Create a free account, or log in

Explained: Is your startup eligible for the COVID-19 wage subsidies?

The government has released clarification on eligibility criteria for its JobKeeper scheme, suggesting startups will indeed be able to claim the support.
Budget
StartupAus chief executive Alex McCauley.

The government has clarified some of the eligibility criteria for its $130 billion wage subsidy scheme, suggesting startups will indeed be able to claim the support.

On Monday, the federal government outlined its $130 billion JobKeeper scheme, aimed at alleviating salary costs for businesses affected by the COVID-19 outbreak and keeping people employed for the next six months.

The package is expansive. Employers will be able to claim payments of $1,500 per eligible employee, including full-time and part-time employees, and some casual workers. It also applies to sole traders and self-employed people, a sector that had previously been somewhat left behind.

You can read more about the scheme and the eligibility criteria here.

Itโ€™s a particularly attractive package for startups, many of which see their staff as their most important asset; good people are often hard to come by, and costly to recruit.

But inevitably, there was confusion, and for a while it looked like many startups wouldnโ€™t fall under the eligibility criteria.

Now, weโ€™ve straightened a few things out.

What was the issue?

The JobKeeper package provided something of a lifeline for most businesses, but left questions unanswered for startups.

The subsidy of $1,500 per eligible employee is available to businesses that have seen a decrease in revenue of 30% or more.

But the sticking point for startups was the time period relating to that.

The statement issued by the Prime Minister said the subsidy is for businesses that have seen a reduction of revenue since March 1, 2020.

Information from the Treasury, however, said eligibility hinges on a revenue reduction of more than 30% โ€œrelative to a comparable period a year agoโ€.

That is, the one-month or three-month period that would cover March last year, depending on the businessโ€™ activity reporting period.

The information was contradictory. And if the Treasuryโ€™s version was correct (which it has transpired to be), it posed a threat to startups that are less than 12 months old, and therefore donโ€™t have revenue figures for this time last year.

Even for those that are a bit older, a year is a long time for startups. A business could have seen revenues tank in the past month, but still be turning over more than they were a year ago.

Of course, their current employee numbers will be relevant to where the business is now, not where it was last year.

Speaking to SmartCompany, Alex McCauley, chief executive of StartupAus, says comparing revenues to a period 12 months ago is a sensible way to do it, for most businesses.

โ€œI think theyโ€™re trying to walk a line,โ€ he says.

โ€œThe standard way of operating for the ATO on something like this is to do a prior-year comparable period, because lots of businesses are seasonal, and the only way to compare March this year is to compare it with March last year.

โ€œFor lots of businesses, December canโ€™t be compared with March. There will be a cyclical revenue cycle for those businesses.โ€

But, startups are not most businesses, and for many, comparing revenue on an annual basis doesnโ€™t make sense.

โ€œNot just startups, but lots of growing businesses across the economy would have been left out if that had remained the only way of assessing for this scheme,” says McCauley.

Whatโ€™s changed?

Following confused outcries from the startup sector, and some rather effective haranguing from McCauley himself, the Treasury has since issued an updated JobKeeper fact sheet.

Now, it specifies that to establish a 30% fall in turnover โ€œmost businessesโ€ will have to show revenue has fallen relative to a year earlier.

But, there will be exceptions.

โ€œWhere a business was not in operation a year earlier, or where their turnover a year earlier was not representative of their usual or average turnover, (e.g. because there was a large interim acquisition, they were newly established or their turnover is typically highly variable) the Tax Commissioner will have discretion to consider additional information that the business can provide to establish that they have been adversely affected by the impacts of the coronavirus,โ€ the Treasury says.

In layman’s terms, this means if your business wasnโ€™t established 12 months ago, or if youโ€™ve been through a high-growth phase thatโ€™s significantly slowed, you donโ€™t have to be judged by a year-on-year decline.

You will still have to prove the impact the coronavirus has had on your business, although we donโ€™t know exactly how.

The tax commissioner will also be able to set alternative eligibility criteria in specific circumstances, the Treasury says.

And if a business estimates in good faith that it will have a decline of 30% or more, but actually the decline is a little less than 30%, โ€œthere will be some toleranceโ€.

What does it mean for high-growth startups?

This update means startups are much more likely to be eligible for the scheme. It offers flexibility for businesses to choose what their best revenue comparison period should be.

โ€œIf March to March isnโ€™t a good comparison for your business because youโ€™ve got highly variable revenue, or because youโ€™re a relatively newly-formed company, then you can pick another comparison period,โ€ McCauley explains.

And, as is stands, it appears that high-growth revenue counts as โ€˜highly variableโ€™ revenue.

โ€œOn the plain reading of the words, โ€˜highly variableโ€™ isnโ€™t just up and down. Up and up is also highly variable,โ€ McCauley says.

โ€œWhat they mean is not a flat line across a page when you graph it over a year,โ€ he adds.

โ€œI think itโ€™s pretty clear that if your revenue is 40% different from month-to-month, thatโ€™s highly variable, whether thatโ€™s 40% more each month or something else.โ€

The clarification also throws a bone to newly-formed startups, whether theyโ€™re less than 12 months old or not, that are not seeing the revenue they expected.

โ€œIn the context of the broader economy, โ€˜recently formedโ€™ might be anything under 10 years, but thereโ€™s no clear guidance in the advice,โ€ McCauley explains.

โ€œA lot of companies that think of themselves as startups will probably serve to satisfy that test, even on the โ€˜recently formedโ€™ criteria.โ€

Should you be worried about the ‘commissionerโ€™s discretion’?

The update allows the tax commissioner to consider alternative tests to establish negative effects of COVID-19 on businesses, at his discretion.

On the one hand, looking at startups on a case-by-case basis doesnโ€™t seem like a practical way of doing things. Like everyone else, many of them need financial support as soon as possible.

But, at the same time, this offers a safety net. If you donโ€™t meet the specific criteria, but you do feel youโ€™ve been affected, itโ€™s reassurance that thereโ€™s wiggle-room. You probably wonโ€™t be left out in the cold.

โ€œWhen it comes down to it, eligibility for this measure is self-assessed,โ€ McCauley notes.

โ€œI think the commissionerโ€™s discretion will come into it further down the track when theyโ€™re reviewing all these arrangements and going over the books,โ€ he says.

Discretionary allowances were likely added to cover cases where a business has clearly been affected, but might still not meet the specific criteria.

Rather than becoming something time-consuming, itโ€™s a safety net for those that might otherwise have slipped through the cracks, McCauley suggests.

โ€œClearly, that was there to make companies comfortable that if they can show with evidence that COVID has negatively impacted their business โ€ฆ then they will be eligible for this payment,โ€ he says.

โ€œI suspect that will be a mechanism used by the ATO to basically bring common sense to a test that canโ€™t, by definition, always apply in every circumstance.โ€

What should startups do?

If youโ€™re a startup and youโ€™ve stood people down, or laid people off, because youโ€™ve been affected by the COVID-19 outbreak, but youโ€™re still not sure if you qualify for the JobKeeper payments, McCauleyโ€™s advice is to apply regardless.

โ€œThis isnโ€™t a payment to support business, itโ€™s a payment to support people,โ€ he says.

โ€œIf your business has people who, because of COVID have been laid off or stood down, you should be looking at every option to help those people manage through the crisis,โ€ he advises.

โ€œThatโ€™s what the government wants too.โ€

Itโ€™s worth noting here that currently this applies to employees, not contractors. But, as sole-traders, contractors will be able to apply for the subsidy themselves.

All in all, while itโ€™s taken a couple of days to iron out the details, McCauley says broadly, this is good news for startups.

โ€œIt was already a genuinely good and helpful measure more broadly,โ€ he says.

โ€œThe risk was that, because of the way the thing was set up, companies in this space would be left out.

โ€œI think weโ€™ve been heard on that and now theyโ€™re pretty clearly included,โ€ he adds.

โ€œThatโ€™s brilliant, and I think it will be a great relief for lots of founders and lots of employees in startups and growth companies.โ€

NOW READ: Startup sector calls on government for โ€œurgent and criticalโ€ support during COVID-19 crisis

NOW READ: What do WhatsApp, Dropbox and Kickstarter have in common? Why times of crisis breed invention