Thanks. Including the principal amount for these taxes + number of payroll entities would have been nice - I am trying to get a sense of the relative proportions of these employment taxes vs actual pay.
The article is just content marketing, sensationalizing a mistake made by an extremely small, early stage startup as a marketing ploy to lead you to the conclusion you should buy this company's software to avoid a similar fate. So not surprising it's light on details. For what it's worth, startups at that stage almost never have a CFO nor any admin/accounting staff. That said, obviously it was a mistake and they should have paid their payroll taxes. But the sentiment in this piece is crafted solely to lead the reader to the conclusion that they should pay for this company's software.
Content marketing is content and marketing, not just marketing, and in this case the content is a good warning to others. Yes, they are trying to sell their product, but they are making a good point, and they aren't shoving their product in your faces. I think you are being hard on them for no good reason.
Startups are hard and early stages are always messy. If the piece was journalistically motivated I'd feel differently, but as a marketing post I don't love the vibe. Just my two cents.
