4 ms·
"Other payroll employees" is doing a lot of lifting. The question is really, payroll is made up of builders, vs nonbuilders. Are devs different from other bui
by IG_Semmelweiss 1y ago
"Other payroll employees" is doing a lot of lifting.
The question is really, payroll is made up of builders, vs nonbuilders.
Are devs different from other builders? The dirty secret is that they are not.
Ford engineers, P&G food researchers, and architect salaries are capitalized just like Software development costs.
But, in the case of software development, only those builders are getting a nice subsidy.
A world where we treat all workers as expenses is not likely since it means the end of US GAAP. So, we must treat all builders like builders . There shouldn't be special favors for some any specific builder group.
- floxy 1y ago>Ford engineers, P&G food researchers, and architect salaries are capitalized just like Software development costs. I'd say the majority of the posters on this thread who are answering questions (as opposed to asking questions) believe this is not the case. What is a good source for learning more about which categories of employee salaries are amortized? Besides becoming a CPA.
- ekianjo 1y agoYou can easily check that architects follow the same rules. When they work towards creating a new building their salaries are amortized
- floxy 1y agoI wonder if most of the people in this thread should then change their minds on this topic, since the #1 reason seems to be that software development is being singled out.
- GenerWork 1y ago>But, in the case of software development, only those builders are getting a nice subsidy. This is why I can't support re-implementing Section 174. Software engineers are now being treated in the tax code like everybody else, and they don't like that change.