rockits
Member
- Messages
- 9,189
So my point was:
- if they claim it and then discover they don’t need it because their business is not impacted as much as they thought, or indeed they have profited from the crisis, they should be asked to repay it
- if they claim it and their business survives and they subsequently return to a minimum (tbd) level of profitability, they should be asked to repay it.
it doesn’t seem unreasonable to me. What seems unreasonable to me is that the wider taxpayer population should be asked to pay for this support for businesses that can afford to repay it in the future. For example, a pensioner who has worked hard all his or her life, never taking any benefits from the state, saving into a pension for their future, to now find that their future income is reduced and they are perhaps paying more tax on it. Just an example......there are many who will get no support under the currently announced packages but will pay for them, who may feel reluctant to pay for small business to “take a breath and enjoy life a little”
I do agree that people shouldn't take it if they don't need it scenario but how do you police or organise this. If your business needs it in 3 months you won't get it and might not survive.
I guess it a kin to panic buying and bulk buying. Really uneccesary in the short term and we haven't done this personally
To clarify I will put myself in the category of I would like to take a breather and enjoy life just a tiny bit. I have done 60-100 hours a week for over 25 years. Some won't work those total hours in their lifetime!
Unfortunately it seems to govt or others often won't help you unless you ask or take. Sad fact and I don't necessarily agree with.
The problem for me is would be focussed on making sure people don't get stuff they don't need or deserve all the time....not just now. Why is now any different?