Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

OBBB signed: Reinstates immediate expensing for U.S.-based R&D

kbkg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 395 posts

Re: OBBB signed: Reinstates immediate expensing for U.S.-based R&D

#91

Post by 0xbadcafebee »

The elimination of green energy incentives is going to have a big negative effect on the economy. Those billions of dollars not only were going to new businesses and jobs, but they were joined with loans from banks and commitments from customers with the expectation that the government would be funding the remainder. This means private industry and banks will be shouldering the loss of hundreds of billions of dollars, which, as any astute person should know by now, later gets shouldered by the average citizen in rate hikes, stock market plunges, increased inflation, etc. There goes your job and 401k and here comes more expensive products.

Aside from the direct negative effects: we lose even more to foreign countries who now have even more runway to gain expertise in green energy and sell to everyone else investing in it. Nobody but the 3rd world is increasing investments in coal/oil and there's no money we could make there anyway. So there goes any money we could've made on energy internationally.

Either this country is intentionally being tanked, or we're in the stupidest timeline.

Re: OBBB signed: Reinstates immediate expensing for U.S.-based R&D

#93

Post by supportengineer »

calvinmorrison wrote: post #39
lesuorac wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meh. If you hire H-1B you should be required to pay a fee greater than it costs to educate an equivalent American. Otherwise you're always in the situation where you have to hire foreigners because no Americans are trained. (or in reality you hire foreigners because they're cheaper for the same role which this no longer makes it the case)

NJ, home of the H1B scam. I worked with these guys at some large corporations on contract and as an employeed (F500 companies). I felt bad for them. Modern serfs. They lived in housing owned by you know the names of these indian firms that do 'anything'. Companies love the low cost, unlimited hours, and no need to hire, they're contractors. they sign deals with big indian vendors to provide everythingunderthesun. Poo…

Sounds like a CRIME to me.

Re: OBBB signed: Reinstates immediate expensing for U.S.-based R&D

#95

Post by samrus »

viraptor wrote: post #63
supriyo-biswas wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At a previous employer, they used to have this process where they would classify each project as being in active development or being in maintenance, and even the tiniest bit of development work required the "initiation" of a "project" with budget planning and approvals. At the time I dismissed it as a bureaucratic process invented by the company; after all, they had no dearth of leaders adding bureaucracy to systems…

> and even the tiniest of development work required the "initiation" of a "project" with budget planning and approvals. That's fully automateable though, right? Sounds like my script to upload a PR, create a JIRA ticket with the same name, link them up, auto-Done on merge.

You cant automate the tactical assessment of "do we want to incur this tax?" Not easily anyway

Re: OBBB signed: Reinstates immediate expensing for U.S.-based R&D

#97

Post by LexiMax »

WatchDog wrote: post #90
LexiMax wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Unless there is some kind of relationship to tech, political posts are generally removed from this site. You shouldn’t interpret this sites focus as the people that post here not thinking there are more important things.

I'm familiar with the voting patterns of HN users.

For this reason I tend to browse HN using the https://news.ycombinator.com/active frontpage because it contains the flagged topics that certain users of this site attempt to hide, while also preserving the vast majority of interesting tech-related topics.

Re: OBBB signed: Reinstates immediate expensing for U.S.-based R&D

#98

Post by margalabargala »

cheriot wrote: post #29
dragonwriter wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It’s an overstuffed bill because nobody will compromise on anything so the only way to pass a bill that has anything even remotely controversial to either party is one reconciliation bill a year. No, and lots of controversial bills have passed other than as reconciliation bills, and especially so during trifectas where they "controversial" within the minority party but broadly supported by the majority; reconciliat…

In the last 10 years, have there been more than a handful of bills that got 60 votes in the senate? I wouldn't like what the current congress would do without the filibuster, but at this point a paralyzed system might be worse.

Absolutely. Many bills in the Senate in that time have gotten over 90. Here's one that passed 95-2 that I picked at random.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/870...

A lot of what happens in Congress is obvious to do and everyone agrees. While the media certainly focuses on the handful of things the two parties are at odds over, most of the lawmaking done by Congress is not controversial between parties, and is simply passed, so we don't hear about it.

Re: OBBB signed: Reinstates immediate expensing for U.S.-based R&D

#99

Post by boroboro4 »

9283409232 wrote: post #35
cheriot wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the last 10 years, have there been more than a handful of bills that got 60 votes in the senate? I wouldn't like what the current congress would do without the filibuster, but at this point a paralyzed system might be worse.

The answer is to vote out politicians. Getting ranked choice voting on your states ballot would go a long way to fixing this. They would not have Mamdani on the ballot for NY mayor if it wasn't for ranked choice voting. Certain politicans know this and have made RCV illegal in their state. Get RCV on the ballot for your state.

Not important but Mamdani would’ve won without ranked choice voting too, it didn’t play a role in the end.

Re: OBBB signed: Reinstates immediate expensing for U.S.-based R&D

#100

Post by mindslight »

creato wrote: post #87
mindslight wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, salaries spent to build a capital asset. Half the cost of a new roof is paying salaries, right? And yet, you still depreciate the whole value of the completed thing, not just the cost of the input materials. If you hire the roofers yourself as employees, you're still supposed to be accounting this way - although obviously there are many ways to fudge it. The point is that building a piece of software that is goi…

At least 50% of time on every software team I've ever been on was spent on maintenance and fixing bugs. You can expense such time as opex, but it has to be justified, and that's often difficult to do. Did you fix a bug by refactoring some code to avoid the problem? Is that capex or opex? Can you convince the IRS of such? The old (and now new) rules eliminated this accounting game and uncertainty.

Sure. I get that having to facilitate accounting takes away from programming, and that nothing is cut in dry with the IRS. I'm not even a fan of the general idea of mandatory depreciation schedules, seeing depreciation as more of an artifact that fell out from double entry book keeping's proliferation of different types of accounts. My only point was that this is just the same regime that everything else has to deal with.

For example if you pay someone to fix a leaky roof and they replace a section of a given size, can you call it a repair/maintenance expense or should you be depreciating it as an improvement to the building? Can you convince the IRS of such? The only reason this has more straightforward answers is that accountants have been answering this question longer.

Post reply on HN