By Ross Marchand

For millions of struggling small businesses across the country, a small hand up from Uncle Sam could go a long way. On April 24, the owners of mom-and-pop establishments breathed a sigh of relief when President Trump signed into law a $310 billion extension of the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), which offers forgivable loans to businesses with 500 or fewer employees.

Unfortunately, the program’s structure is hopelessly confusing, which has left many beleaguered businesses not receiving the money they need. Congress and the Trump administration must get PPP back on track and make sure struggling companies are able to get some relief.

Since PPP loans started flowing in early April, there’s been lots of press about large restaurant and entertainment chains jostling for taxpayer dollars meant for small businesses. Potbelly Sandwich shop nabbed $10 million from Uncle Sam, while Ruth’s Chris Steak House was approved for $10 million each for its two subsidiaries. Kura Sushi, which operates 25 locations in the U.S. and more than 400 restaurants worldwide, received about $6 million. After a public outcry, all of these chains returned the money. But more than 70 publicly traded companies received PPP funds before the initial program money ran out on April 16, and many of them (i.e. Fiesta Restaurant Group Inc.) have not yet given back the funding.

Reasonable people can argue about whether, say, individual Marriott locations deserve help. But it makes little sense to riddle what should be a broad-based relief program with loopholes that few can understand. In this case, the CARES Act allows companies in the “accommodation and food services” sectors to get small business loans for each business location that employs 500 or fewer workers. In other words, a publicly traded restaurant or hotel chain with many thousands of workers can take taxpayer dollars so long as individual locations meet the 500-worker employment threshold established by the CARES Act. New language from the SBA suggests that “it is unlikely that a public company with substantial market value and access to capital markets will be able to make the required certification in good faith” that they are struggling to get by. But guidance is still squishy, especially considering that capital markets are significantly impaired at the moment.

Bizarrely, the preferential treatment doled out to some industries and ownership structures is being withheld from other critical parts of the economy. Companies backed by private investors have been unable to get around complicated affiliation rules that render employees backed by investors, including private equity, ineligible for PPP assistance. The SBA’s Interim Final Rules on the program keep investor-backed businesses on the sidelines, forcing these companies to choose between taxpayer and investor dollars. Current rules force them to add the employee counts of their “affiliates” (companies investing in them and all other businesses that the investor might separately invest in) to their own totals, in effect ballooning the small company’s employee count and catapulting it outside the PPP eligibility threshold. For example, if an investor-backed …read more

Via:: American Conservative

By Ross Marchand

For millions of struggling small businesses across the country, a small hand up from Uncle Sam could go a long way. On April 24, the owners of mom-and-pop establishments breathed a sigh of relief when President Trump signed into law a $310 billion extension of the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), which offers forgivable loans to businesses with 500 or fewer employees.

Unfortunately, the program’s structure is hopelessly confusing, which has left many beleaguered businesses not receiving the money they need. Congress and the Trump administration must get PPP back on track and make sure struggling companies are able to get some relief.

Since PPP loans started flowing in early April, there’s been lots of press about large restaurant and entertainment chains jostling for taxpayer dollars meant for small businesses. Potbelly Sandwich shop nabbed $10 million from Uncle Sam, while Ruth’s Chris Steak House was approved for $10 million each for its two subsidiaries. Kura Sushi, which operates 25 locations in the U.S. and more than 400 restaurants worldwide, received about $6 million. After a public outcry, all of these chains returned the money. But more than 70 publicly traded companies received PPP funds before the initial program money ran out on April 16, and many of them (i.e. Fiesta Restaurant Group Inc.) have not yet given back the funding.

Reasonable people can argue about whether, say, individual Marriott locations deserve help. But it makes little sense to riddle what should be a broad-based relief program with loopholes that few can understand. In this case, the CARES Act allows companies in the “accommodation and food services” sectors to get small business loans for each business location that employs 500 or fewer workers. In other words, a publicly traded restaurant or hotel chain with many thousands of workers can take taxpayer dollars so long as individual locations meet the 500-worker employment threshold established by the CARES Act. New language from the SBA suggests that “it is unlikely that a public company with substantial market value and access to capital markets will be able to make the required certification in good faith” that they are struggling to get by. But guidance is still squishy, especially considering that capital markets are significantly impaired at the moment.

Bizarrely, the preferential treatment doled out to some industries and ownership structures is being withheld from other critical parts of the economy. Companies backed by private investors have been unable to get around complicated affiliation rules that render employees backed by investors, including private equity, ineligible for PPP assistance. The SBA’s Interim Final Rules on the program keep investor-backed businesses on the sidelines, forcing these companies to choose between taxpayer and investor dollars. Current rules force them to add the employee counts of their “affiliates” (companies investing in them and all other businesses that the investor might separately invest in) to their own totals, in effect ballooning the small company’s employee count and catapulting it outside the PPP eligibility threshold. For example, if an investor-backed …read more

Via:: American Conservative

By Ross Marchand

For millions of struggling small businesses across the country, a small hand up from Uncle Sam could go a long way. On April 24, the owners of mom-and-pop establishments breathed a sigh of relief when President Trump signed into law a $310 billion extension of the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), which offers forgivable loans to businesses with 500 or fewer employees.

Unfortunately, the program’s structure is hopelessly confusing, which has left many beleaguered businesses not receiving the money they need. Congress and the Trump administration must get PPP back on track and make sure struggling companies are able to get some relief.

Since PPP loans started flowing in early April, there’s been lots of press about large restaurant and entertainment chains jostling for taxpayer dollars meant for small businesses. Potbelly Sandwich shop nabbed $10 million from Uncle Sam, while Ruth’s Chris Steak House was approved for $10 million each for its two subsidiaries. Kura Sushi, which operates 25 locations in the U.S. and more than 400 restaurants worldwide, received about $6 million. After a public outcry, all of these chains returned the money. But more than 70 publicly traded companies received PPP funds before the initial program money ran out on April 16, and many of them (i.e. Fiesta Restaurant Group Inc.) have not yet given back the funding.

Reasonable people can argue about whether, say, individual Marriott locations deserve help. But it makes little sense to riddle what should be a broad-based relief program with loopholes that few can understand. In this case, the CARES Act allows companies in the “accommodation and food services” sectors to get small business loans for each business location that employs 500 or fewer workers. In other words, a publicly traded restaurant or hotel chain with many thousands of workers can take taxpayer dollars so long as individual locations meet the 500-worker employment threshold established by the CARES Act. New language from the SBA suggests that “it is unlikely that a public company with substantial market value and access to capital markets will be able to make the required certification in good faith” that they are struggling to get by. But guidance is still squishy, especially considering that capital markets are significantly impaired at the moment.

Bizarrely, the preferential treatment doled out to some industries and ownership structures is being withheld from other critical parts of the economy. Companies backed by private investors have been unable to get around complicated affiliation rules that render employees backed by investors, including private equity, ineligible for PPP assistance. The SBA’s Interim Final Rules on the program keep investor-backed businesses on the sidelines, forcing these companies to choose between taxpayer and investor dollars. Current rules force them to add the employee counts of their “affiliates” (companies investing in them and all other businesses that the investor might separately invest in) to their own totals, in effect ballooning the small company’s employee count and catapulting it outside the PPP eligibility threshold. For example, if an investor-backed …read more

Via:: American Conservative

By Ross Marchand

For millions of struggling small businesses across the country, a small hand up from Uncle Sam could go a long way. On April 24, the owners of mom-and-pop establishments breathed a sigh of relief when President Trump signed into law a $310 billion extension of the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), which offers forgivable loans to businesses with 500 or fewer employees.

Unfortunately, the program’s structure is hopelessly confusing, which has left many beleaguered businesses not receiving the money they need. Congress and the Trump administration must get PPP back on track and make sure struggling companies are able to get some relief.

Since PPP loans started flowing in early April, there’s been lots of press about large restaurant and entertainment chains jostling for taxpayer dollars meant for small businesses. Potbelly Sandwich shop nabbed $10 million from Uncle Sam, while Ruth’s Chris Steak House was approved for $10 million each for its two subsidiaries. Kura Sushi, which operates 25 locations in the U.S. and more than 400 restaurants worldwide, received about $6 million. After a public outcry, all of these chains returned the money. But more than 70 publicly traded companies received PPP funds before the initial program money ran out on April 16, and many of them (i.e. Fiesta Restaurant Group Inc.) have not yet given back the funding.

Reasonable people can argue about whether, say, individual Marriott locations deserve help. But it makes little sense to riddle what should be a broad-based relief program with loopholes that few can understand. In this case, the CARES Act allows companies in the “accommodation and food services” sectors to get small business loans for each business location that employs 500 or fewer workers. In other words, a publicly traded restaurant or hotel chain with many thousands of workers can take taxpayer dollars so long as individual locations meet the 500-worker employment threshold established by the CARES Act. New language from the SBA suggests that “it is unlikely that a public company with substantial market value and access to capital markets will be able to make the required certification in good faith” that they are struggling to get by. But guidance is still squishy, especially considering that capital markets are significantly impaired at the moment.

Bizarrely, the preferential treatment doled out to some industries and ownership structures is being withheld from other critical parts of the economy. Companies backed by private investors have been unable to get around complicated affiliation rules that render employees backed by investors, including private equity, ineligible for PPP assistance. The SBA’s Interim Final Rules on the program keep investor-backed businesses on the sidelines, forcing these companies to choose between taxpayer and investor dollars. Current rules force them to add the employee counts of their “affiliates” (companies investing in them and all other businesses that the investor might separately invest in) to their own totals, in effect ballooning the small company’s employee count and catapulting it outside the PPP eligibility threshold. For example, if an investor-backed …read more

Via:: American Conservative

By Ross Marchand

For millions of struggling small businesses across the country, a small hand up from Uncle Sam could go a long way. On April 24, the owners of mom-and-pop establishments breathed a sigh of relief when President Trump signed into law a $310 billion extension of the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), which offers forgivable loans to businesses with 500 or fewer employees.

Unfortunately, the program’s structure is hopelessly confusing, which has left many beleaguered businesses not receiving the money they need. Congress and the Trump administration must get PPP back on track and make sure struggling companies are able to get some relief.

Since PPP loans started flowing in early April, there’s been lots of press about large restaurant and entertainment chains jostling for taxpayer dollars meant for small businesses. Potbelly Sandwich shop nabbed $10 million from Uncle Sam, while Ruth’s Chris Steak House was approved for $10 million each for its two subsidiaries. Kura Sushi, which operates 25 locations in the U.S. and more than 400 restaurants worldwide, received about $6 million. After a public outcry, all of these chains returned the money. But more than 70 publicly traded companies received PPP funds before the initial program money ran out on April 16, and many of them (i.e. Fiesta Restaurant Group Inc.) have not yet given back the funding.

Reasonable people can argue about whether, say, individual Marriott locations deserve help. But it makes little sense to riddle what should be a broad-based relief program with loopholes that few can understand. In this case, the CARES Act allows companies in the “accommodation and food services” sectors to get small business loans for each business location that employs 500 or fewer workers. In other words, a publicly traded restaurant or hotel chain with many thousands of workers can take taxpayer dollars so long as individual locations meet the 500-worker employment threshold established by the CARES Act. New language from the SBA suggests that “it is unlikely that a public company with substantial market value and access to capital markets will be able to make the required certification in good faith” that they are struggling to get by. But guidance is still squishy, especially considering that capital markets are significantly impaired at the moment.

Bizarrely, the preferential treatment doled out to some industries and ownership structures is being withheld from other critical parts of the economy. Companies backed by private investors have been unable to get around complicated affiliation rules that render employees backed by investors, including private equity, ineligible for PPP assistance. The SBA’s Interim Final Rules on the program keep investor-backed businesses on the sidelines, forcing these companies to choose between taxpayer and investor dollars. Current rules force them to add the employee counts of their “affiliates” (companies investing in them and all other businesses that the investor might separately invest in) to their own totals, in effect ballooning the small company’s employee count and catapulting it outside the PPP eligibility threshold. For example, if an investor-backed …read more

Via:: American Conservative

By Carrie Severino When Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court was pending and sexual assault allegations against him surfaced, Democrats rushed to judgment in the blink of an eye. …read more

Via:: Fox Opines

By Doug Bandow

President Donald Trump’s bluster continues to leave the world more confused than usual. After Iranian boats sailed near a U.S. navy flotilla, he threatened Iran via tweet, authorizing American forces to “shoot down and destroy any and all Iranian gunboats if they harass” U.S. vessels. It was an echo of his tweet two years ago, insisting that Tehran “never, ever threaten the United States again.”

He never acted on that threat. This time, Gen John Hyten, Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, added a warning: “we will come and we will come large.” However, the Pentagon almost immediately dismissed the mutual bravado, insisting that policy had not changed. Deputy Secretary of Defense David Norquist explained the president was merely emphasizing that “all of our ships retain the right of self-defense.”

Unsurprisingly, Iranian officials responded in kind. One promised to “destroy any American terrorist force in the Persian Gulf that threatens security of Iran’s military or non-military ships.” Nor is the Persian Gulf the only flashpoint.

U.S. forces are unwelcome and under fire in Iraq by Iranian-backed militias. American personnel remain in Syria, where they illegally occupy Syrian oil installations and are tasked with blocking transit of Iranian forces aiding the Syrian government. Confrontations with Russian regulars and mercenaries allied with Syria and Iran already have occurred. Even an inadvertent clash could escalate dangerously.

For decades Washington’s policy toward Iran has been a disaster. In 1953 the U.S. helped overthrow the democratically-elected government of Mohammad Mossadegh. With American support Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi ruled brutally until he was overthrown by a broad-based revolution in February 1979.

Carter administration officials attempted to save the regime. The New York Times recently reported on how special envoy Gen. Robert E. Huyser admitted “that he had urged Iran’s top military leaders to kill as many demonstrators as necessary to keep the shah in power.” He complained that the top Iranian general was “gutless” and refused his advice.

A ruthless Islamist regime emerged from the chaos, leading to the 15-month captivity of America’s embassy staff. The Reagan administration backed Iraq’s Saddam Hussein in his bloody aggressive war against Iran, even providing components for chemical weapons and protecting tankers carrying oil whose sale funded Baghdad’s forces. In 1988 the U.S. navy shot down a civilian Iranian airliner, killing 290 people.

For a time Washington worried more about the specter of Iraqi than Iranian domination of the Persian Gulf, leading to roughly two decades of war and occupation of Iraq. Ironically, America’s ouster of Hussein allowed Iran to greatly increase its influence in its Shia-majority neighbor, which was reinforced by Tehran’s military aid against the Islamic State after the latter overran much of Iraq.

Concern over an Iranian nuclear program, which U.S. intelligence believes was halted in 2003, led to increasing economic sanctions and constant military threats. Although Tehran posed no threat to America, which could destroy the former many times over, Washington acted for its clients Israel and Saudi Arabia. President Barack Obama finally promoted America’s interests by joining several other nations in …read more

Via:: American Conservative

By Gregg Jarrett If there was ever any question about the dishonesty and corruption that poisoned the case against Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, newly released documents erase all doubt. …read more

Via:: Fox Opines

By Donna Brazile I’m horrified that the administration and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell are putting American lives at risk by forcing them to vote in-person during a pandemic involving a highly communicable virus. …read more

Via:: Fox Opines

By Deroy Murdock Across multiple televised debates, while the pandemic grew, those who crave Trump’s job stayed mum about COVID-19. …read more

Via:: Fox Opines