SBA Caps the Aggregate Amount of PPP Loans Each Corporate Family Can Receive
Client Alert | 1 min read | 05.01.20
On April 30, 2020, the Small Business Administration (SBA) released an interim final rule imposing a $20 million cap on the aggregate amount of loans a single corporate group can receive from the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP). Given the high demand for PPP loans and finite appropriations, the SBA has imposed this limit in order to ensure PPP funds reach the largest possible number of borrowers.
Businesses are part of a single corporate group if they are majority owned, directly or indirectly, by a common parent based on the broad definition in the interim final rule. This cap applies without limitation even to those businesses that are eligible for the otherwise applicable waiver-of-affiliation provisions.
This cap applies to PPP loan funds that have not yet been fully disbursed as of April 30, 2020. This means that the cap applies not only to all PPP loans to be made in the future but also to any loans that have only been partially disbursed. The interim final rule makes it incumbent on PPP recipients and applicants to determine if they will receive PPP loans in excess of the cap and withdraw or request cancellation of any pending PPP loan application or approved PPP loan not in compliance with this rule. The Crowell & Moring Team is closely watching these developments and is standing by to confer with companies about the impact of this new loan ceiling.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 2 min read | 11.14.25
Claim construction is a key stage of most patent litigations, where the court must decide the meaning of any disputed terms in the patent claims. Generally, claim terms are given their plain and ordinary meaning except under two circumstances: (1) when the patentee acts as its own lexicographer and sets out a definition for the term; and (2) when the patentee disavows the full scope of the term either in the specification or during prosecution. Thorner v. Sony Comput. Ent. Am. LLC, 669 F.3d 1362, 1365 (Fed. Cir. 2012). The Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Aortic Innovations LLC v. Edwards Lifesciences Corp. highlights that patentees can act as their own lexicographers through consistent, interchangeable usage of terms across the specification, effectively defining terms by implication.
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.14.25
Microplastics Update: Regulatory and Litigation Developments in 2025
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.13.25
