Let me ask you a question: how do you feel about big corporates taking the wage subsidy scheme?

We’re talking big law firms, big petrol retailers, big retirement care providers.

The reason I’m asking is because there’s been an eruption of moral outrage over these companies taking government assistance.

It’s provoked ‘anger and ridicule’. 

Critics have dug out the names of the big firms, published them and then listed the reasons they shouldn’t have taken the money.

Auckland Airport got named and shamed for taking $4.3 million in wage subsidies while also able to raise $1.2 billion from investors in a shares issue.

Retirement care company Summerset got named for taking $8.8 million in subsidies while still able to earn income as an essential service in lockdown.

Several big law firms including MinterEllisonRuddWatts and Meredith Connell got named for taking millions while presumably still earning eye-wateringly high incomes.

This has become such a big reputational issue that Z Energy is not sure whether it should take the wage subsidy.  It’s still considering it - it will make a decision next week - but it’s conceded it’s worried about reputation and brand damage.

Isn’t this silly? There shouldn’t be any reputational damage in taking government assistance.

This subsidy is available to any business as long as it has suffered a drop of more than 30% in revenue as a result of the government’s Covid-19 response and will retain staff for the duration.  It doesn’t matter how big the corporate is, how much cash it has in the bank or how much it pays its top staff.

I’d argue these corporates are entitled to the money if only as a compensation for what’s been asked of them.  The government asked businesses big and small to make a sacrifice on behalf of the country’s health by shutting down completely.  This is a very small amount to soften the blow of that sacrifice.

To my mind, it’s a bad business decision to not take the money if it’s available.

Critics argue that corporates should be responsible and not take the subsidy because it’s a cost that will ultimately fall on taxpayers.

It’s a fair point to make but it misses a point: big corporates and the people who work in them are taxpayers too.