The companies furloughing staff

[The80sweregreat]

.. such as Victoria Beckham, Stella McCartney, Virgin etc.
It would be hard for me to boycott these companies as I haven't the money to buy their goods and services myself , but do mumsnetters think they are wrong to ask for tax payers money when they are wealthy themselves? Other companies are also taking money , but not getting the grief.
I'm glad these staff are keeping their jobs but do you think it should be owners paying the wages?
Not a journalist and I've little knowledge of business taxes and rates. Just curious of people's views on this latest problem thrown up by the coronavirus health emergency.
Are they being ' picked on' because they are famous? Is it fair?

I think it's morally reprehensible what they're doing. The companies should only be using furlough - which is costing us £1billion a day - if they need it. I read that VB is paying the 20% difference from her own money but that still doesn't make what she's doing right. The bosses at ITV should also hang their heads in shame.

As most of us will be taking a massive tax hit next year to fund this I do not begrudge anyone getting the money now although I get none of it. It is certainly working out very unfairly however. I just came off the phone speaking to someone who has a personal service company so can claim as they are under PAYE whilst I am self employed with no company so no furlough can apply. In other words those who reduced and avoided tax with a PSC get the free money and those who were not and earn over £50k before tax profits as sole traders don't get a penny.

The difficult thing is the companies might not need it they might not go insolvent because of this but that’s because without it they would be making large-scale job losses and that might still be required despite it.

I don’t think it’s a straightforward and saying large companies shouldn’t be claiming it they should be able to weather the storm because the only way they would be doing that is the mass job losses which has a much more direct impact on their staff, the economy etc

It is very difficult. Masses of companies all the time are on the brink of collapse and before the virus were about to go under yet even they - non viable about to go bust before the virus now get loads of free money.

I hope they do get rules in place to stop businesses taking advantage. The government should have said so before businesses could apply tho. It should only be for companies that would go under or make redundancies if they couldn't furlong. Companies that have over a certain amount of profit shouldn't be able to furlong.

And when they submit their annual accounts next year it will be clear if they've got business/income this year or not.

A limited company is a legal entity in its own right, and its financial position is entirely separate from it owner(s).

Many company owners are well-off in their own right, but that will be mostly assets on paper including the supposed share value of the business itself rather than actual cash in the bank. The value of that investment may have fallen dramatically already.

The business has to stand on its own two feet, and if it has no receipts from customers coming in, it will be difficult to pay its staff, so it can apply for furlough.

All businesses are in the same boat, whether or not their owner is disliked by the media.

..except that busineses which are a sole trader not a company are not in the same boat - the incorporated business can obtain furlough money for its directors and other employees whatever they earn and the sole trader on more than £50k nothing.

Didkdt explained it very well.
As much as I like VB clothes, the company has been running at a loss for a very long time. I don’t even know if it’s ever made a profit on paper.
Big companies like those would have got the best professional advice available so they wouldn’t be breaking the law.
The reality is that there are an awful lot of businesses running from hand to mouth every month, small and even medium ones, and larger ones who can swing it through investors even though the businesses are not always profitable.
In some cases the owners and their families are exposed in other cases only the staff is at risk.
Personal wealth though is and should be kept separate from the business.