logoalt Hacker News

culiyesterday at 10:17 PM0 repliesview on HN

It seems like this reversion is being paired with changes to 41(d)(1)(A) and 280C(c)(1)

> The domestic research or experimental expenditures . . . otherwise taken into account as a deduction or charged to capital account under this chapter shall be reduced by the amount of the credit allowed under section 41(a). Read in conjunction with Section 41(d)(1)(A), discussed above, it seems that all taxpayers claiming a research tax credit will necessarily have costs which are treated under Section 174A and thus subject to the reduction specified under amended Section 280C(c)(1).

> To our knowledge, many taxpayers have interpreted this language to mean that there is a reduction under 280C(c)(1) only to the extent the research credit exceeds the amortization allowed under Section 174, generally 10% in the year the expense is incurred under the applicable half-year convention. In that case, there would typically be little or no reduction to deductions and capitalized amounts, and correspondingly no reason to elect a reduced credit in lieu of a nonexistent or minimal reduction.

https://www.morganlewis.com/pubs/2025/07/new-section-174a-re...

TL;DR: I don't think we're out of the woods yet