZ ) wants to use a tax credit to encourage Americans to take a vacation over the next two years .
Under her proposed TRIP Act , adults would be able to tap a $ 4,000 tax credit for travel within the U.S. , with eligible expenses including lodging , transportation costs and entertainment .
And the credit would apply to each adult , so a couple could claim an $ 8,000 credit , plus another $ 500 per child .
While McSally says her proposal is aimed at reviving the domestic tourism industry , critics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t do much good for the millions of Americans facing lost jobs , reduced incomes and an uncertain future .
“ That idea [ is ] one of the wackiest I ’ ve come across in recent months in an effort to stimulate the economy , ” financial adviser Ric Edelman told Yahoo Finance .
“ It ’ s tone deaf and doesn ’ t acknowledge that there are millions of American households who can ’ t afford to pay their rent or afford to buy food or medicine.
” Matthew Gardner @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy , says that the loose requirements in the bill mean “ that any car owner with an ounce of creativity should be able to gin up an excuse for taking a tax credit for every tank of gas they ’ ve purchased in 2020.
” That , says Gardner , makes the bill “ an invitation to tax avoidance .
”

Sen. Martha McSally (R-AZ) wants to use a tax credit to encourage Americans to take a vacation over the next two years. Under her proposed TRIP Act, adults would be able to tap a $4,000 tax credit for travel within the U.S., with eligible expenses including lodging, transportation costs and entertainment. And the credit would apply to each adult, so a couple could claim an $8,000 credit, plus another $500 per child.
While McSally says her proposal is aimed at reviving the domestic tourism industry, critics point out that the non-refundable credit won’t do much good for the millions of Americans facing lost jobs, reduced incomes and an uncertain future.
“That idea [is] one of the wackiest I’ve come across in recent months in an effort to stimulate the economy,” financial adviser Ric Edelman told Yahoo Finance. “It’s tone deaf and doesn’t acknowledge that there are millions of American households who can’t afford to pay their rent or afford to buy food or medicine.”
Matthew Gardner, a senior fellow at the left-leaning Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, says that the loose requirements in the bill mean “that any car owner with an ounce of creativity should be able to gin up an excuse for taking a tax credit for every tank of gas they’ve purchased in 2020.” That, says Gardner, makes the bill “an invitation to tax avoidance.”


thefiscaltimes--2020-06-23--4 Potential Pitfalls for the Economic Recovery

Congress is expected to pass a major economic relief and stimulus bill later this summer , but there is still considerable uncertainty about its final form .
Will it include another round of stimulus checks , or tax cuts for businesses ?
Will the unemployed continue to get additional aid ?
And will state and local governments get a lifeline as they confront huge budget shortfalls ?
Annie Lowrey of The Atlantic writes Tuesday that the next set of federal policies will likely play a key role in how we navigate the serious pitfalls that the economy still faces , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” could be in the offing if lawmakers fail to respond appropriately to the crisis at hand .
She focuses on four major issues that will require attention from federal policymakers : The “ household fiscal cliff.
” The $ 1,200 stimulus checks and enhanced unemployment benefits have kept millions of households afloat , but they are temporary .
If federal aid is pulled back prematurely , before the economy fully recovers , many of those households could tumble into poverty .
The decimation of small business .
While the Paycheck Protection Program @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to have helped thousands of businesses remain viable in the short run , the lack of consumer demand in a high-unemployment economy , along with the continued need to maintain some degree of social distancing as the coronavirus continues to spread , will likely force many small businesses to close their doors for good in the coming months .
The budget crunch for state and local governments .
With plummeting tax collections and soaring safety net spending , state and local governments are facing massive deficits that are already forcing layoffs and service @ @ @ @ @ @ @ federal government , millions of public employees could lose their jobs , creating another drag on the recovery .
The ongoing health crisis .
“ Ending the pandemic would have been the single best thing the federal government could have done to preserve the country ’ s wealth , health , and economic functioning , ” Lowrey says .
But the U.S. has failed to develop and deploy some of the basic tools used to control the spread of the coronavirus , and the result is a new surge of cases in some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lack of preparation and well-coordinated response , parts of the country are likely going to have to muddle through well into the fall , depressing the economic rebound .
Still , the good news is that all of these potential pitfalls can be addressed by federal policies , Lowrey says , ranging from income support to a nationwide test-and-trace system .
All that ’ s required is for policymakers to make good decisions -- though that may be easier said than done .

Congress is expected to pass a major economic relief and stimulus bill later this summer, but there is still considerable uncertainty about its final form. Will it include another round of stimulus checks, or tax cuts for businesses? Will the unemployed continue to get additional aid? And will state and local governments get a lifeline as they confront huge budget shortfalls?
Annie Lowrey of The Atlantic writes Tuesday that the next set of federal policies will likely play a key role in how we navigate the serious pitfalls that the economy still faces, warning that a “second great depression” could be in the offing if lawmakers fail to respond appropriately to the crisis at hand. She focuses on four major issues that will require attention from federal policymakers:
The “household fiscal cliff.” The $1,200 stimulus checks and enhanced unemployment benefits have kept millions of households afloat, but they are temporary. If federal aid is pulled back prematurely, before the economy fully recovers, many of those households could tumble into poverty.
The decimation of small business. While the Paycheck Protection Program and other forms of federal assistance appear to have helped thousands of businesses remain viable in the short run, the lack of consumer demand in a high-unemployment economy, along with the continued need to maintain some degree of social distancing as the coronavirus continues to spread, will likely force many small businesses to close their doors for good in the coming months.
The budget crunch for state and local governments. With plummeting tax collections and soaring safety net spending, state and local governments are facing massive deficits that are already forcing layoffs and service cutbacks. Without targeted aid from the federal government, millions of public employees could lose their jobs, creating another drag on the recovery.
The ongoing health crisis. “Ending the pandemic would have been the single best thing the federal government could have done to preserve the country’s wealth, health, and economic functioning,” Lowrey says. But the U.S. has failed to develop and deploy some of the basic tools used to control the spread of the coronavirus, and the result is a new surge of cases in some states that are reopening. Given the lack of preparation and well-coordinated response, parts of the country are likely going to have to muddle through well into the fall, depressing the economic rebound.
Still, the good news is that all of these potential pitfalls can be addressed by federal policies, Lowrey says, ranging from income support to a nationwide test-and-trace system. All that’s required is for policymakers to make good decisions -- though that may be easier said than done.


thefiscaltimes--2020-06-23--Trump Says Yes to More Stimulus Checks … or Something

President Trump kinda sorta committed to another round of stimulus checks on Monday .
Asked in an interview with Scripps televisions stations if he ’ d get viewers ( read : voters ) who are struggling financially in Florida , Ohio , Wisconsin and Michigan — all key swings states in the upcoming election —another round of stimulus checks , Trump said , “ Yeah , we are .
We are.
” Trump ’ s pledge sounds less than iron-clad .
Pressed on how much and when the next round of coronavirus relief would be , Trump shifted to touting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We will be doing another stimulus package .
It ’ ll be very good .
It ’ ll be very generous.
” As for how much the checks would be , the president said , “ You ’ ll find out about it .
You ’ ll find out.
” He said the next package would be bipartisan and would be done “ over the next couple of weeks , probably ” — an unlikely timeframe given what top GOP senators have said .
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( R-KY ) has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bill will only begin next month .
Trump has told aides he largely supports another round of stimulus checks since he believes they will help the economy and his reelection chances , The Washington Post reports .
But the idea faces resistance from some conservative lawmakers and White House officials .
“ The White House has not officially taken a position on the matter ” and the president hasn ’ t reached a final decision , The Post reports , noting that “ the president ’ s advisers and allies are split , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ favor of a second round of payments and National Economic Council Director Larry Kudlow more skeptical about another program matching the first , which cost about $ 300 billion .
“ Probably , we would want to target those to those folks who lost their jobs and are most in need , ” Kudlow reportedly told Fox Business on Tuesday .
“ All right , that ’ s the speculation on my part , but I think this is -- that ’ s where it ’ s going.
” Mnuchin said Tuesday that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ under discussion for the next coronavirus bill , but that it would be more targeted and focused on the job market .
“ We ’ re talking about a bunch of different ideas that we may need to do in another bill , and we want to take our time and make sure we ’ re thoughtful , ” Mnuchin told reporters .
“ So whatever we do it ’ ll be much more targeted , much more focused on jobs , bringing back jobs and making sure we take care of our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ round of stimulus checks is still in question , and it would reportedly be more likely if paired with reductions in the $ 600-a-week enhanced unemployment benefit Congress approved in March .
That boost in jobless benefits is set to expire at the end of July and its future will also be the subject of negotiations .

President Trump kinda sorta committed to another round of stimulus checks on Monday.
Asked in an interview with Scripps televisions stations if he’d get viewers (read: voters) who are struggling financially in Florida, Ohio, Wisconsin and Michigan — all key swings states in the upcoming election —another round of stimulus checks, Trump said, “Yeah, we are. We are.”
Trump’s pledge sounds less than iron-clad. Pressed on how much and when the next round of coronavirus relief would be, Trump shifted to touting the pre-pandemic economy before adding, “We will be doing another stimulus package. It’ll be very good. It’ll be very generous.”
As for how much the checks would be, the president said, “You’ll find out about it. You’ll find out.” He said the next package would be bipartisan and would be done “over the next couple of weeks, probably” — an unlikely timeframe given what top GOP senators have said. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has indicated that negotiations on the next relief bill will only begin next month.
Trump has told aides he largely supports another round of stimulus checks since he believes they will help the economy and his reelection chances, The Washington Post reports. But the idea faces resistance from some conservative lawmakers and White House officials.
“The White House has not officially taken a position on the matter” and the president hasn’t reached a final decision, The Post reports, noting that “the president’s advisers and allies are split,” with Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin in favor of a second round of payments and National Economic Council Director Larry Kudlow more skeptical about another program matching the first, which cost about $300 billion. “Probably, we would want to target those to those folks who lost their jobs and are most in need,” Kudlow reportedly told Fox Business on Tuesday. “All right, that’s the speculation on my part, but I think this is -- that’s where it’s going.”
Mnuchin said Tuesday that a number of different ideas are still under discussion for the next coronavirus bill, but that it would be more targeted and focused on the job market. “We’re talking about a bunch of different ideas that we may need to do in another bill, and we want to take our time and make sure we’re thoughtful,” Mnuchin told reporters. “So whatever we do it’ll be much more targeted, much more focused on jobs, bringing back jobs and making sure we take care of our kids.”
The bottom line: Another round of stimulus checks is still in question, and it would reportedly be more likely if paired with reductions in the $600-a-week enhanced unemployment benefit Congress approved in March. That boost in jobless benefits is set to expire at the end of July and its future will also be the subject of negotiations.


thefiscaltimes--2020-06-22--Dems Say Trump Sitting on Billions in Coronavirus Testing Money

The Trump administration is sitting on nearly $ 14 billion in funding provided by Congress to help states with coronavirus testing and contract tracing , two top Democrats said Sunday , calling on the administration to distribute the money “ immediately.
” Congress in April approved $ 25 billion to ramp up testing and tracing and another $ 2 billion to cover free testing for the uninsured .
“ While it has been months since these funds were first appropriated , the Administration has failed to disburse significant amounts of this funding , leaving communities without the resources they need @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the virus , ” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York and Sen. Patty Murray of Washington said in a letter to Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar .
The senators wrote that the administration has full discretion regarding more than $ 8 billion of the $ 25 billion in funding but has not released a plan to distribute the money .
“ It is critical that the Administration disburse the $ 8 billion immediately with an emphasis on addressing two major unmet needs : contact tracing and collecting data on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they wrote .
The senators also said that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has yet to award nearly $ 4 billion that could be used for surveillance and contact tracing efforts .
In a response provided to The Washington Post , HHS said it has distributed $ 14 billion of the $ 25 billion but that Congress had failed to give the agency clear and specific guidance on how to spend the rest .
“ Now members [ of Congress ] are contacting HHS with their individual priorities and complaining the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Michael Caputo , assistant secretary for public affairs at the agency , told the Post .
“ Regardless , HHS is committed to working with Congress to ensure the healthcare delivery system gets the support needed at this time.
” The Democratic letter comes after President Trump on Saturday told supporters at his campaign rally in Tulsa that he had asked officials to slow down coronavirus testing .
After saying that the United States has now tested 25 million people , Trump added : `` When you do testing to that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more people ; you 're going to find more cases .
So I said to my people , ‘ Slow the testing down , please.
’ '' Critics quickly called that another example of Trump putting his personal political interests above the health and safety of the nation , but administration officials have downplayed those remarks , saying they were made in jest , were “ tongue-in-cheek ” or were just “ a passing observation.
” In an interview with Scripps News on Monday , the president refused to directly answer whether he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ If we did slow it down , we would n't show nearly as many cases , ” Trump said .
“ Frankly , I think we 're way ahead of ourselves , if you want to know the truth .
We 've done too good a job … The reason we have more cases [ is ] because we do more testing than any other country by far.
” Public health experts say that the recent surge in cases seen in many U.S. states is not just the result of increased @ @

The Trump administration is sitting on nearly $14 billion in funding provided by Congress to help states with coronavirus testing and contract tracing, two top Democrats said Sunday, calling on the administration to distribute the money “immediately.”
Congress in April approved $25 billion to ramp up testing and tracing and another $2 billion to cover free testing for the uninsured. “While it has been months since these funds were first appropriated, the Administration has failed to disburse significant amounts of this funding, leaving communities without the resources they need to address the significant challenges presented by the virus,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York and Sen. Patty Murray of Washington said in a letter to Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar.
The senators wrote that the administration has full discretion regarding more than $8 billion of the $25 billion in funding but has not released a plan to distribute the money. “It is critical that the Administration disburse the $8 billion immediately with an emphasis on addressing two major unmet needs: contact tracing and collecting data on COVID-19 racial and ethnic disparities,” they wrote.
The senators also said that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has yet to award nearly $4 billion that could be used for surveillance and contact tracing efforts.
In a response provided to The Washington Post, HHS said it has distributed $14 billion of the $25 billion but that Congress had failed to give the agency clear and specific guidance on how to spend the rest. “Now members [of Congress] are contacting HHS with their individual priorities and complaining the dollars are not spent to their wishes,” Michael Caputo, assistant secretary for public affairs at the agency, told the Post. “Regardless, HHS is committed to working with Congress to ensure the healthcare delivery system gets the support needed at this time.”
The Democratic letter comes after President Trump on Saturday told supporters at his campaign rally in Tulsa that he had asked officials to slow down coronavirus testing. After saying that the United States has now tested 25 million people, Trump added: "When you do testing to that extent, you're going to find more people; you're going to find more cases. So I said to my people, ‘Slow the testing down, please.’"
Critics quickly called that another example of Trump putting his personal political interests above the health and safety of the nation, but administration officials have downplayed those remarks, saying they were made in jest, were “tongue-in-cheek” or were just “a passing observation.”
In an interview with Scripps News on Monday, the president refused to directly answer whether he had instructed staff to slow down testing. “If we did slow it down, we wouldn't show nearly as many cases,” Trump said. “Frankly, I think we're way ahead of ourselves, if you want to know the truth. We've done too good a job … The reason we have more cases [is] because we do more testing than any other country by far.”
Public health experts say that the recent surge in cases seen in many U.S. states is not just the result of increased testing.


thefiscaltimes--2020-06-22--Coronavirus Stimulus May Have Prevented a Surge in Poverty

Despite an extraordinary rise in unemployment during the coronavirus crisis , the level of poverty in the U.S. has remained steady or even fallen slightly thanks to the unprecedented increase in federal relief spending , according to new studies reviewed by Jason DeParle of The New York Times .
Researchers at the Center on Poverty and Social Policy at Columbia University found that the roughly $ 500 billion Congress authorized in the CARES Act for additional safety net spending – about half of which is dedicated to the $ 600 per week enhancement of unemployment benefits ( see the chart @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people from falling into poverty .
With the relief spending , the researchers projected the poverty rate rising slightly this year to 12.7 % , up from 12.5 % before the pandemic .
Without the spending , the rate would have climbed to 16.3 % , with roughly 12 million more people becoming impoverished .
“ Right now , the safety net is doing what it ’ s supposed to do for most families — helping them secure a minimally decent life , ” said Zachary Parolin , one of the researchers .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ loss , this is really remarkable.
’ ’ A separate study found that the surge in federal spending actually lowered the poverty rate as poorer households saw an increase in income .
Using a different definition of poverty , researchers at the University of Chicago and Notre Dame found that the 12-month poverty rate fell from 10.9 % in January and February to 8.6 % in April and May .
What ’ s next ?
The researchers emphasize that despite the better-than-expected estimates on poverty , millions of Americans continue to face serious @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to access payments they are entitled to receive , and the disbursement of aid has been uneven and sometimes unpredictable .
More significantly , much of the increased safety net spending is temporary , with the enhanced unemployment benefits slated to expire at the end of July .
While policymakers are still debating what comes next , it ’ s almost certain that the extraordinary spending authorized by Congress will decline as the economy reopens , potentially setting the stage for a significant increase in poverty if the recovery is sluggish and unemployment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time .
For more details , see the studies here and here , and The New York Times article here .

Despite an extraordinary rise in unemployment during the coronavirus crisis, the level of poverty in the U.S. has remained steady or even fallen slightly thanks to the unprecedented increase in federal relief spending, according to new studies reviewed by Jason DeParle of The New York Times.
Researchers at the Center on Poverty and Social Policy at Columbia University found that the roughly $500 billion Congress authorized in the CARES Act for additional safety net spending – about half of which is dedicated to the $600 per week enhancement of unemployment benefits (see the chart below) – helped prevent millions of people from falling into poverty. With the relief spending, the researchers projected the poverty rate rising slightly this year to 12.7%, up from 12.5% before the pandemic. Without the spending, the rate would have climbed to 16.3%, with roughly 12 million more people becoming impoverished.
“Right now, the safety net is doing what it’s supposed to do for most families — helping them secure a minimally decent life,” said Zachary Parolin, one of the researchers. “Given the magnitude of the employment loss, this is really remarkable.’’
A separate study found that the surge in federal spending actually lowered the poverty rate as poorer households saw an increase in income. Using a different definition of poverty, researchers at the University of Chicago and Notre Dame found that the 12-month poverty rate fell from 10.9% in January and February to 8.6% in April and May.
What’s next? The researchers emphasize that despite the better-than-expected estimates on poverty, millions of Americans continue to face serious hardships. Some workers have been unable to access payments they are entitled to receive, and the disbursement of aid has been uneven and sometimes unpredictable. More significantly, much of the increased safety net spending is temporary, with the enhanced unemployment benefits slated to expire at the end of July. While policymakers are still debating what comes next, it’s almost certain that the extraordinary spending authorized by Congress will decline as the economy reopens, potentially setting the stage for a significant increase in poverty if the recovery is sluggish and unemployment remains elevated for an extended period of time.
For more details, see the studies here and here, and The New York Times article here.