https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2022/01/31/americas-covid-job-saving-programme-gave-most-of-its-cash-to-the-rich Skip to content * Menu * Weekly edition * Search Sign in * Featured + Climate change + Coronavirus + The Biden presidency + American power + 1843 magazine + The World Ahead 2022 + Daily briefing * Sections + The world this week + Leaders + Letters + Briefing + United States + The Americas + Asia + China + Middle East & Africa + Europe + Britain + International + Business + Finance & economics + Science & technology + Culture + Graphic detail + Obituary + Special reports + Technology Quarterly + Essay + By Invitation + Schools brief + The World Ahead 2022 + What If? + Open Future + The Economist Explains * More + Newsletters + Podcasts + Films + Subscriber events + iOS app + Android app + Executive courses * Manage my account * Sign out Search [ ] Graphic detail Daily chart America's covid job-saving programme gave most of its cash to the rich But the country was ill-prepared to do better --------------------------------------------------------------------- Jan 31st 2022 * * * * It was known as the "American peculiarity". Weeks into the first pandemic-induced lockdowns in March 2020, America was suffering from anomalously high job losses. The unemployment rate more than quadrupled between February and April, leaping from 3.5% to 14.7%. Elsewhere in the oecd, a club of mostly rich countries, the average increase was much less steep. Unemployment rates in Britain and Germany barely budged, rising from 4% to 4.1% and 3.5% to 3.7% respectively. Many governments staved off damage by paying businesses to keep workers employed. But America had little experience with anything approaching that sort of drastic intervention. Its hastily designed scheme sent much of its relief money to people who didn't need it. The Economist today Handpicked stories, in your inbox A daily newsletter with the best of our journalism [ ]Sign up A study by economists at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and America's Federal Reserve quantifies these failings. The cares Act, a $2.2trn covid-19 economic-relief package, passed in March 2020, boosted unemployment benefits and introduced stimulus cheques of up to $1,200 per person. It also initiated the Paycheck Protection Programme (ppp), a scheme offering loans of up to $10m to businesses with fewer than 500 employees (covering 47% of workers). Loans were forgiven if firms sustained pre-pandemic employment and wages six months after receiving the funds. The study found that ppp payments were targeted with less precision than stimulus cheques or unemployment benefits (though a surprising share of the latter went to the richest households, because a lot of well-off people lost their jobs). Business loans from the federal government did prevent job losses, but only to a limited extent: less than a third of ppp dollars went to workers who would otherwise have been laid off. Roughly three-quarters of the programme's spending went to business owners and shareholders. Almost $366bn--72% of funding in 2020--went to households making more than $144,000 per year. The ppp was poorly designed. Any small business that could prove it was "substantially affected by covid-19" was eligible. Firms could apply if they had fewer than 500 employees per site, rather than in total. Shake Shack, a fast-food chain with roughly 220 branches in America and a market capitalisation of almost $2.5bn, received a multimillion dollar loan. So did the Los Angeles Lakers, a basketball team valued at more than $5bn. Both subsequently returned the money amid mounting political pressure. Other big firms did not. European countries did better: governments encouraged struggling employers to keep workers on their payrolls with reduced hours, and then made up some or all of the pay gap. Unlike the ppp, such programmes were usually aimed only at struggling firms that needed to cut salaries (though they were not always well targeted: a share of beneficiaries in Britain continued to pay dividends). Yet despite the flaws in America's programme, the study's authors argue that Congress was incapable of doing better. Crafting a targeted policy would have been hard, expensive and slow. Many countries that kept workers in jobs had programmes in place already: some of the most successful--including France, Japan and Germany--simply increased coverage and benefits at the onset of the pandemic. If America hopes to waste less money in future crises, it should plan ahead. # Editor's note (January 31st 2021): The author of this piece worked with David Autor, a member of the team who wrote the paper referenced in this article, until December 2021, but took no part in this research. For a look behind the scenes of our data journalism, sign up to Off the Charts, our weekly newsletter. Reuse this contentThe Trust Project The Economist today Handpicked stories, in your inbox A daily newsletter with the best of our journalism [ ]Sign up More from Graphic detail Elysian stakes How we forecast the French election [20220205_WOT110] Daily chart By one measure of living standards, South Korea has overtaken Japan [20220205_WOT155] Singing in tongues What Spotify data show about the decline of English [20220129_wop800] Daily chart In tennis, the elite capture the glory--and most of the money [20220129_WOT921] More from Graphic detail [20220205_WOT110] How we forecast the French election We reveal our statistical model--and how it works [20220205_WOT155] By one measure of living standards, South Korea has overtaken Japan Faster productivity growth helps explain South Korea's ascent --------------------------------------------------------------------- [20220129_wop800] What Spotify data show about the decline of English Our interactive analysis of five years of hits in 70 countries--and the links between them --------------------------------------------------------------------- [20220205_WOT110] How we forecast the French election We reveal our statistical model--and how it works [20220205_WOT155] By one measure of living standards, South Korea has overtaken Japan Faster productivity growth helps explain South Korea's ascent --------------------------------------------------------------------- [20220129_wop800] What Spotify data show about the decline of English Our interactive analysis of five years of hits in 70 countries--and the links between them --------------------------------------------------------------------- In tennis, the elite capture the glory--and most of the money But a divide persists between the sexes --------------------------------------------------------------------- * Subscribe * Group subscriptions * Reuse our content * The Trust Project * Help and contact us Keep updated * * * * * * Published since September 1843 to take part in "a severe contest between intelligence, which presses forward, and an unworthy, timid ignorance obstructing our progress." The Economist * About * Advertise * Press centre * Store The Economist Group * The Economist Group * Economist Intelligence * Economist Impact * Economist Events * Working Here * Which MBA? * GMAT Tutor * GRE Tutor * Executive Jobs * Executive Education Navigator * Executive Education: The New Global Order * Executive Education: Business Writing * Terms of Use * Privacy * Cookie Policy * Manage Cookies * Accessibility * Modern Slavery Statement * Do Not Sell My Personal Information Copyright (c) The Economist Newspaper Limited 2022. All rights reserved.