Why do you think there was a choice? I don't see anything supporting that in the article.
The governments position was stated as follows:
it was more important to maintain a consistent government than to apply the bonus rule retroactively and without warning.
Seems like the company payback was entirely voluntary and this is an example no good deed going unpunished.
The governments position was stated as follows: it was more important to maintain a consistent government than to apply the bonus rule retroactively and without warning.
Seems like the company payback was entirely voluntary and this is an example no good deed going unpunished.