Companies can get a £1,000 per person bonus if they bring back an employee from furlough for at least three months after the government's wage payment scheme ends in October
Primark said it will not take up the £30m bonus from the government for taking back furloughed workers.
Chancellor Rishi Sunak announced last week that all businesses will be paid £1,000 for each employee they bring back from furlough, reports the BBC.
Previously, the clothing chain placed around 30,000 workers on the government's coronavirus job retention scheme.
Primark said it lost sales of around £650m a month through shutting shops because of the coronavirus pandemic. However, they reopened UK stores in mid-June and still expects to turn a profit.
A spokeswoman for Associated British Foods, the owner of Primark, said, "The company removed its employees from government employment support schemes in the UK and Europe in line with the reopening of the majority of its stores."
"The company believes it should not be necessary therefore to apply for payment under the bonus scheme on current circumstances."
Announcing the Job Retention Bonus in last week's summer economic update, Sunak said, "One of the most important things we can do to prevent unemployment is to get as many people as possible from furlough back to their jobs."
Companies can get a £1,000 per person bonus if they bring back an employee from furlough for at least three months after the government's wage payment scheme ends in October.
There are currently 9.4 million on the government's furlough scheme who, if they all returned to work, could be more than £9bn in bonus payments from taxpayers' money.
Sunak said the Job Retention Bonus scheme would be open to "all" companies.
But Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer criticised the scheme for not being targeted on those companies that needed it most.
While he agreed that the government "is right to act", he said, "Our concern is the action they've taken isn't focused on the right places, so the Jobs Retention Bonus is a bonus for all jobs and many of those jobs, many of the people would have been brought back in any event.
"Some are really at risk of losing their jobs, so we say it should have been targeted in the areas that most need it."