Source · Select Committees · Treasury Committee
Recommendation 10
10
Paragraph: 63
There is a striking inconsistency between the way the Government is treating employees earning more...
Conclusion
There is a striking inconsistency between the way the Government is treating employees earning more than £50,000 a year and those who are self-employed and have trading profits above £50,000 a year. Whereas those who are employed can receive support from the Government up to a maximum wage amount of £2,500 a month through the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme, those who are self-employed receive nothing at all under the Self-employment Income Support Scheme. This is unfair. We believe the Government ought not to disadvantage the self-employed in this way.
Paragraph Reference:
63
Government Response
Acknowledged
HM Government
Acknowledged
Your report makes several recommendations regarding eligibility criteria for SEISS. You have recommended the removal of the £50,000 threshold criteria and introduce a taper up to the total monthly support cap of £2,500. The existing arrangement is designed to target the scheme at those who need support the most. With 2019–20 returns taken into account, we estimate around 95 per cent of those with more than half their income from self- employment could be eligible for this scheme. The Government does not think that it is proportionate to introduce a taper to the SEISS, given the complexity of introducing and administering such a taper and the relatively small number of people who would benefit. Your report suggests that this threshold disadvantages the self-employed compared to the employed. The SEISS and CJRS are very different schemes, making such comparisons challenging. For example, CJRS pays for hours which are not worked, meaning that people eligible for the CJRS cannot work for the employer that is furloughing them, while people who are eligible for SEISS may still be able to work alongside claiming. Both schemes have been generously designed to address a particular population.