As far as I know, most fast food franchises don't own the land under the restaurants in the way that McDonald's does. I'm not familiar with the numbers, but I've seen quips to the effect that McDonald's is a real estate investment firm that does fast food as a side hustle.

That quip was actually documented quite lucidly in The Founder (where Michael Keaton plays Ray Kroc). I really enjoyed that film.

I read a similar article once as well. Back then I wondered where the benfit would be, other than it being kind of a company store for franchise owners. Turns out to be a very robust set-up for crisis, doesn't it?

I don't really get the question of "if" for anyone close to this size. It goes back to the old adage, "If you owe the bank a million dollars, you have a problem. If you owe the bank a billion dollars, the bank has a problem". A corporation as large as McDonalds can dictate terms to whoever holds their debt.

But in the case of rent payments McDonalds is the bank. Whether or not McDonalds decides to defer rent the number of franchisees who can afford to remit payment is going to decline. A handful of franchisees unable to pay is a problem for those franchisees. A majority of franchisees unable to pay is a problem for McDonalds. It's better for McDonalds to address the issue/uncertainty now.

However, if you and a thousand others owe the bank a million dollars, bank has an even bigger problem than just being owed a billion