Client Alerts & Insights
The Paycheck Protection Program Loan Forgiveness Application
May 18, 2020
Authored By:
On May 15 2020, the SBA released the The Paycheck Protection Program Loan Forgiveness Application. We address some of the highlights of the application below.
- For administrative efficiency, if a borrower received proceeds of a loan in the middle of a pay period and processes payroll bi-weekly (i.e. 26 pays per year) or more frequently the borrower can calculate its payroll costs staring on the first day of the first full pay period after the loan was funded. This is known in the application as the “Alternative Payroll Covered Period”
Note that if a client uses the Alternative Payroll Covered Period to calculate payroll costs it still must use the regular Covered Period (i.e. first 8 weeks after the loan was funded) to calculate the following:
a. Interest payments
b. Rent and lease payments
c. Utility Payments
If the borrower uses the Alternative Payroll Covered Period to calculate payroll costs, it must also use the same period to calculate FTEs and salary/hourly wage reductions. - To the extent non-payroll costs (i.e. rent, interest or utilities) are incurred during the Covered Period, but the bill for such amount is not due until after the Covered Period, the amount can still be forgiven as long as the amount is paid before the next regular billing date.
- Payroll costs incurred during the borrower’s last pay period, but not paid by the end of the Covered Period or the Alternative Payroll Covered Period, as applicable, can still be forgiven if paid on or before the next regular payroll date. This means that borrowers do not have to run a special payroll.
- FTEs are calculated based on a 40 hour work week and the calculation is done to the tenth of an hour and on a per employee basis.
- No single employee can count as more than one FTE. This means if a person worked over 40 hours per week, they still count as one employee.
- For administrative efficiency, borrower’s may designate anyone who worked less than 40 hours a week as one half of an FTE.
- When determining if the forgiveness amount is reduced due to salary or wage reduction of more than 25%, you compare average salary/hour wages between 1/1/20 and 3/31/20 to average salary of hourly wages during the Covered Period or Alternative Payroll Covered Period.
- FTE count does not have to be reduced for any of the following reasons:
a. an employee was fired for cause;
b. an employee voluntarily resigned;
c. an employee voluntarily requested and received a reduction in their hours; or
d. an employer offered in writing to re-hire an employee, but the employee refused the offer - If the borrower reduced FTEs during 2/15/20 through 4/26/20 and as calculated on June 30th, the borrower has the same number of FTEs it did during borrower’s pay period that included February 15th, the forgiveness amount will not be reduced as result of lower number of FTEs.
Page 10 of the application contains a detailed description of the documentation that needs to be submitted for forgiveness. Note that documentation must be retained for 6 years from the date the loan is forgiven.
If you have any questions, please contact a member of Benesch’s Commercial Finance & Banking Practice Group.
Matthew P. Delguyd at mdelguyd@beneschlaw.com or 216.363.4627.
Logan Bryant at lbryant@beneschlaw.com or 216.363.6217.
***
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
Supreme Court Clarifies Judicial Estoppel Standard in Bankruptcy Nondisclosure Cases
The U.S. Supreme Court rejected a rigid rule that often blocked debtors from pursuing claims they failed to disclose in bankruptcy. Courts must now look at the full circumstances before deciding whether an omission was intentional or an honest mistake.
Federal Court Hands Major Win to Tissue Product Manufacturers – FDA’s HCT/P Classification Decision for Umbilical Cord–Derived Product CORDGRAFT Rejected
On March 18, 2026, Chief Judge Brian C. Wimes of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri issued a significant decision overturning the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (“FDA”) classification of Vitti Labs’ umbilical cord–derived product, CORDGRAFT.
Science-Backed But Not FDA-Approved: New Lawsuit Challenges FDA’s Rejection of 114 Health-Related Advertising Claims
A new lawsuit challenges the FDA’s rejection of 114 health-related advertising claims for supplements, arguing that the agency’s narrow interpretation of what counts as an “authoritative statement” unfairly blocks science-backed—but not FDA-approved—claims from appearing on product labels.
When ChatGPT Lies: What the First Wave of AI Defamation Cases Means for Plaintiffs
The common argument made by plaintiffs that differences in alleged misrepresentations are transcended by the center of the gravity of the alleged fraud should not be addressed through the typical approach of just comparing the level of variance of the representations in the case at issue with that in the relevant precedent.