7 ms·

anecdata: after lay off 10 months ago, I suddenly got 3 offers in July and I am employed now. I think it's the BBB that fixed the tax code issue - just a guess

anecdata: after lay off 10 months ago, I suddenly got 3 offers in July and I am employed now. I think it's the BBB that fixed the tax code issue - just a guess.

bitbasher 1y ago
anecdata: I run a saas product and my primary customers are recruiters, after the BBB I have had more daily signups and new subscribers than previous months.
littlexsparkee 1y ago
less recruiter activity than a few months ago, cleared one interview gauntlet just to have the role change due to a new lead hire, otherwise getting followups for screens but hit or miss on the tech assessments. might have to spend more time practicing. 10 yoe, SFBA.
- throwmeaway222 1y ago
  sorry to hear that, keep it up, it was absolutely demoralizing for me during those 10 months I started to believe I was actually losing my mind after a literal 20 year history in startups/tech. But my colleagues are all younger than me - they are hiring people out of college too, so you can make it just keep pushing
dyauspitr 1y ago
This might be the only good thing in all of BBB
- bravesoul2 1y ago
  Good... for tech workers, and tech companies.
MisterBiggs 1y ago
I was laid off this year and also saw a massive uptick in offers in July. Based in Colorado, but was looking nation wide and I got more interest out of SF than the rest of the country combined.
- petcat 1y ago
  Sounds like you're one of the lucky ones. In my experience, remote tech jobs have largely moved to India. It's like pulling teeth at my company to get them to offer a remote job in a NA timezone (US or Canada).
Terr_ 1y ago
With respect to chronology and cause/effect, I'd point out that provision took effect in January 2022, so it's been of-concern for a while. It was put into law in 2017 with the Republican TCJA, but section 174 was time-delayed, part of a general trick of having all of the tax-cuts and spending immediately, with any budget "balancing" items deferred as long as possible.
- ivewonyoung 1y ago
  Why didn't the Democrats who were in power repeal it by Jan 2022 by itself or as part of other large bills they passed?
  - trenchpilgrim 1y ago
    Because it was intended to offset losses in tax revenue from the 2017 tax cuts, and trying to undo those tax cuts would have been political suicide.
  - devonbleak 1y ago
    It wouldn't have been budget-neutral without a bunch of tax increases along with it which they don't have the spine to implement.
    - ivewonyoung 1y ago
      It had Republican support so they could've easily gotten the 60 votes in the Senate, so it didn't need to be budget-neutral.
  - gedy 1y ago
    Crimethink
  - Terr_ 1y ago
    Among other possible attempts(?) that touched on the issue, here's one in 2024 that Republicans blocked in the Senate, where they "filibustered" it by voting "nay" on cloture. https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/118-2024/s230 https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/118-2024/s230 > Why didn't the Democrats Alternate question: Why didn't the Republicans do something in the years before 2025 to fix the problem they created and which tech-company lobbyists absolutely told them about?
silisili 1y ago
I'm not looking for work, but have a LinkedIn that I honestly forgot about until the end of July. It'd been so long since I got even recruiterspam I forgot about it. And out of nowhere, 2 or 3 target recruiter messages. Hopefully things are looking up for the market.
sexeriy237 1y ago
Ah yes, the BBB that fixed the rules that trump changed last time.
- ivewonyoung 1y ago
  Why didn't the Biden admin "fix" the rule before it took effect in Jan 2022? They passed several bills, they could've have included the repeal. It took effect on the democrats watch, because of their inaction. Edit: Republican Marco Rubio introduced a clean bill to repeal the changes in 2023. https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/2823 https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/282... The Democrat controlled Senate blocked it from coming to a vote. Why does HN always blame only Republicans for this change?
  - hn_acc1 1y ago
    It's possible you need a supermajority or something to specifically "undo" laws passed by a previous session of congress - something Biden did not have.
    - ivewonyoung 1y ago
      Then how did Republicans repeal it just recently with zero Dem votes? Repealing it had Republican support during the Biden term too, they even introduced a bill in2023 to repeal it which the Democrats killed. https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/2823 https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/282... Democrats really wanted the changes to take place since their platform is all about higher taxes on companies and high earners.
      - rezonant 1y ago
        > which the Democrats killed Do you have a source for this claim? The congressional record says only that it died in the Finance Committee
        1y ago
seangrogg 1y ago
Partially! The text of the OBBBA actually made permanent the section of the tax code that treats software development as research and amortizes accordingly. However, because nothing can just be straightforward, it also allows domestic research expenses to be deducted immediately instead of amortized. Definitely a much better tax situation but also not one we would've been in if not for the TCJA, and we still have an exposed oblique (the removal of the domestic research exclusion) that could put us back in the same spot unless the software development as research section is removed.
650REDHAIR 1y ago
That’s quite the leap there. But not a surprise based on your history here on HN.

anecdata: after lay off 10 months ago, I suddenly got 3 offers in July and I am employed now. I think it's the BBB that fixed the tax code issue - just a guess.

bitbasher 1y ago

anecdata: I run a saas product and my primary customers are recruiters, after the BBB I have had more daily signups and new subscribers than previous months.

littlexsparkee 1y ago

less recruiter activity than a few months ago, cleared one interview gauntlet just to have the role change due to a new lead hire, otherwise getting followups for screens but hit or miss on the tech assessments. might have to spend more time practicing. 10 yoe, SFBA.

throwmeaway222 1y ago
sorry to hear that, keep it up, it was absolutely demoralizing for me during those 10 months I started to believe I was actually losing my mind after a literal 20 year history in startups/tech. But my colleagues are all younger than me - they are hiring people out of college too, so you can make it just keep pushing

dyauspitr 1y ago

This might be the only good thing in all of BBB

bravesoul2 1y ago
Good... for tech workers, and tech companies.

MisterBiggs 1y ago

I was laid off this year and also saw a massive uptick in offers in July. Based in Colorado, but was looking nation wide and I got more interest out of SF than the rest of the country combined.

petcat 1y ago
Sounds like you're one of the lucky ones. In my experience, remote tech jobs have largely moved to India. It's like pulling teeth at my company to get them to offer a remote job in a NA timezone (US or Canada).

Terr_ 1y ago

With respect to chronology and cause/effect, I'd point out that provision took effect in January 2022, so it's been of-concern for a while. It was put into law in 2017 with the Republican TCJA, but section 174 was time-delayed, part of a general trick of having all of the tax-cuts and spending immediately, with any budget "balancing" items deferred as long as possible.

ivewonyoung 1y ago
Why didn't the Democrats who were in power repeal it by Jan 2022 by itself or as part of other large bills they passed?
- trenchpilgrim 1y ago
  Because it was intended to offset losses in tax revenue from the 2017 tax cuts, and trying to undo those tax cuts would have been political suicide.
- devonbleak 1y ago
  It wouldn't have been budget-neutral without a bunch of tax increases along with it which they don't have the spine to implement.
  - ivewonyoung 1y ago
    It had Republican support so they could've easily gotten the 60 votes in the Senate, so it didn't need to be budget-neutral.
- gedy 1y ago
  Crimethink
- Terr_ 1y ago
  Among other possible attempts(?) that touched on the issue, here's one in 2024 that Republicans blocked in the Senate, where they "filibustered" it by voting "nay" on cloture. https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/118-2024/s230 https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/118-2024/s230 > Why didn't the Democrats Alternate question: Why didn't the Republicans do something in the years before 2025 to fix the problem they created and which tech-company lobbyists absolutely told them about?

silisili 1y ago

I'm not looking for work, but have a LinkedIn that I honestly forgot about until the end of July. It'd been so long since I got even recruiterspam I forgot about it. And out of nowhere, 2 or 3 target recruiter messages. Hopefully things are looking up for the market.

sexeriy237 1y ago

Ah yes, the BBB that fixed the rules that trump changed last time.

ivewonyoung 1y ago
Why didn't the Biden admin "fix" the rule before it took effect in Jan 2022? They passed several bills, they could've have included the repeal. It took effect on the democrats watch, because of their inaction. Edit: Republican Marco Rubio introduced a clean bill to repeal the changes in 2023. https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/2823 https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/282... The Democrat controlled Senate blocked it from coming to a vote. Why does HN always blame only Republicans for this change?
- hn_acc1 1y ago
  It's possible you need a supermajority or something to specifically "undo" laws passed by a previous session of congress - something Biden did not have.
  - ivewonyoung 1y ago
    Then how did Republicans repeal it just recently with zero Dem votes? Repealing it had Republican support during the Biden term too, they even introduced a bill in2023 to repeal it which the Democrats killed. https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/2823 https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/282... Democrats really wanted the changes to take place since their platform is all about higher taxes on companies and high earners.
    - rezonant 1y ago
      > which the Democrats killed Do you have a source for this claim? The congressional record says only that it died in the Finance Committee
      - 1y ago

seangrogg 1y ago

Partially! The text of the OBBBA actually made permanent the section of the tax code that treats software development as research and amortizes accordingly. However, because nothing can just be straightforward, it also allows domestic research expenses to be deducted immediately instead of amortized. Definitely a much better tax situation but also not one we would've been in if not for the TCJA, and we still have an exposed oblique (the removal of the domestic research exclusion) that could put us back in the same spot unless the software development as research section is removed.

650REDHAIR 1y ago

That’s quite the leap there. But not a surprise based on your history here on HN.