In response to the COVID-19 crisis, the U.S. government passed the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act on March 27, 2020, creating the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), among others, to aid small businesses and their employees. Most PPP loans were administered by commercial banks in return for fees, and the banks bore little monitoring costs or risks, since PPP loans were forgivable by the government. I analyze if PPP loans of up to $1 million were net substitutes or complements for conventional small business loans of the same size for the PPP-issuing banks. The $1 million upper bound roughly corresponds to credits to the smallest firms that are often financially constrained. Using Call Report data through 2020:Q4, I find significant net complementarities. An additional dollar of PPP credit of up to $1 million had multiplier effects on conventional loans to the smallest firms of about an extra dollar.

为了应对 COVID-19 危机，美国政府于 2020 年 3 月 27 日通过了《冠状病毒援助、救济和经济安全 (CARES) 法案》，制定了薪资保护计划 (PPP) 等，以帮助小企业及其企业雇员。大多数 PPP 贷款由商业银行管理并收取费用，而且银行几乎不承担监控成本或风险，因为 PPP 贷款可以得到政府的豁免。我分析了 PPP 发行银行高达 100 万美元的 PPP 贷款是否是相同规模的传统小企业贷款的净替代品或补充。 100 万美元的上限大致相当于对经常受到财务限制的最小企业的信贷。使用截至 2020 年第四季度的通话报告数据，我发现了显着的净互补性。最多 100 万美元的额外 1 美元 PPP 信贷会对向最小企业提供约 1 美元的额外传统贷款产生乘数效应。