Abstract

The coronavirus pandemic upturned Americans’ lives. Within the first few weeks, millions of Americans reported being laid off from their jobs. Other people were working reduced hours or were working remotely from home. Children’s daycares and schools closed, and parents were thrown into new roles as educators and full-time babysitters, while, in some instances, also continuing to work full-time jobs. The profound financial effects caused by even a few weeks of the coronavirus’ upheaval spurred Congress to pass the CARES Act, which purported to provide economic relief to individuals and businesses.

For individuals, the CARES Act includes five provisions that were effectively designed to provide people money: a direct payment in the form of a tax rebate, enhanced employment benefits, additional paid sick leave, a limited mortgage foreclosure and eviction moratorium, and temporary suspension of some student loan payments. Of these provisions, the direct payment and enhanced employment benefits were the two touted as centerpieces of the CARES Act and the two most likely to aid the majority of American households.

Ultimately, this financial support will prove to be shockingly minimal. The direct payments represent a fraction of the average American households’ monthly budget. It also quickly became apparent that the payments were unlikely to reach most people within any sort of useful timeframe, and that once they did, they could be garnished immediately by debt collectors and even banks themselves. The unemployment benefits, while providing people with more money over several months, required that people be laid off and similarly were unlikely to reach people quickly enough to be effective.

Share

COinS