3 ms·
Is this true even if you don't capitalize the immaterial IP asset generated by the R&D salaries on the balance sheet? Is that required in the US? Otherwise I'm
by svara 1y ago
Is this true even if you don't capitalize the immaterial IP asset generated by the R&D salaries on the balance sheet? Is that required in the US?
Otherwise I'm quite amazed that salaries can be carried forward as future expenses.
- wdaher 1y agoThis is what the Sec 174 change said: it says that you do have to capitalize it.
- mppm 1y agoElsewhere in the world (under IFRS accounting rules) capitalization of R&D costs has been a firm requirement for a while. The US has been somewhat unique in allowing them to be expensed instead, until recently.
- svara 1y agoTaxes are calculated according to tax accounting rules, not IFRS, though? I know of at least two Western European countries where you don't have to do that. Don't worry, we pay enough taxes either way ;)
- mppm 1y agoYeah, seems I was wrong about that. Apparently most IFRS countries allow expensing R&D for tax purposes, regardless of accounting. Many even have an R&D superdeduction nowadays. Sorry for the noise :(
- bravesoul2 1y agoI was confused and has to double check. In Australia you can deduct them https://www.ato.gov.au/businesses-and-organisations/income-deductions-and-concessions/incentives-and-concessions/research-and-development-tax-incentive-and-concessions/research-and-development-tax-incentive/previous-years/guides/amounts-you-can-claim/eligible-expenditure-under-the-rd-tax-incentive https://www.ato.gov.au/businesses-and-organisations/income-d...
- 0xWTF 1y agoCame here to ask about the Aussie RDTI. So, if I spend $10M on R&D and make $5M, what's the difference between US and Aussie net?
- anticensor 1y agoSome countries have uniform accounting where the tax accounting rules closely follow IFRS.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]