Social Europe

politics, economy and employment & labour

  • Themes
    • A ‘manifesto’ for 2024
    • Global cities
    • Strategic autonomy
    • War in Ukraine
    • European digital sphere
    • Recovery and resilience
  • Publications
    • Books
    • Dossiers
    • Occasional Papers
    • Research Essays
    • Brexit Paper Series
  • Podcast
  • Videos
  • Newsletter
  • Membership

Keeping business alive: the government will pay

Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman 18th March 2020

To prevent the coronavirus shock to demand precipitating a long-lasting depression, government needs to become short-term payer of last resort.

payer of last resort
Emmanuel Saez

The coronavirus threatens the world’s economic life. The most important message that needs to come from heads of state immediately, even before any new law or implementation details, is: ‘Do not lay off your workers or liquidate your business. Government will pay your idle workers and your necessary maintenance costs while you are shutdown. Government money is coming soon.’

Several European countries have moved in this direction—most notably Denmark with its temporary wage compensation scheme and France with the address by the president, Emmanuel Macron, on March 16th. It is crucial to stanch the flow of mass layoffs and business destruction already starting.

payer of last resort
Gabriel Zucman

Output loss

Social-distancing measures, essential to fight the epidemic, are sharply reducing demand in many sectors, such as transport, restaurants, hotels and entertainment. This direct output loss is expected to be short, probably a few months.

It is possible to estimate this loss roughly by summing up output in sectors that are going to shut down—nationwide lockdowns have already been decided in Italy, Spain and France, among other countries. For the United States, we estimate that the direct output loss will be around 30 per cent. If this lasts a quarter, the annual loss to gross domestic product will be 7.5 per cent—comparable to a very severe recession.

Government cannot undo this, but it can alleviate economic hardship during the epidemic and prevent lasting damage to the economy. In other words, government can prevent a very sharp but short recession becoming a long-lasting depression.

Absent government actions, the direct output loss will create large losses for businesses and will lead to mass layoffs. Many businesses and workers do not have enough liquidity to weather dramatic shortfalls in demand. The risk is that many businesses liquidate, severely affecting workers’ families.


Become a Social Europe Member


Support independent publishing and progressive ideas by becoming a Social Europe member for less than 5 Euro per month. Your support makes all the difference!


Click here to become a member

The death of a business has long-term costs: links between entrepreneurs, workers and customers are destroyed and often need to be rebuilt from scratch; laid-off workers need to find new jobs. Keeping businesses alive through this crisis and making sure workers continue to receive their pay cheques is essential—even for businesses and workers that have to remain idle due to social distancing. (Standard economic models assume zero transaction costs for hiring workers, finding customers, deploying capital and so on, and hence cannot capture the issue well.)

Social insurance

In the context of this pandemic, we need a new form of social insurance, one that directly helps workers and businesses. The most direct way to provide this insurance is to have the government act as a payer of last resort, so that hibernating businesses can keep paying their workers (instead of laying them off) and paying their necessary bills (instead of going bankrupt).

In practice, the key step is to make sure that cash flows to idle workers and businesses immediately. Payments should be set in the simplest form. Idle workers should immediately start receiving special unemployment-insurance benefits, so that they are no longer a cost to their employers—even though they stay formally employed—and no rehiring process is needed once they can come back to work.

The unemployment-insurance system is already up and running. This makes it possible to compute and deliver compensation to idle workers. Self-employed individuals (such as gig workers) could report themselves as idle and be eligible for this special unemployment insurance. In case of partial idling, unemployment-insurance benefits would be prorated.

Unemployment-insurance benefits are progressive, since they replace a higher fraction of earnings for low-paid workers. This is a desirable feature, as low-paid workers are more likely to be affected by the lockdown (being less likely to be able to work from home) and less likely to have savings to replace a temporary loss in earnings.  

In the payer-of-last-resort programme we envision, businesses on lockdown would report their necessary monthly costs of maintenance and receive payment from the government. Necessary costs are rent, utility payments, interest on debt, health insurance of idle workers and other costs vital for the maintenance of the business, even if no longer operating.

For partially shut-down sectors, the government would pay a fraction of the maintenance costs. The amounts don’t need to be exact; verification and correction can take place once the lockdown is over. Any excess government payment could be transformed into an interest-free loan the government could recoup over several years.

Key advantage

The key advantage of this policy is that businesses can hibernate without bleeding cash and hence without risking bankruptcy. There are two reasons why it would work in the case of the coronavirus pandemic.

First, it is clear what is driving the shock—a health crisis which has nothing to do with any business’s decision and will be temporary. Secondly, different industries are affected differently. That’s in contrast to normal recessions, where the drop in demand is widely spread and has no clear timeline.

Providing liquidity—in the form of interest-free loans, for example—can help businesses and laid-off workers weather the storm, but this policy is insufficient. Loans do not compensate businesses and workers for their losses but just allow them to smooth costs over a longer time horizon.

In the case of the coronavirus crisis, it makes sense for the government to compensate businesses and workers for their losses through social insurance. Each business can then re-emerge almost intact, after the hibernation due to social distancing ends, rather than loaded with a heavy coronavirus debt burden.  

How much would such a payer-of-last-resort programme cost? Based on national account statistics by industry, we estimate for the US that, with a nationwide lockdown, up to 30 per cent of aggregate demand could evaporate over the next three months, leading to a 7.5 per cent drop in annual GDP.

Compensating idle workers and necessary business-maintenance costs would involve government payments of around half this total. Unemployment insurance replaces about 50-60 per cent of wages, and essential maintenance costs of businesses are probably less than half of normal operating costs (for example, non-flying planes do not burn fuel).

The total cost for the government would thus be around 3.75 per cent of GDP, financed via an increase in public debt. The direct output loss from social-distancing measures would in effect be put on the government’s tab, that is to say socialised.

Not enough

Current proposals to deal with the economic consequences of the pandemic do not go far enough or are not well targeted to the ailing sectors. Business loans would help businesses but would not compensate them for their losses. Postponing tax payments would help with liquidity but is not well targeted, since it also benefits individuals and businesses not directly affected. Direct payments to individuals would help alleviate temporary economic hardship but this policy is poorly targeted as well—too little for those who lose their jobs and not needed by those who don’t.

During social distancing, the goal should not be to increase aggregate demand, since people can no longer spend on many goods and services. Existing unemployment-insurance and paid sick-leave policies come closest to helping laid off workers and those unable to work, but they do not prevent layoffs and do not help businesses.

A payer-of-last-resort programme will work if it is limited in time (say three months), so that the cost remains manageable and business decisions are not affected. It would not fully offset the economic cost of the coronavirus.

No matter what governments do, there will be real output losses. Even if airlines workers are paid, the plane rides won’t happen. For other sectors, supply-chain distortions will happen, no matter what, due for instance to quarantine measures.

But a payer-of-last-resort programme would alleviate the hardship for workers and businesses. It would maintain the cash flow for families and businesses, so that the coronavirus shock has no secondary impacts on demand—such as laid-off workers cutting down on consumption—and a quick rebound can take place once demand comes back.

Business activity is on hold today. But, with an intravenous cash flow, it can be kept alive until the health crisis is over.

Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman

Emmanuel Saez is director of the Center for Equitable Growth at the University of California at Berkeley; Gabriel Zucman is professor of economics there. They are co-authors of The Triumph of Injustice: How the Rich Dodge Taxes and How to Make Them Pay.

You are here: Home / Politics / Keeping business alive: the government will pay

Most Popular Posts

new world order,state,citizen A new world order: from warring states to citizensPaul Mason
Tesla,IF Metall,electric car,union US electric-car maker faces Swedish union shockGerman Bender
Israel,Hamas Israel and Hamas: the debasement of discourseRobert Misik
Israel-Palestine,refugee,refugees Israel-Palestine: a comparative perspectiveBo Rothstein
Germany,sick,economic Germany’s true economic diseasePeter Bofinger

Most Recent Posts

Europe,constitutional reform,EU,governance European constitutional reform hangs in the balanceGuido Montani
treaty changes,EU,European Parliament Treaty changes for an EU that works for citizensGabriele Bischoff
human security,Europe,investment,military Investing in human security in EuropeChiara Bonaiuti
citizenship education,European Union,democratic European citizenship education—antidote to hateRéka Heszterényi
healthcare,hospitals,social dialogue,pandemic Healthcare depends on the health of social dialogueJorge Cabrita and Victoria Cojocariu

Other Social Europe Publications

Global cities cover pdf Global cities
strategic autonomy Strategic autonomy
Bildschirmfoto 2023 05 08 um 21.36.25 scaled 1 RE No. 13: Failed Market Approaches to Long-Term Care
front cover Towards a social-democratic century?
Cover e1655225066994 National recovery and resilience plans

Eurofound advertisement

How will Europe’s green transition impact employment?

Climate-change objectives and decarbonisation measures are vital for the future of Europe. But how will these objectives affect employment and the labour market?

In the latest episode of the Eurofound Talks podcast series, Mary McCaughey speaks with the Eurofound senior research manager John Hurley about new research which shows a marginal increase in net employment from EU decarbonisation measures—but also potentially broad shifts in the labour market which could have a profound impact in several areas.


LISTEN HERE

Foundation for European Progressive Studies Advertisement

New Progressive Post magazine available!

In this new edition of the Progressive Post, the Special Coverage looks at EU fiscal rules, particularly at the long-awaited proposal to reform EU fiscal governance which was presented by the European Commission in April. The plan aimed to address the shortcomings of the current framework, promote growth and sustainability and reduce high public debt ratios but it lacks ambition. It falls short of enabling the green and social transition, and lacks instruments to improve the democratic legitimacy and transparency of the decision-making process.

The Focus is dedicated to Turkey, a heavyweight of the European neighbourhood, an EU candidate country—but one with which the EU has a progressively deteriorating relationship. One Dossier looks at Latin America, whose nations are increasingly breaking free from the traditional alignment of their foreign policy with more powerful allies in the northern hemisphere. The other Dossier on progressive cities in Europe offers a range of examples from European cities where a transformation towards sustainability is currently taking place concretely and on the ground, thanks to the vision and ambition of progressive administrations.

Discover the Progressive Post website and stay tuned!


DOWNLOAD HERE

Hans Böckler Stiftung Advertisement

WSI European Collective Bargaining Report 2022 / 2023

With real wages falling by 4 per cent in 2022, workers in the European Union suffered an unprecedented loss in purchasing power. The reason for this was the rapid increase in consumer prices, behind which nominal wage growth fell significantly. Meanwhile, inflation is no longer driven by energy import prices, but by domestic factors. The increased profit margins of companies are a major reason for persistent inflation. In this difficult environment, trade unions are faced with the challenge of securing real wages—and companies have the responsibility of making their contribution to returning to the path of political stability by reducing excess profits.


DOWNLOAD HERE

ETUI advertisement

Response measures to the energy crisis: a missed opportunity to feed the socio-ecological contract

With winter coming and Europe ready to get through it without energy shortages, power cuts and recession, new research conducted by the ETUI in seven EU member states (AT-FR-DE-GR-IT-PL-ES) highlights that, with some 80 per cent of spending being directed to broad-based measures, short-term national government support during the recent energy crisis was poorly targeted. As a result, both social- and climate-policy goals were rather sidelined, with the biggest beneficiaries of public fossil-fuel subsidies being higher income groups and the wealthiest people.


AVAILABLE HERE

Friedrich Ebert Stiftung advertisement

It‘s all about jobs: investing in Europe’s workers and qualifications for a competitive clean economy

An ecological miracle on the labour market? Or rather job losses? The impact on employment and job profiles in Europe of ecological modernisation is a question driving politics and society.

We have taken a close look at studies and forecasts on the development of the European labour market. One thing is clear: without qualified and motivated workers, the economy will not flourish and the modernisation process will come to a standstill. Europe must deliver on a massive scale in the coming years to remain at the forefront.

We spoke to trade unionists and experts: what trends do we need to shape, what risks do we need to avoid, what course do we need to set now? Key findings in this study from FES Just Climate.


DOWNLOAD HERE

About Social Europe

Our Mission

Article Submission

Membership

Advertisements

Legal Disclosure

Privacy Policy

Copyright

Social Europe Archives

Search Social Europe

Themes Archive

Politics Archive

Economy Archive

Society Archive

Ecology Archive

Follow us

RSS Feed

Follow us on LinkedIn

Follow us on YouTube

Social Europe ISSN 2628-7641