"To repay or not to repay": Directors' duties and the JobKeeper wage subsidy scheme

Editorial


Goding, Vincent. 2022. ""To repay or not to repay": Directors' duties and the JobKeeper wage subsidy scheme." Australian Law Journal. 96 (12), pp. 869-871.
Article Title

"To repay or not to repay": Directors' duties and the JobKeeper wage subsidy scheme

ERA Journal ID33861
Article CategoryEditorial
AuthorsGoding, Vincent
Journal TitleAustralian Law Journal
Journal Citation96 (12), pp. 869-871
Number of Pages3
Year2022
PublisherLawbook Co.
Place of PublicationAustralia
ISSN0004-9611
Web Address (URL)https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/agispt.20221209079476
AbstractThe JobKeeper wage subsidy scheme (JobKeeper) was the federal government’s flagship economic policy response to the pandemic. Running initially from March to September 2020, it was designed to assist businesses affected by the pandemic to cover their wages by providing a subsidy of $1,500 per eligible employee per fortnight. Under the first iteration, an entity would qualify if it passed a basic decline in turnover test, calculated by comparing “projected” turnover for a relevant period in 2020 with the corresponding period in 2019. There was no requirement to reassess the projection during the first six months of the scheme. That the decline in turnover might not eventuate, or that an entity might remain profitable, or increase profits during the period of support, was irrelevant once the test was met. Widely supported and praised for contributing to the country’s economic recovery, JobKeeper and its perceived undeserving beneficiaries were also criticised when public funds ended up subsidising the wages bills of profitable – even booming – companies. Due to their transparency, publicly listed companies bore the brunt. JobKeeper “profiteers” were called upon to repay the unnecessary corporate welfare. Few did. It has been reported that at least $38 billion under the scheme went to companies whose turnover did not fall below applicable thresholds; while $2.6 billion went to companies whose turnovers doubled or tripled during quarters for which they claimed JobKeeper. While there is no reliable public record of the total amount repaid, based on disclosures to the Australian Stock Exchange the amount repaid by listed entities as of July 2022 is just over $242 million. JobKeeper provides a contemporary case study to consider corporate responsibilities and the trajectory of the law regarding directors’ duties to act in companies’ best interests.
KeywordsCorporation law
Contains Sensitive ContentDoes not contain sensitive content
ANZSRC Field of Research 2020480103. Corporations and associations law
350702. Corporate social responsibility
350701. Corporate governance
Public NotesFiles associated with this item cannot be displayed due to copyright restrictions.
Byline AffiliationsUniversity of the Sunshine Coast
Permalink -

https://research.usq.edu.au/item/z8xq6/-to-repay-or-not-to-repay-directors-duties-and-the-jobkeeper-wage-subsidy-scheme

  • 22
    total views
  • 1
    total downloads
  • 0
    views this month
  • 0
    downloads this month

Export as

Related outputs

Directors' duties, CSR and the JobKeeper wage subsidy scheme
Goding, Vincent. 2024. "Directors' duties, CSR and the JobKeeper wage subsidy scheme." Melbourne University Law Review. 47 (2).
Exceptionality, Neoliberalism and Corporations in COVID Times: JobKeeper and the legal shaping of economic order in crisis
Goding, Vincent Reginald Andrew. 2024. Exceptionality, Neoliberalism and Corporations in COVID Times: JobKeeper and the legal shaping of economic order in crisis. PhD Thesis Doctor of Philosoph. University of the Sunshine Coas. https://doi.org/10.25907/00841
Submission to Independent Evaluation of the JobKeeper Payment
Goding, Vincent. 2023. Submission to Independent Evaluation of the JobKeeper Payment. Australian Government: The Treasury.
The Robot and Human Futures: Visualising Autonomy in Law and Science Fiction
Goding, Vincent and Tranter, Kieran. 2023. "The Robot and Human Futures: Visualising Autonomy in Law and Science Fiction." Law and Critique: journal of critical legal studies. 34 (3), pp. 315-340. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10978-023-09360-7
Introduction - 2022 Annual Conference of the Society of Corporate Law Academics - Re: The Corporation — Re-Thinking, Re-Forming, ReImagining
Peters, Timothy D. and Goding, Vincent. 2022. "Introduction - 2022 Annual Conference of the Society of Corporate Law Academics - Re: The Corporation — Re-Thinking, Re-Forming, ReImagining." Australian Journal of Corporate Law. 38 (1), pp. 1-4.
COVID, crisis, and unordinary order: A critical analysis of Australia’s JobKeeper wage subsidy scheme as an exceptional measure
Goding, Vincent. 2022. "COVID, crisis, and unordinary order: A critical analysis of Australia’s JobKeeper wage subsidy scheme as an exceptional measure." Jindal Global Law Review. 13 (1), pp. 39-68. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41020-022-00166-9
'The machine runs itself': law is technology and Australian embryo and human cloning law
Goding, Vincent and Tranter, Kieran. 2021. "'The machine runs itself': law is technology and Australian embryo and human cloning law." Griffith Law Review. 30 (2), pp. 240-269. https://doi.org/10.1080/10383441.2021.1901356