Small Law Firms, Solo Lawyers Strain for Relief in $350B Pandemic Loan Program
Firms and solo practitioners may test the eligibility requirements of the already-challenged program.
April 07, 2020 at 05:24 PM
5 minute read
As small and midsize law firms rush to claim a share of $350 billion in government-backed loans to keep their payrolls afloat, some are finding that their business models pose a special obstacle.
Starting April 3, small U.S. businesses have been able to start applying for the Paycheck Protection Program, a key part of the $2 trillion COVID-19 pandemic relief bill. Under the program, banks will loan up to $10 million to businesses with less than 500 employees on very favorable terms—two-year maturity and 1% interest rate.
The U.S. Small Business Administration will forgive the entirety of the loan's principal if, eight weeks after receiving the money, the businesses keep all of their employees on the payroll and the money they borrowed is used for compensation, rent, mortgage interest or utilities. If businesses do take the money and lay off employees anyway—or cut their pay by more than 25%—then they have to pay back a portion of the principal.
"Every firm I have spoken to that meets the size criteria says they're applying," said Lisa Smith, a principal at the law firm consultancy Fairfax Associates. "You can probably throw a dart to any firm with 200 lawyers and probably find one."
Another legal consultant said "many, if not, almost all" law firms with less than 500 employees are applying for the program.
The program's roll-out has been a frustrating headache for everyone involved. Technical problems have plagued the program since its April 3 launch. On Monday, a key SBA system that's used in processing small business applications crashed, according to Politico. Financial institutions have seen a crush of applications, according to Vox.
But law firms and solo practitioners are likely to represent a special test of the program's eligibility requirements because of the compensation models and business structures that characterize the legal industry.
"It's really challenging trying to fit a square peg through a round hole, because law firms have so many different ways to pay their employees," said Tyler Maulsby, an ethics counsel at Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz.
A key example of this confusion is whether lawyers who might own equity in their firm, whether designated as partners, members or shareholders, count toward the program's head count limit. One legal consultant said he heard that law firms that are organized as professional corporations and send W-2 forms to equity partners must include them in their employee totals, but firms that are organized as limited liability partnerships can't because equity partners are not employees.
But David Hernand, a partner in Paul Hastings' corporate department who has been informally giving advice to his lawyer friends who run smaller firms, said he expected equity partners would be considered employees.
Noting the variety of law firm and compensation structures out there, Maulsby said it's important for law firms to be consistent in how they treat their equity partners apart from their employees who receive a traditional paycheck. Law firms should consult their bankers and tax professionals on these issues if they have questions, Maulsby added.
"It's reasonable to make that distinction, especially when the application is asking who is getting paid on a salary … and who is at risk not getting paid," Maulsby said.
Solo practitioners have their own set of challenges. The law is supposed to allow solo practitioners like June Castellano, a Rochester, New York-based lawyer who practices family law, to count her monthly draws on her Paycheck Protection Program application. But Castellano said her bank won't count those draws on her application, meaning the only money she can borrow would pay the salaries of her one full-time employee and her part-time employee.
"You don't just keep the people you employed paid. You keep yourself paid. It's such a new and different concept. That's the disconnect," Castellano said.
Although the program is run by the SBA, it's administrated by banks. But not every bank is participating in the program, to the frustration of solo commercial litigators like Domenick Napoletano. Based out of Brooklyn, Napoletano has accounts with a number of banks, but he does his primary banking through Citibank, which isn't accepting PPP applications yet.
"For them not to be able to come forward, for a person like myself, it's disheartening," Napoletano said. Both Napoletano and Castellano are leading the New York State Bar Association's emergency task force that aims to link small law firms with economic aid.
And then there are general concerns about the program. No one knows when the money will actually begin flowing to small businesses. Although the program is active until June 30, Napoletano said he's worried the money has already run out. News reports Tuesday said the Trump administration is hoping to add another $250 billion to the program.
"It might already be gone, because there are too many people applying for this and there's just not enough money," Napoletano said. "There is simply not enough money."
|Read More
Pay Cuts, Layoffs, and More: How Law Firms Are Managing the Pandemic
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllGovernment Attorneys Are Flooding the Job Market, But Is There Room in Big Law?
4 minute readCan Law Firms Avoid Landing on 'Enemy' List During the Trump Administration?
5 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Connecticut Movers: Year-End Promotions, Hires and an Office Opening
- 2Luigi Mangione Defense Attorney Says NYC Mayor’s Comments on Case Raise Fair Trial Concerns
- 3Revisiting the Boundaries Between Proper and Improper Argument: 10 Years Later
- 4Hochul Vetoes 'Grieving Families' Bill, Faulting a Lack of Changes to Suit Her Concerns
- 5Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Customers: Developments on ‘Conquesting’ from the Ninth Circuit
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250