Financial – Eq Muscle Release Mon, 26 Apr 2021 03:04:16 +0000 en-US hourly 1 Financial – Eq Muscle Release 32 32 Why is a $ 2,000 stimulus good for you – unless you have student loans Tue, 09 Mar 2021 10:56:39 +0000

FG Trade / Getty Images

You may be familiar with the game “Would you rather?” In the board game, players choose between two equally bad – or equally good – scenarios. It can lead to a lot of speculation, conversation, deep thinking, and laughter. But if you’re paying off student loans, the answer to the question, “Would you rather receive $ 2,000 this month or get your student loan debt erased? Should be obvious.

See: Answers to Your Top Questions About Student Loan Debt Cancellation
Find: 9 Ways Student Debt Affects All Aspects of American Lives

Students who graduated in 2019 left college with an average debt of $ 30,062, according to US News & World Report. A stimulus payment of $ 2,000 per person could help pay for rent, utilities, and your car loan for a month. But having up to $ 50,000 in debt canceled could open the door to financial freedom for the 42 million Americans facing student loans.

If President-elect Joe Biden keeps his promise to send $ 2,000 stimulus checks to Americans “immediately” upon taking office, however, those with student loan debt may not have a choice. $ 2000 in cash now or tens of thousands of dollars. in loan remission.

What does one have to do with the other?

See: Here’s what student loan borrowers really feel about the election
Find: Third Stimulation Check Likely To Come Under Biden – How Much Could You Get?

First, paying off student debt is an expensive choice. The loan forgiveness could cost the federal government $ 400 billion to $ 450 billion, according to Forbes. And stimulus checks, while expensive, would put money in the hands of more people.

The proposed stimulus checks could be part of The Heroes Act, a stimulus package that was stopped by Republicans in Congress last year. The act also included $ 1 trillion in state and local aid.

States could, in theory, use this aid to distribute and administer COVID-19 vaccines faster and more efficiently. Giving more people immunity to the virus could help jumpstart the U.S. economy better than any aid program, but states are currently struggling. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said more than 70% of our vaccines have still not been used.

See: What if Biden can’t cancel your student debt? Here are 15 ways to repay these loans
Find: How Gen Z plans to avoid student loans

When it comes to more coronavirus aid – for businesses, states, and individuals – or student loan debt forgiveness, we face a classic case of the good of the many who prevail. on the needs of the few. Even if the few, in this situation, total 42 million Americans facing student debt that they may never pay off.

Of course, a compromise is possible. Biden could choose to write off up to $ 10,000 in student debt per person, or cap income on debt cancellation and continue handing out stimulus checks.

But amid negotiations for another coronavirus stimulus package and vaccine delivery issues, student loan debt cancellation could be filed in favor of more immediate concerns.

After all, one in seven student borrowers were already in default before the pandemic, and the CARES Act only provided for temporary relief in payments.

More from GOBankingRates:

This article was originally published on Why is a $ 2,000 stimulus good for you – unless you have student loans

New York court holds notice to reinstate sufficient monthly payments to slow mortgage lending Tue, 09 Mar 2021 10:56:39 +0000

The Supreme Court of New York, Kings County, recently found that a notice sent by a mortgagee that reinstates the monthly payments and states that any previous acceleration is revoked is sufficient to constitute a deceleration of the underlying loan. Carter v US Bank Trust, NA, 2021 WL 291198 (NY Sup. Ct. January 27, 2021). Taken with the recent State Court of Appeal ruling Freedom Mortg. Corp. c. EngelIt is now clear that lenders in New York have at least two ways to slow down a loan: by voluntarily stopping foreclosure action or by sending an affirmative deceleration notice. In the case, the defendant had a mortgage on the plaintiff’s Brooklyn property, and when the plaintiff defaulted on her payment obligations, the defendant brought a foreclosure action on October 27, 2010, which was subsequently dismissed. On October 25, 2016, two days before the expiration of the limitation period, the defendant’s loan manager sent the plaintiff a notice of deceleration, in which he identified himself as the defendant’s manager and stated, in the relevant part : “Please note that to the extent that any previous acceleration may be applicable, we hereby revoke any prior and currently applicable acceleration of the loan, withdrawing any prior request for immediate payment of all amounts secured by the collateral instrument and let’s restore the loan as an installment loan. ”The plaintiff did not dispute that the notice was received before the expiration of the limitation period. The plaintiff subsequently sued for title to the property, and the defendant sought summary judgment, arguing that he had slowed down the loan by means of the notice.

The Kings County Supreme Court rendered summary judgment in favor of the defendant. While in New York, a six-year limitation period begins to run on the acceleration of mortgage debt, “a lender can revoke his choice to accelerate the mortgage. By a positive revocation act for a period of the six-year period of the limitation period. “The Court considered that the wording contained in the defendant’s notification was more than sufficient to constitute an affirmative act of revocation, since it” clearly and unambiguously required a resumption of the monthly payments “and also” provided monthly billing statements showing “regular monthly payments” and indicating that the mortgage is to be paid in monthly installments and not in a lump sum. ” Accordingly, the Court held that “the notification in question was an affirmative act which effectively accelerated the mortgage before the expiration of the limitation period”.

Rick and Morty episode 8 season 4 recap: never question the acid Tue, 09 Mar 2021 10:56:39 +0000

The best episodes of Rick and morty often invoke clever meta-commentaries, portray Rick in hilariously mean and mean ways, or show the horrific angst of living in an infinite, meaningless multiverse.

“The Vat of Acid Episode” does all three, as Rick reaches Eric Cartman’s levels of mean-spirited, the very first scene setting off an unusual amount of conflict between the two. Morty has, inevitably, grown more cynical as the series has progressed, and here he does the unthinkable and mocking of Rick’s acid tank prop like a ridiculously convoluted ruse.

Of course, the diamond deal going awry prompts the two to jump into the false acid, with Rick’s increasingly silly backup plans being fun close to an episode of Looney Tunes – I thought the whole episode was going to take place inside the tank.

But Morty’s frustration eventually erupted, leaving Rick somewhat humiliated. Every now and then Morty tries to take back control of Rick (though it never ends well), and this time around, he wants to live his life like a video game, playing on easy mode. And to be fair, who wouldn’t?

Watching Morty come to grips with his reality as he enjoys endless retakes is great fun, as he ends up relying on his remote like a crutch, usually pressing the button, for the most minor mistakes. When he’s done being a perverted teenager, after exhausting all the exciting stuff, Morty finally manages to cultivate a real relationship with a girl, having mastered the initial pickup line.

There is a lot of story in this silent montage, as the relationship between Morty and his unnamed girlfriend evolves, almost breaks up, until the two are faced with an agonizing experience and make it out alive, in one way or another. It’s funny to think that through the whole edit, Rick is just biding his time, waiting for the big reveal – Rick would never allow Morty to enjoy a healthy relationship, otherwise.

Of course, we’re waiting for the inevitable meltdown, because the last time Morty pressed his remote was seconds before he struck up a conversation with his future girlfriend. And of course, Jerry unknowingly destroys Morty’s new life, mistaking the replacement device for the TV remote.

One press of the button, and a potentially happy future is erased from the face of infinity, forever. It’s just another unbearable tragedy for Morty to endure, but the real horror is yet to come, as Rick finally reveals how the remote works – not through time travel, but by switching between almost indistinguishable, murderous universes. a Morty every time.

Thus, Rick relishes his moment of almost unmatched cruelty, before coming up with a solution – compressing each “do-over” into a single universe, and escaping the consequences by … jumping into a vat of fake acid.

It’s both horrible and hilarious, a very Rick and morty moment; over and over again, Rick went out of his way to show Morty how little control he had over his own life, through increasingly elaborate storylines. Morty will never escape the endless, messy adventures with Rick, doing things exactly on Rick’s terms, simply because his sociopathic grandfather has no one to share his life with.

That’s the underlying tragedy (and comedy) of the show, the insanely unhealthy dynamic between grandfather and grandson. But we’re certainly seeing signs that Morty’s tolerance and patience is eroding – how far can Rick push him, until something snaps?

If you enjoyed reading, check out my other Rick and Morty Season 4 recaps:

Episode 1 “Edge of Tomorty: Rick Die Rickpeat”

Episode 2 “The Old Man and the Siege”

Episode 3 “One Crew Over the Crewcoo’s Morty”

Episode 4 “Claw and Hoarder: Special Ricktim’s Morty”

Episode 5 “Rattlestar Ricklactica”

Episode 6: “Never Ricking Morty”

Episode 7: “Promortyus”

Episode 8: “The episode of the acid tank”

Episode 9: “Childrick of Mort”

Episode 10: “Star Death Rickturn of the Jerri”

Education department unveils new loan forgiveness website, expert calls ‘distraction’ Tue, 09 Mar 2021 10:56:39 +0000

The Department of Education (ED) has created a new website for borrowers seeking debt relief after being defrauded by college.

But an expert involved in litigating those borrower defense claims said the changes were mostly cosmetic.

“Throughout this administration, what we’ve seen is the substitution of process for substance,” Toby Merrill, director of the Predatory Student Loans Project at Harvard Law School, told Yahoo Finance.

“None of the actions taken by the ministry have provided relief to the borrowers,” she added, “and that’s all they need. I think it’s a distraction – it’s an intentional distraction. “

Clare McCann, deputy director of New America, a federal policy think tank, said that while it “seems a little awkward and it’s unfortunate that it took so long, a single consolidated website with a Online application will be extremely helpful to borrowers. “

The new website attempts to improve the borrower defense process, which involves alumni of allegedly predatory schools seeking loan cancellation.

“ Our borrower defense mechanism is not working at all ”

There are some obvious limitations with the recently unveiled process. For example, the website states that only those with direct loans can get debt relief.

“If any of your Federal Student Loans are Federal Family Education Loan Program (FFEL) loans and / or Federal Perkins Loan Program loans, they are not eligible for discharge under the law or borrower’s repayment defense regulations, ”the website says.

About 8000000 borrowers with Federal Family Education Loans (FFELs) and commercially owned and federally backed Perkins Loans are effectively excluded from this process.

Another limitation is that if a borrower has defaulted on their federal loans that are in collections, the website indicates that a borrower’s defense request triggers a collections shutdown.

BOSTON - JUNE 10: Katie Dillon, of Portsmouth, NH, a 4th year student at Northeastern, listened to US Senator Elizabeth Warren.  Senator Elizabeth Warren and U.S. Representative John Tierney visited Northeastern University to talk about the future of student loans and its impending July 1 deadline when interest rates could double if Congress doesn't act, in Boston , Massachusetts, Monday, June 10, 2013 (Photo by Yoon S. Byun / The Boston Globe via Getty Images)

Katie Dillon, of Portsmouth, NH, a 4th year student at Northeastern, listened to US Senator Elizabeth Warren talk about the future of student loans. (Photo by Yoon S. Byun / The Boston Globe via Getty Images)

The site also assesses the interest an applicant would generate if they abstained – as well as how much they owe if their application ends up being denied – which could discourage borrowers from applying for the process in the first place.

Overall, Merrill pointed out, the website is not getting to the root of the problem.

“Right now our borrower defense mechanism isn’t working at all, so I still think people should have started there,” she said. “I’m not concerned about the shape of the app.”

‘I know it’s disappointing’

The borrower’s defense rules were originally enshrined in law through the Higher Education Act in the early 1990s and were intended to help victims fraudulent schools seek redress.

Under existing law, borrowers with federal loans are eligible for loan discount if a college or university has misled them or has engaged in other misconduct in violation of certain state laws.

After the Great Recession, enrollment in for-profit schools “skyrockets in the first decade of the period, almost quadrupled between 2000 and 2011, ”according to the New York Fed.

The Obama administration instituted regulations protecting defrauded borrowers, and the Trump administration tried to dismantle these regulations despite court decisions favor borrowers.

WASHINGTON, DC - DECEMBER 12: US Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos testifies during a hearing before the House Education and Labor Committee December 12, 2019 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC.  The committee held a hearing on “the review of the implementation of the borrower defense by the education department”.  (Photo by Alex Wong / Getty Images)

U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos testifies during a hearing before the House Education and Labor Committee December 12, 2019 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. (Photo: Alex Wong / Getty Images)

The new website offers the same tool that the ministry had paused few months ago, who conducted an investigation by the House Education Committee.

A whistleblower complaint, discovered by American journalist News in June, found one which alleged that the FSA’s Deputy Principal Under-Secretary had pushed back on changes that made the site more user-friendly.

In October, the education committee revealed documents in which they said showed how it went.

“I know it’s disappointing,” wrote an FSA official in an email, “as many of us have done a lot of work to get there.”

This post has been updated to remove a quote from an anonymous member of Congress.

Aarthi is a reporter for Yahoo Finance. She can be reached at Follow her on Twitter @aarthiswami.

Read more:

Follow Yahoo Finance on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Flipboard, SmartNews, LinkedIn, Youtube, and reddit.

Report: New U.S. Relocation Agency Could Lend Billions for Manufacturing Tue, 09 Mar 2021 10:56:39 +0000

The head of the new US International Development Finance Corp. (DFC) said this week that the agency could provide tens of billions of dollars in funding to return manufacturing to the United States, according to a report by Reuters.

One of the projects it could fund is a $ 12 billion semiconductor factory from Taiwan, DFC CEO Adam Boehler told the news agency.

In conjunction with the Department of Defense, the DFC recently issued a call for proposals from companies seeking funding under the Defense Production Act, which prioritizes government orders in the midst of a war. or a national crisis. The Defense Department announced on June 22 that it would spend $ 100 million authorized by the CARES Act to boost the manufacturing of medical and pharmaceutical technology in the U.S. The Trump administration has been pushing for U.S. manufacturing to return to this country from China.

Boehler told Reuters that the new financial agency has received a lot of attention from the companies and that some may receive signed letters of agreement from the agency within the next month.

“The areas that are immediately lit are in PPE and pharmaceutical value chains,” Boehler said, adding that some pharmaceutical companies wanted to return generic drug production to the United States. Most generic drugs are imported, according to Reuters.

The DFC has used Korean War-era law to require certain manufacturers to produce ventilators and personal protective equipment much needed during the COVID-19 pandemic. For example, President Donald Trump ordered General Motors in March to start producing ventilators for COVID-19 patients In April, the Defense Department awarded $ 133 million in contracts for N95 ventilators to 3M (NYSE:MMM), Owens and Minor (NYSE:IMO) and Honeywell (NYSE:HON) under the law.

Under the $ 100 million DOD initiative, eligible projects are expected to help return production to the United States or strengthen associated national supply chains for personal protective equipment, testing supplies drugs, vaccines, pharmaceuticals, ventilation equipment or “relevant ancillary materials and technologies,” according to the defense. department.

Aqua Metals Withdraws Veritex Loan, Now Debt Free Tue, 09 Mar 2021 10:56:39 +0000

Receives additional insurance payment of $ 0.8M

MCCARRAN, Nev., December 15, 2020 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) – Announcement from Aqua Metals, Inc. (NASDAQ: AQMS) (“Aqua Metals” or the “Company”), which is reinventing lead recycling with its latest AquaRefining ™ technology. company paid off its $ 9.0 million debt to Veritex Bank, leaving Aqua Metals virtually debt-free. In addition, the company received an additional progress payment of $ 0.8 million from its insurance provider. Insurance payments received to date now total $ 23.4 million. The company plans to collect additional insurance proceeds for the replacement value of its damaged assets and any recovery proceeds from a business interruption.

“The withdrawal of our loan from Veritex Bank is another positive step for Aqua Metals as we have accelerated our transition to a small cap business model. As a result of this action, our team achieved their previously guided goal of paying off debt by the end of the year. Eliminating our debt significantly strengthens the balance sheet and completely removes the burden of loan covenants. Additionally, this step improves the Company’s cash consumption rate by eliminating $ 0.9 million annually in debt service payments, including $ 0.6 million in interest expense. We are also pleased with the continued progress made in loss recovery through our insurance recovery efforts, ”said Judd Merrill, Chief Financial Officer.

About Aqua Metals

Aqua Metals, Inc. (NASDAQ: AQMS) is reinventing lead recycling with its patented AquaRefining ™ technology. Unlike fusion, AquaRefining is a room temperature water-based process that emits less pollution. The modular systems are intended to enable the company to significantly reduce the environmental impact and increase the recycling production capacity of lead-acid batteries by licensing the AquaRefining technology to partners. This could help meet the growing demand for lead to power new applications, including automotive stop / start batteries which supplement the main vehicle battery, lead acid batteries which are found in electric vehicles. , internet data centers, alternative energy applications including solar, wind and grid scale. storage. Aqua Metals is based in McCarran, Nevada. To learn more, please visit

Aqua Metals has used and intends to continue to use its Investor Relations website (, in addition to its Twitter, LinkedIn and YouTube accounts at https: / / (@AquaMatalsInc), and respectively, as a means of disclosure material non-public information and to comply with its disclosure obligations under FD Regulation.

Safe Harbor

This press release contains forward-looking statements regarding Aqua Metals, Inc. Forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, our plans, objectives, expectations and intentions and other statements containing words such as “expects” , “considers”, “anticipates”, “plans”, “intends”, “believes”, “estimates”, “potential” and variations of these words or similar expressions which reflect the uncertainty of events or of future results, or that are not related to historical matters. The forward-looking statements contained in this press release include our expectations regarding the sale of the land and building of our McCarran facility; the sufficiency of any sales proceeds associated with any other insurance recovery to fund our operations and the development and completion of our V1.25 electrolyzer; the advantages of the V1.25 electrolyser; and the future of recycling lead-acid batteries through traditional foundries. These forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that could cause actual results to differ materially. These factors include: (1) the risk that we may not be able to sell the land, building and non-essential equipment of our McCarran plant in a timely manner, (2) the risk that we may not realize the proceeds of the sale which we expected from the sale of the land, building and non-essential equipment, (3) the risk that the terms of such sale may include indemnities or other provisions which pose possible liability to Aqua Metals, (4) the risk that we may not be able to complete the development of our V1.25 electrolyzer; (5) the risk that we may not realize the expected benefits of our V1.25 electrolyzer; (6) the risk that our insurance covering our claims related to the November 2019 fire at our TRIC facility and the proceeds from the sale of legacy assets may not be sufficient to fund our accelerated licensing strategy; (7) the risk that we may not be able to satisfactorily demonstrate to potential licensees the technical and commercial viability of our V1.25 chlorinator and AquaRefining process; (8) the risk that licensees will refuse or delay adopting our AquaRefining process as an alternative to merger despite the perceived benefits of AquaRefining; (9) the risk that we may not realize the expected economic benefits from any license that we may enter into; (10) the risk that we may need to engage in additional sales of our equity securities in order to fund our future operations; (11) the risk that additional funding, by any means, may not be available at all; (12) the fact that we have not generated significant income to date, thus subjecting us to all the risks inherent in a business in the start-up phase; (13) the risk that our patents and any other patents that may be granted to it will be challenged, invalidated or circumvented; (14) the risk that we may not be able to successfully conclude our proposed joint development agreement with Clarios or, if we do, realize the expected benefits of such an agreement; (15) changes in federal, state and foreign laws governing the recycling of lead-acid batteries; (16) our ability to protect our proprietary technology, trade secrets and know-how and (17) other risks disclosed in the “Risk Factors” section included in our quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed on October 22, 2020 and thereafter Deposits with the SEC. Aqua Metals cautions readers not to place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. The Company does not undertake, and specifically disclaims any obligation, to update or revise these statements to reflect new circumstances or unforeseen events as they occur, except as required by law. .

Contact Person: Glen Akselrod, Bristol Capital
(905) 326-1888, ext. 1

SEC Staff Grant No-Action Exemption Under Investment Company Law Tue, 09 Mar 2021 10:56:39 +0000

On January 13, 2021, staff in the Investment Management Division (staff) of the Securities and Exchange Commission (Commission) issued a letter of no action indicating that it would not recommend any enforcement action to the Commission under section 17 (f) of the Investment Companies Act 1940 (1940 Act) and paragraphs (b) to (f) ) of Rule 17f-2 below, if certain registered management investments companies or series thereof (Funds), or their directors or officers, if the Funds, acting as independent depositories, maintain certain interests in the loans (as defined below) without strictly complying with paragraphs (b) through (e) of Rule 17f-2.


Section 17 (f) of the 1940 Act generally requires a registered investment company to keep its securities and similar investments in the custody of a bank, a member of a national stock exchange, or retain these assets themselves, subject to the rules prescribed by the Commission. Rule 17f-2 of the 1940 Act sets out the conditions under which a fund can act as a self-custodian, which some see as a burden. For example, the rule requires that: (1) Investments of funds (with a few exceptions) must be deposited in the custody of a bank (often referred to as a “vault requirement,” which involves certification or possession physical); (2) the board of directors of the fund must designate a maximum of five “authorized persons” for the fund and adopt a resolution allowing access to the fund’s investments only to two persons acting together; (3) any person depositing or withdrawing investments with the depositary or ordering their withdrawal and delivery from the safekeeping of the fund or other company must sign a specific rating; and (4) investments maintained by a fund must be verified by a full review by an independent accountant retained by the fund at least three times during the year, at least two of which must be on a “surprise” basis. .

Loan interest

The letter is about term or deferred drawing business loans (loans) that are created, negotiated and structured by one or more major lenders, usually made up of banks, insurance companies or other financial institutions. The terms of the loans are usually set out in a credit agreement between the principal lenders, the borrower and the administrative agent who administers the loans on behalf of the syndicate of lenders. In accordance with specific terms and subject to the terms of the credit agreement, prime lenders may sell interest in a loan (interest on the loan) to third parties, including the Funds. The Funds do not receive any certificate of securities or other tangible proof of ownership which could be held with its custodian or which, if endorsed and delivered to a subsequent purchaser or other third party, could be used by such third party to prove its own right to Interest on loans from a Fund. There are a number of stages in the settlement of loan interest purchases, and various documents are executed as part of the settlement process (loan documents). As the Funds point out in the application, possession of the loan documents would be of no value to a purchaser or other purported assignee of interest on a Fund’s loans. Instead, the interest on the loan is reflected in the records kept on behalf of the borrower under the loan (the administrative agent) for the purpose of identifying the owners of all interest on the loan and the amount. of the principal of the loan attributable to each.

The Funds had provided the loan documents to their custodian for safekeeping under Section 17 (f), but this posed a number of issues. In particular, the Funds have suggested that the current practice of keeping records in “sealed envelopes” by fund custodians does little to help achieve the objectives underlying Section 17 (f), at least as regards loan documents. As a result, the Funds have sought to cease delivering Loan Documents to their custodians and instead rely on Rule 17f-2, but with a number of modifications to take into account the particular attributes of this class. ‘particular assets.


Building on an earlier staff non-intervention waiver, the Funds proposed the following instead of the rule requirements:

  • Only a limited number of authorized staff of the Funds would instruct the custodian of the Funds and administrative agents;

  • Passwords or other appropriate security procedures would be used to ensure that only duly authorized persons can pass these instructions;

  • The Funds would reconcile interest on settled loans with the records of administrative officers on a regular basis (ie at least monthly);

  • Interest on loans would be titled or registered with administrative agents in the name of a Fund (and not in the name of the Fund’s investment advisor);

  • Neither the Funds nor their investment advisers are affiliated with administrative agents; and

  • Each Fund would adopt policies and procedures reasonably designed to prevent the violation of the above conditions, as part of the Fund’s compliance program under Rule 38a-1 of the 1940 Act.

Instead of the rule verification requirement, each Fund would be subject to an annual audit during which the Fund’s independent accountant confirms all of the Fund’s investments, including its investments in loan interest, and reconciles interest on the loan with the Fund’s accounting records. The inbound letter noted that a single annual audit, such as that normally performed for mutual funds, provides sufficient custodial protections to investors in pooled investment vehicles under Rule 206 (4) – 2 of the Investment Advisers Act 1940 (Advisers Act). In the letter, staff specifically noted the statement in the incoming letter that the Funds are in compliance with annual audit requirements. This letter reflects the continued interest in investments and loan swaps by non-banks which in turn continue to raise interesting regulatory issues under the 1940 Act and the Advisors Act.

© 2021 Greenberg Traurig, LLP. All rights reserved. Review of national legislation, volume XI, number 48

As tax deadlines approach, lawmakers announce deal that would exempt Massachusetts businesses from tax on PPP loans Tue, 09 Mar 2021 10:56:39 +0000

Lawmakers said they had reached a deal to lower tax bills for businesses that received state and federal allowances amid the pandemic, and also help some unemployed workers, but they will need to act. quickly as tax deadlines loom.

Senate Speaker Karen Spilka, House Speaker Ronald Mariano and Ways and Means Committee Chairs, Representative Aaron Michlewitz and Senator Michael Rodrigues, said in a joint statement that the bill would “reignite” the recovery. pandemic.

In a preview of the bill that has yet to be released, lawmakers said they would exempt businesses from tax on canceled loans from the Paycheck Protection Program, freeze unemployment rates at two years, waive fees and some taxes for some unemployed workers and extend paid vacation pay.

The announcement came just hours after a group of bipartisan lawmakers and the Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance came together to pressure legislative leaders to take action to help businesses pay millions in taxes on PPP loans.

As lawmakers explained in their statement, “time is running out” as the tax bills of thousands of small businesses in Massachusetts fall due in less than a week on March 15. Small Massachusetts businesses organized as flow-through entities owe about $ 130 million in federal P3 loans, according to state budget chief Michael Heffernan.