Client Alerts & Insights
Benesch COVID-19 Resource Center: SBA Affiliation Rules May Complicate CARES Act Paycheck Protection Program Loan Eligibility for Certain Physicians and Group Practices
April 2, 2020
Authored By:
As many health care providers consider applying for CARES Act Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loans under SBA Section 7(a), we would like these providers to be mindful of SBA’s “affiliation rules.” These rules may require borrowers, in certain circumstances, to aggregate their employee count with the employee count of their joint venture partner (or a joint venture partner’s parent company(ies)) to determine a borrower’s eligibility for PPP loans (e.g., the simplest test is that a borrower must have 500 or less employees).
More particularly, a question has arisen whether a physician or group practice applying for PPP loans under SBA Section 7(a), and which has one or more direct or indirect joint venture interests (e.g., joint ventures with dialysis organizations, surgery center companies or health systems, among others) may be required to aggregate all of a joint venture’s (and possibly its joint venture partner’s direct or indirect employees) for purposes of determining PPP loan eligibility. The rules regarding this issue are complicated and evolving due to the speed with which legislation has passed and guidance is being issued. We are aware that congressional lobbying efforts are under way in an effort to remove the affiliation rules for PPP loans. Benesch attorneys are tracking this potential issue and will follow up as additional guidance becomes available. In the meantime, it is important to understand the facts and circumstances related to each joint venture arrangement to evaluate whether this issue may apply.
Borrowers should be aware of these rules and appropriately disclose their relationships and affiliations in the SBA loan application. To guard against the business risk of PPP loan ineligibility, however, many providers are also attempting to increase capacity under existing lines of credit, apply for Emergency Injury Disaster loans (EIDL) and are working with their advisors to take advantage of tax relief offered under the CARES Act and CMS’s expansion of the Accelerated and Advance Payments Program.
Please reach out to one of the authors below if you have questions about the information contained in this Client Alert.
Jason S. Greis at jgreis@beneschlaw.com or 312.624.6412.
Scott P. Downing at sdowning@beneschlaw.com or 312.624.6326.
***
Please note that this information is current as of the date of this Client Alert, based on the available data. However, because COVID-19’s status and updates related to the same are ongoing, we recommend real-time review of guidance distributed by the CDC and local officials.

Latest News
Back To Wright Line: NLRB Resets Standards for Workplace Misconduct
Employers have regained greater flexibility to address offensive or abusive employee conduct that occurs during union activity or other activity protected by the National Labor Relations Act. On September 23, 2026, the National Labor Relations Board (the “Board”) issued a significant decision in Lion Elastomers LLC, 375 NLRB No. 41, restoring the prior standard for evaluating discipline when employee misconduct occurs during protected concerted activity from General Motors LLC, 369 NLRB No. 127.
Can an Algorithm Commit a Tort? The Circuit Split Over Section 230
A growing circuit split is reshaping the scope of Section 230 immunity. While the Fourth and Ninth Circuits continue to view algorithmic recommendations as protected publisher conduct, the Third Circuit has taken a narrower approach, holding that certain algorithm-driven content recommendations may constitute a platform’s own conduct and therefore fall outside Section 230’s protections.
Key Considerations for Businesses facing Defamation Issues: Strategies for Protecting Your Reputation and Brand
Defamation risk for businesses has never been higher. Even five years ago, unfavorable press could be expected to fade from …
SDNY Bankruptcy Court Offers Further Direction on Default Interest and Fee Recovery
The SDNY Bankruptcy Court’s written decision in 1300 Desert Willow builds on the framework established in Mako, providing additional guidance on when a debtor can overcome the presumption that an oversecured creditor is entitled to post-petition default interest at the contractual rate.