The time bomb in the tax code that's fueling mass tech layoffs

Post by cake_robot » Fri, Jun 06, 2025, 10:22 PM UTC

luckylion wrote: post #230

ksec wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that is the simplest and best analogy I have read so far in the comments.

The chef doesn't create a meal once that you can sell for the next 10 years though. You pay him for time X, he makes a meal, you sell that meal. That's fundamentally different from regular software development outside of agencies where there is no direct relationship. Software development is closer to an investment than an expense. Amortization sucks in general, yes, because the money is gone and it doesn't affect yo…

Post by naijaboiler » Fri, Jun 06, 2025, 10:24 PM UTC

victoro wrote: post #157

radley wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not really targeted at tech, insomuch as at Democrats. Everyone assumed it was a traditional accounting hack. But given the timing and the reinitialization, it's clearly political, not economic. The code is a strategic time-bomb designed to cause a high-profile economic downturn during a presidential election cycle, specifically when the following president is a Democrat and Republicans have a house majority. It…

The Democrats had control of the presidency and the house in 2022 when this provision first went into effect but had 2 fewer senators (1 fewer if you count the tie-breaking VP). Why didn't they try to change it? Is there some reason a change in the tax code like this can't be modified or repealed once its in place?

Post by teeray » Fri, Jun 06, 2025, 10:28 PM UTC

madaxe_again wrote: post #200

tomrod wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would be the one positive I have heard regarding OBBB. This should be put into its own bill.

That isn’t how legislation is passed. If anything, it needs a section about acceptable tar shingle application standards for roofs within 6 nautical miles of any heliport operated in a subarctic area on the west cost. Then it’s looking like a bill.

Post by kgwgk » Fri, Jun 06, 2025, 10:30 PM UTC

itsoktocry wrote: post #232

trhway wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, that is tremendously important aspect here - the US tech would look better on paper - higher paper profits due lower paper expenses - while getting increased cash flow stress due to decreased deductability of the salaries which are among the main expenses in software dev business.

> Yes, that is tremendously important aspect here - the US tech would look better on paper It's completely unimportant. Nobody is getting fooled "on paper" by amortized salaries.

Post by aeonik » Fri, Jun 06, 2025, 10:30 PM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #238

yardstick wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Governments in general are pushing for capital gains tax normalization where instead of requiring a taxation event the capital gains tax would be levied yearly. You’re alluding to wealth taxes, right? Because taxing unrealised gains are wealth taxes. Or maybe I’ve misunderstood?

> Because taxing unrealised gains are wealth taxes. No, wealth taxes are a tax on retained wealth (a stock). Taxing unrealized gains is a tax on income (a flow), it just changes the point at which taxation attaches from a realization event to the actual gain.