Members of Parliament (MPs) have a point (see related story). Excluding certain categories of companies from the COVID-19 payroll subsidy based on what seem rather arbitrary considerations is a bad idea. That this was apparently based on a United Nations (UN) industry classification does not make it necessarily right or even lawful.
For example, some so-called “essential services” were included and others not. The same goes for certain businesses allowed to operate under vastly different-than-normal circumstances. Just because these were – fully or partially – open with often major restrictions in no way implies they did not suffer.
It is best to stick to objective criteria like the minimum 20 per cent turnover loss standard. Otherwise, government could easily be accused of hiding behind the UN list rather than assisting employers who need it to pay and maintain their personnel.
After all, saving jobs and the related tax revenues was one of the main motives for the St. Maarten Support Relief Plan (SSRP). Disqualifying a lot of service-oriented sectors in a non-industrial economy defeats the purpose and could lead to more layoffs than many may realise.
Perhaps fiscal compliance can play a bigger role, but whatever selection guidelines are used need to be crystal clear, unambiguous as well as measurable. Just saying one “thinks” this or that kind of business does not require help may even create the impression of favouritism, and the mere perception of such is best avoided.
