The hidden time bomb in the tax code that's fueling mass tech layoffs
-
This post did not contain any content.
-
This post did not contain any content.
How is it that we are only learning about this now
-
This post did not contain any content.
That’s what makes the politics of Section 174 so revealing. For all the rhetoric about bringing jobs back and making things in America, the first Trump administration’s major tax bill arguably helped accomplish the opposite.
What an utterly shocking turn of events. /s
Fucking MAGAt idiots.
️
-
How is it that we are only learning about this now
I remember talking about this at the time. It did get some attention, although the industry was quick to blame other things instead, like AI.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Fits with the time period where the company I worked for laid off nearly 70 of us and outsourced the department. I'd be curious to see how the numbers run to see if they were actually better off somehow doing so do to this.
-
This post did not contain any content.
This is why our tax code is broken. There's so many hidden bullshit codes and requirements, that people are fucked unless they can actually spend a fortune on accountants and tax lawyers, two professional that we don't need that many of btw, but our tax code is written to make money and jobs for the rich.
Fuck the feds.
-
I remember talking about this at the time. It did get some attention, although the industry was quick to blame other things instead, like AI.
Meanwhile I would argue that most efficiency gains from AI are outweighed by the cost of false positives wasting time and energy, learning prompt engineering, and other testing/fiddling adding overhead.
-
This is why our tax code is broken. There's so many hidden bullshit codes and requirements, that people are fucked unless they can actually spend a fortune on accountants and tax lawyers, two professional that we don't need that many of btw, but our tax code is written to make money and jobs for the rich.
Fuck the feds.
How can it be broken if it works exactly as intended? Same goes for the tax laws in my shitstain country.
I read an article the other day how taxes are a way - and always have been - to redistribute from the poor to the rich. Sounds about right.
-
Meanwhile I would argue that most efficiency gains from AI are outweighed by the cost of false positives wasting time and energy, learning prompt engineering, and other testing/fiddling adding overhead.
LLMs work in some limited use cases with good data to draw from. Most companies, especially large corporations, have shit data. Current AI cannot fix bad data. They will never do what these guys are promising they will do.
-
Meanwhile I would argue that most efficiency gains from AI are outweighed by the cost of false positives wasting time and energy, learning prompt engineering, and other testing/fiddling adding overhead.
You're not arguing against anything I've said given I said blame, as in, scapegoating AI for mismanagement and fundamental changes.
-
How can it be broken if it works exactly as intended? Same goes for the tax laws in my shitstain country.
I read an article the other day how taxes are a way - and always have been - to redistribute from the poor to the rich. Sounds about right.
Can you find and link me to the article? Ideally, they're to fund public necessities, schools and other infrastructure, roads, etc, fire departments, sanitation, defense, anything used by the collective.
-
How is it that we are only learning about this now
We were, but being set to expire in a decade and redundant 24 hour news cycles means they were designed to be forgotten.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I can't tell if it's "the true cause" of the massive tech layoffs because I know jackshit of US tax, but it does make more sense than every company realising at the same time that they over-hired or becoming instant believers of AI-driven productivity.
The only part that doesn't make sense to me is why hide this from employees. Countless all-hamds with uncomfortable CTOs spitting badly rehearsed bs about why 20% of their team was suddenly let go or why project Y, top of last year's strategic priorities, was unceremoniously cancelled. Instead of "R&D is no longer deductible so it costs us much more now".
I would not necessarily be happier about being laid off but this would at least be an explanation I feel I'd truly be able to accept
-
I can't tell if it's "the true cause" of the massive tech layoffs because I know jackshit of US tax, but it does make more sense than every company realising at the same time that they over-hired or becoming instant believers of AI-driven productivity.
The only part that doesn't make sense to me is why hide this from employees. Countless all-hamds with uncomfortable CTOs spitting badly rehearsed bs about why 20% of their team was suddenly let go or why project Y, top of last year's strategic priorities, was unceremoniously cancelled. Instead of "R&D is no longer deductible so it costs us much more now".
I would not necessarily be happier about being laid off but this would at least be an explanation I feel I'd truly be able to accept
I found out about this about a year ago while I was laid off. It coincided with when the massive layoffs began. Seems pretty likely to me. Developer salaries aren't low and to lose another 80% on top is a big hit.
Also a lot of my coworkers are really nervous about immigration right now. This is a bad time to be an Indian tech worker in the US. My team of about 10 could wind up reduced to me and one other guy. We'd even lose our manager and every PM. And this team is responsible for critical software at a major company.
-
Meanwhile I would argue that most efficiency gains from AI are outweighed by the cost of false positives wasting time and energy, learning prompt engineering, and other testing/fiddling adding overhead.
In my experience, for developers, actual productivity is inversely correlated to AI usage espousal. I straight up had an extremely mid developer tell our CFO (who has no business scheduling meetings about AI with devs in the first place) that AI made them 10x as productive. This of course is complete bullshit, and of course it got the CFO salivating. All of this is madness
-
That’s what makes the politics of Section 174 so revealing. For all the rhetoric about bringing jobs back and making things in America, the first Trump administration’s major tax bill arguably helped accomplish the opposite.
What an utterly shocking turn of events. /s
Fucking MAGAt idiots.
️
I like how your emotes tell a short story
-
This post did not contain any content.
So Trump set a time bomb for who he thought would be 46 and then lost his re-election. Now he has to fix the mess he created - and if he does he will be hailed as a corporate hero for fixing the tax problem he created.
If he doesn't fix it he will continue to plunge the future of America into chaos.
Fucking futureless clown people.
-
We were, but being set to expire in a decade and redundant 24 hour news cycles means they were designed to be forgotten.
At the time, it was part of the whole poisonous structure of the 2017 tax bill, where everything would expire after Trump's presumed 2nd term to sabotage his Democratic successor, confident that no one has long enough memory to realize where it came from.
-
Can you find and link me to the article? Ideally, they're to fund public necessities, schools and other infrastructure, roads, etc, fire departments, sanitation, defense, anything used by the collective.
I don’t have the article but basically when the rich aren’t taxed proportionally, their wealth and therefore power grows, while the lower classes get squeezed harder as they must give up a greater portion of their wealth in order to fund the obligations toward said infrastructure that keeps the whole machine running.
When used inappropriately, they are one piece of the larger system that funnels all the wealth upwards at the expense of everyone and everything else.
-
This post did not contain any content.
When Congress passed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), the signature legislative achievement of President Donald Trump’s first term, it slashed the corporate tax rate from 35% to 21% — a massive revenue loss on paper for the federal government.
To make the 2017 bill comply with Senate budget rules, lawmakers needed to offset the cost. So they added future tax hikes that wouldn’t kick in right away, wouldn’t provoke immediate backlash from businesses, and could, in theory, be quietly repealed later.
The delayed change to Section 174 — from immediate expensing of R&D to mandatory amortization, meaning that companies must spread the deduction out in smaller chunks over five or even 15-year periods — was that kind of provision. It didn’t start affecting the budget until 2022, but it helped the TCJA appear “deficit neutral” over the 10-year window used for legislative scoring.
The delay wasn’t a technical necessity. It was a political tactic. Such moves are common in tax legislation. Phase-ins and delayed provisions let lawmakers game how the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) — Congress’ nonpartisan analyst of how bills impact budgets and deficits — scores legislation, pushing costs or revenue losses outside official forecasting windows.
And so, on schedule in 2022, the change to Section 174 went into effect. Companies filed their 2022 tax returns under the new rules in early 2023. And suddenly, R&D wasn’t a full, immediate write-off anymore. The tax benefits of salaries for engineers, product and project managers, data scientists, and even some user experience and marketing staff — all of which had previously reduced taxable income in year one — now had to be spread out over five- or 15-year periods.