Name File Type Size Last Modified
  adp 04/01/2022 11:22:AM
  fig6_f1 04/01/2022 02:35:PM
  figb1 04/01/2022 03:15:PM
  tab1 04/01/2022 07:08:PM
jep_readme.pdf application/pdf 221.1 KB 04/01/2022 07:27:AM

Project Citation: 

Autor, David, Cho, David, Crane, Leland D., Goldar, Mita, Lutz, Byron, Montes, Joshua, … Yildirmaz, Ahu. Data and Code for: The $800 Billion Paycheck Protection Program: Where Did the money Go and Why Did it Go There? Nashville, TN: American Economic Association [publisher], 2022. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2022-05-02. https://doi.org/10.3886/E157742V1

Project Description

Summary:  View help for Summary The Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) provided small businesses with roughly $800 billion dollars in uncollateralized, low-interest loans during the pandemic, almost all of which will be forgiven. With 93 percent of small businesses ultimately receiving one or more loans, the PPP nearly saturated its market in just two months. We estimate that the program cumulatively preserved between 2 to 3 million job-years of employment over 14 months at a cost of $170K to $257K per job-year retained. These estimates imply that only 23 to 34 percent of PPP dollars went directly to workers who would otherwise have lost jobs; the balance flowed to business owners and shareholders, including creditors and suppliers of PPP-receiving firms. Program incidence was highly regressive, with about three-quarters of PPP funds accruing to the top quintile of households. This compares unfavorably to the other two major pandemic aid programs, enhanced UI benefits and Economic Impact Payments (i.e. stimulus checks). PPP's breakneck scale-up, its high cost per job saved, and its regressive incidence have a common origin: PPP was essentially untargeted because the United States lacked the administrative infrastructure to do otherwise. The more targeted pandemic business aid programs deployed by other high-income countries exemplify what is feasible with better administrative systems. We discuss how the United States could build capacity in state unemployment systems that would serve workers and businesses both in normal times and during the next crisis.
Funding Sources:  View help for Funding Sources Smith Richardson Foundation (20202252); Accenture LLP (027843-0001); Andrew Carnegie Fellowship (G-F-19-56882); Washington Center for Equitable Growth (APP-01666)

Scope of Project

Subject Terms:  View help for Subject Terms Government Programs; Employment; COVID-19
JEL Classification:  View help for JEL Classification
      E24 Employment; Unemployment; Wages; Intergenerational Income Distribution; Aggregate Human Capital; Aggregate Labor Productivity
      H25 Business Taxes and Subsidies including sales and value-added (VAT)
      H32 Fiscal Policies and Behavior of Economic Agents: Firm
      H81 Governmental Loans; Loan Guarantees; Credits; Grants; Bailouts
Geographic Coverage:  View help for Geographic Coverage United States
Time Period(s):  View help for Time Period(s) 2020 – 2021


Related Publications

Published Versions

Export Metadata

Report a Problem

Found a serious problem with the data, such as disclosure risk or copyrighted content? Let us know.

This material is distributed exactly as received from the data depositor. As of April 2026, depositors are required to submit study materials in accessible formats. ICPSR has not reviewed, checked, or processed this material. For additional information about the study, please contact the investigator(s) directly. If you have questions about the accessibility of materials distributed by ICPSR or require further assistance, please visit ICPSR's Accessibility Center.