Client Alerts & Insights
Tax Guidance on Paycheck Protection Program (PPP)
November 19, 2020
Authored By:
The IRS has previously released guidance saying that expenses paid with Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) proceeds which would otherwise be deductible will not be permitted to be deducted. There was much hope in the business community that this ruling would be overturned since it effectively reduces the benefit of PPP by a company’s marginal tax rate.
Unfortunately, the IRS released another revenue ruling on November 18, 2020 affirming its previous stance. The ruling can be found here and essentially states that if there is a reasonable expectation that a PPP loan will be forgiven then the PPP borrower cannot deduct expenses paid for with PPP proceeds for tax purposes.
Given that this is the second time the IRS has taken this stance, it is likely that legislation would be needed from Congress to change directions.
The impact on taxes can have a significant impact on cash flows and also on financial covenant calculations under credit facilities.
For more information, please contact your Benesch representative.
Matthew P. Delguyd at mdelguyd@beneschlaw.com or 216.363.4627.
Latest News
Ohio Board of Professional Conduct Issues Ohio Ethics Guide on Artificial Intelligence for Lawyers and Judicial Officers
Dispensary tip practices—especially involving hybrid roles like “Leads” or Agents-in-Charge—are increasingly being scrutinized as unlawful as a surge in wage-and-hour lawsuits claim that managers or employees with supervisory duties are improperly sharing in tips meant for front-line staff.
Connecticut Broadens Data Privacy Act Requirements Effective July 1, 2026
Key Takeaways Revised Applicability Scope and Exemptions Effective July 1, 2026, the CTDPA’s existing applicability thresholds are reduced, resulting in …
SCOTUS Extends FAA Exemption to Last-Mile Drivers: What the Flowers Foods decision means for motor carriers and transportation providers
On May 28, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Flowers Foods, Inc. v. Brock, expanding reach of the Federal Arbitration Act’s (“FAA”) Section 1 exemption for transportation workers engaged in interstate commerce. The Court held that a worker who transports goods on an intrastate leg of an interstate journey can qualify for Section 1’s exemption without crossing state lines or interacting with vehicles that do. This decision has significant implications for motor carriers and transportation providers that rely on arbitration agreements to resolve disputes with independent contractors and employee drivers.
Beyond the Buzzwords: State AGs Put Enforcement Muscle Behind Algorithmic Pricing and Age Verification Crackdowns
State AGs are doubling down—across party lines—on consumer protection, with a sharp focus on vulnerable groups and increased scrutiny of algorithmic pricing models and online age verification practices.