Minister Koolmees has, in answers to parliamentary questions provided a number of examples in which objections to the final determination of the NOW grant have been upheld.
Discount
The examples relate to the first subsidy period under the NOW scheme (the period covering March, April and May 2020). These are cases in which the final subsidy amount is reduced because the wage bill in January 2020 is higher than in the reference period for the subsidy (the reference period is March/April/May 2020, unless the applicant has chosen to shift this period forward by one or two months).
This is because a condition of the subsidy is that the employer continues to pay the employees’ wages. Anyone who has failed to do so will face a reduction in the subsidy.
Extra pay in January
Many employers actually pay their employees an extra wage in January. As a result, the wage for that month is higher, even though the employer has paid the full wage. The UWV bases its calculations on the information processed in the payroll records. However, it is not always possible to identify the additional pay components from this data. As a result, the subsidy is wrongly reduced.
The Minister gives the following examples in which objections have been upheld.
- The employee received a bonus in January.
- In January, a bonus was paid out, mileage allowances (non-tax-free) were paid retrospectively, and holiday pay was paid retrospectively to an employee who left in 2019.
- In January, employees were paid for overtime worked in 2019.