Live data from Hacker News

Tell HN: Help restore the tax deduction for software dev in the US (Section 174)

news.ycombinator.com

921–930 of 957 posts

Re: Tell HN: Help restore the tax deduction for software dev in the US (Section 174)

#921
post #637

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I keep seeing an objection in this thread along the lines of "what make software so special that it deserves a tax deduction". Correct me if I'm wrong, but if a company hires someone to say, mine coal or brew beer, the expense of those employees is an expense any company can claim a full tax deduction on. If you're a line chef or wait tables, your salary is tax deductible to the restaurant. So it's not that we are as…

> Correct me if I'm wrong, but if a company hires someone to say, mine coal or brew beer, the expense of those employees is an expense any company can claim a full tax deduction on. If you're a line chef or wait tables, your salary is tax deductible to the restaurant. The question is: are you getting the value of that work in the same tax year, or is it creating an asset that creates value over time? If you hire a gu…

Software engineering is not just about building new things. I'd propose that by far the majority of the time of software engineers is spent on maintenance, bug fixing, minor incremental improvements, etc. Almost all software is either sold directly as a service or as a product with a servicing agreement.

> most software development is creating an asset that pays off over time

This is a fantasy.

Re: Tell HN: Help restore the tax deduction for software dev in the US (Section 174)

#922

On "Section 174" and more on taxes from Hill, Barth & King LLC at https://hbkcpa.com/insights/proposed-tax-bill-addresses-trum... is in part: Jobs Act. The bill also addresses the “big three” business tax provisions: deducting research and development expenses, 100% bonus depreciation, and loosening the rules for the deductibility of business interest. with deducting research and development expenses For more there i…

And how does this all get paid for ? It doesn't. It massively increases the deficit and debt which in turn will have a raft of knock on consequences for the economy and the reputation of the US.

Clearly "Section 174" is now, currently, an issue.

And vaguely I seemed to remember some Trump campaign statements that in taxes some business spending could be deducted instead of amortized (spread over several years) or some such.

I'm deliberately no expert on taxes or business taxes.

Some of the Internet discussions seemed to suggest that some of the worst of 174 were to be implemented, continued, canceled, whatever, so for more information on the background, status, future, etc. of 174, did a little Google search and came up with the discussion I posted here. That discussion seems to say that the "Big Beautiful Bill" may get rid of 174, and that would seem to be in the collection of deduction changes Trump discussed.

About the economy, growth, the Fed's Prime rate, deficit spending, interest payments on Treasury bonds, tariffs, inflation, the balances of trade and payments, R&D, AI, foreign investment in the US, 174, etc., to me the MSM (mainstream media) is short on enough credible information for me to have much in opinions.

In addition, for politics, mostly it looks like noise for some manipulation, effect, or other and a reason to follow "Always look for the hidden agenda."

So, about 174, the information I have looks no more credible and a lot less fun than an old Bugs Bunny cartoon! But maybe Bugs Bunny or Elmer Fudd would guess that getting rid of 174 would help R&D, new businesses, factories, business revenue, and even, net, tax revenue. Or did Elmer repeat "To make money, have to spend money."?

I'd scream at the junk -- drama -- in the MSM, but it won't do any good.

Summary: For the main issues here in the US, I just don't have good information. The stuff I posted above seems to suggest that the future of 174 is still in doubt.

Re: Tell HN: Help restore the tax deduction for software dev in the US (Section 174)

#923

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah this is the most plausible interpretation. Software engineers being taxed similar to brewery design engineers seems reasonable, not the person literally brewing each batch of beer.

I don't understand the reasoning behind this, however. Why depreciate anything over multiple years vs just deducting it in the current year? Does it not all come out to the same amount to the IRS in the end?

The tax code strives to minimize distortions (except insofar as they are deliberately introduced). That is, it seeks to minimize how much the existence of the income tax changes people’s economic conduct.

To minimize distortion, the income tax must accurately compute “income”—the actual increase in wealth. Depreciation is part of that. To compute income, the net increase in wealth, you need to subtract costs from revenue. When you buy an asset, your wealth doesn’t immediately increase or decrease—it simply changes form (from cash to an asset). The actual cost is the depreciation on the asset, which occurs over time.

Say you buy a delivery vehicle for $50,000. In the first year, you make $100,000 in revenue and have $20,000 in operating expenses. What’s your income after one year—the actual change in wealth? You have $80,000 in cash after operating expenses, plus a vehicle that you can sell for maybe $40,000. So you have $100,000+$40,000 in cash and assets in minus $20,000+$50,000 in cash and assets out, for a $70,000 increase in wealth.

Calculated another way, you have $100,000 in revenue-$20,000 in operating expenses-$10,000 in depreciation = $70,000 in income. Now, over say 5 years, you’ll depreciate the full $50,000 cost, and the total dollar amount the IRS gets will be the same. But it will get more taxes in the first year, which due to the time value of money is worth more than getting the money in subsequent years.

Re: Tell HN: Help restore the tax deduction for software dev in the US (Section 174)

#924

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you hire someone to build you an office or office furniture, you are creating a long lived asset so it is capitalized If you hire someone to clean your office, you are not creating an asset so it is expensed Building software is generally creating a long lived asset

This comment is misleading and misses the point. When you buy an office chair you capitalize the asset on your books. The chair manufacturer in turn pays wages to a person to construct the chair. Those wages are not capitalized, the manufacturer deducts them fully when they are incurred. The main issue is that “software manufacturers” must now depreciate those same wages over 5 years. Which is unique and does not pas…

That is not correct.

The chair manufacturer capitalizes the costs of factory wages into inventory.

They are expenses as cost of goods sold when the inventory is sold.

Which makes sense because they have realized 100% of the value of those expenses when it is sold.

Re: Tell HN: Help restore the tax deduction for software dev in the US (Section 174)

#925

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you hire someone to build you an office or office furniture, you are creating a long lived asset so it is capitalized If you hire someone to clean your office, you are not creating an asset so it is expensed Building software is generally creating a long lived asset

Thanks. Capitalized expense means the expense can be amortized over years? If so, the short-term profit can be higher than expensed cost? That sounds bad in this context as more profit means more tax. However, the OP seems to argue that capitalized expense is good for tech companies. In the meantime, the parent comment says "Depreciating means that if you pay an engineer $200k in a year, in tax-world you only had $40…

Capitalized means it’s treated as an investment into an asset rather than just a cost of doing business. The reason we do this is because we want revenue and expenses to reasonably match the time period where their value comes into play.

For example, if you build 100 widgets for $1M this year, the labor and materials cost of those widgets are capitalized into inventory. Next year you sell them all for $2M.

Capitalization rules would say you had no profit or loss in the first year, and $1M profit in the second year because the cost of the inventory gets expensed when the inventory is sold.

Fixed assets like buildings, machinery, and now software have pre defined lifetimes that the expense is realized over. In the case of software, it’s 5 years.

Tech companies don’t like this because they want to front load recognition of expenses to pay less taxes today.

Re: Tell HN: Help restore the tax deduction for software dev in the US (Section 174)

#926

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you’re building software that is intended to be used for longer than a year then it should be capitalized. The argument on HN is always just complaining that it’s unfavorable to devs; but it’s perfectly reasonable with regards to actual tax principles.

Software engineers hired for custom, in house work are not building a fixed piece of software with the intention of letting it loose unchanged for the next five years. Software engineers hired to build product are not exclusively building a finished product, and are increasingly necessary as part of the expense of operating that product long term. Industry trends have gone towards combining and blending developement,…

The idea that the software must not be changed over the next five years is irrelevant

The important bit is that it will be used for longer than one year

Re: Tell HN: Help restore the tax deduction for software dev in the US (Section 174)

#927

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you’re building software that is intended to be used for longer than a year then it should be capitalized. The argument on HN is always just complaining that it’s unfavorable to devs; but it’s perfectly reasonable with regards to actual tax principles.

Almost all other payroll is deductible. Why is salary for someone building a house deductible, but salary for someone building a for loop a capital expense Look into when this started and why and you might understand it

Salary for building assets generally are capitalizable. Construction companies have a special carve out because they typically are hired to build the assets for someone else and are paid for the completion of the construction work.

A factory worker building a product to be sold is capitalized into inventory

Re: Tell HN: Help restore the tax deduction for software dev in the US (Section 174)

#928

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? They're suggesting you spend a minute or two per month thinking about it, not meticulous tracking. That might not be practical , but what they are describing is a perfectly good use of the word "just".

A minute or two (or even 10 minutes) per month is basically just guessing/bullshitting. Anything that is accurate rather than imagination requires more overhead than this. Likely anything even remotely accurate requires the sort of micromanagement software that lawyers use to track billable hours, requires desktop-surveillance, and meeting minutes-dissection after-the-fact. Not sure how they will decide to rate reddi…

Government wants a number -- they get a number. How I get to the number is precise enough in my opinion and you are free to disagree with my methodology.

When I was doing it, I worked in an actual startup and granularity of time allocation was in weeks. This week I was doing the thing, the other I was mostly doing bugfixes/refactorings etc.

You could do more precise and account with hour or minute granularity with tools if you have to

Re: Tell HN: Help restore the tax deduction for software dev in the US (Section 174)

#929
post #859

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference between a fermentation system and software is that right now, software changes fast enough that five years is a long time. While there are software that are still in use from five years ago, there are plenty of obsolete software no one is still using made five years ago.

The tax code accounts for that by providing different depreciation schedules for different kinds of assets. For software the catch-all depreciation schedule is 3 years: https://www.irs.gov/publications/p946 .

Is 3 years reasonable?

If we are making say, a point-of-sale software rolled out in a fast food franchise (let’s take Chick-fil-A since they have edge Kubernetes deployments), is it reasonable that we won’t add features to that software in 3 years? Perhaps.

What about bug fixes? Is that expense or should we expect time spent on bug fixes to also be depreciated in 3 years?

What about configuration? Does configuring that POS for new menu items count as software development, and therefore needs to be depreciated over the next 3 years?

Chick-fil-A has edge Kubernetes. Does the install and implementation itself counts as “R&D”? If we argue that configuration can be expensed, then would writing manifests be depreciable or not? What if we use “infrastucture as code” tools such as Chef?

What about say, excel sheets and macros? Or forget macros — just basic use of a spreadsheet. Some manager add in a summation to a column to compute totals. Very basic stuff. Is that software development? If it is, would that be depreciated over 3-years?

If we argue that this is normal use of excel and should not be depreciated, then why wouldn’t my normal use of a compiler and editor also count as normal use and should not be depreciated?

Whether it is 5 years or 3 years, the point is that unlike physical capital goods, software changes very fast, even if the underlying hardware wasn’t changing that fast. It is not always that expert designers build them — software can also be written in a way where end users modify them. We also use software to make software, and can rapidly change our tooling in a way that we cannot with physical capital equipment.

I see the merit in categorizing software as capital, from an economic theory point of view, but software also has its own dynamic that is distinct from physical capital equipment. A tax code that does not acknowledge that can bring more overall harms to the society.

Re: Tell HN: Help restore the tax deduction for software dev in the US (Section 174)

#930
post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, same as any other expense. You find a way to pay for it, or you go out of business. If the number is 10%; you need either 10% more revenue or 10% less costs.

Except its a fabricated expense by law . Of course we can say "it is what it is, deal with it" for pretty much anything.

Sorry, I thought you were asking a question. I misread, didn't realize it was rhetorical.
Post reply on HN