alt Hacker NewsIf correct, this is a good thing on a generally bad, overstuffed bill. Immediate expensing never should have been changed in the first place, and it was always weird seeing people twist themselves in knots defending it.
Replies
This. TCJA removed it and OBBBA restored it. What am I missing here
Maybe for every other item in the bill there is a another group of people out there who also think that "that is a good thing on a generally bad, overstuffed bill".
> Immediate expensing never should have been changed in the first place
This is indicative of ignorance. There is a reason why we have these rules.
Twisting not required. Depreciation straightforwardly applies to every other business capital expenditure. Hire someone to put a new roof on a rental property, and you're out the tens of thousands of dollars cash while only getting an immediate deduction for one thirtieth of the value. If you were expecting to pay that cash out of income, it's effectively a realized income and then reinvestment.
The recent (-ly undone) change went against decades of how things were, was crippling for medium size cashflow-positive startups, effectively increased taxes, etc. But it was really just a straightforward application of the general principles that apply to most everything else.
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.