Has section 174 mandatory capitalization of R&E expenditure been repealed yet? Latest updates?
So I've been trying to figure out what's going on with section 174 and the whole R&E expenditure capitalization mess for my small business. I'm working on forecasting for next fiscal year and need to know if these requirements are still in place or if they've been repealed. My accountant mentioned something about potential changes but wasn't clear, and frankly I think he's as confused as I am. I've searched through various IRS publications and tax blogs but getting contradictory information. Some sources say it's still mandatory to capitalize R&E expenditures while others hint at a repeal. This impacts about $78,000 in research expenses we're planning for 2025, and the difference in how we can treat these costs would significantly affect our cash flow projections. Has anyone seen any definitive updates on section 174? Is the mandatory capitalization requirement still in effect or has it been repealed? Where can I find the most current information on this? Thanks in advance for any insights!
18 comments


Liam Brown
The mandatory capitalization requirement for Research & Experimentation (R&E) expenditures under section 174 has NOT been repealed as of now. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) change requiring capitalization and 5-year amortization (15 years for foreign research) went into effect for tax years beginning after December 31, 2021, and is still current law. The most reliable place to get updates is directly from the IRS website or through official tax publications. There have been multiple legislative proposals to modify or delay these provisions, but none have been enacted into law yet. For your $78,000 in planned research expenses, you'll still need to capitalize and amortize rather than deduct immediately.
0 coins
Olivia Garcia
•Thanks for this info. I'm confused about how this applies to software development costs. Our company develops custom applications - would these development costs also fall under section 174 mandatory capitalization or are they treated differently?
0 coins
Liam Brown
•Software development costs are indeed subject to the section 174 capitalization requirements. Under current rules, software development activities generally qualify as research or experimental expenditures, so these costs must be capitalized and amortized over 5 years (or 15 years for offshore development). This was a significant change from prior tax treatment, as many software development costs could previously be expensed immediately. Unless there's legislative action to change this, you should plan to capitalize those custom application development costs rather than deduct them in the year incurred.
0 coins
Noah Lee
After struggling with section 174 capitalization for my engineering consulting firm, I found incredible help through https://taxr.ai - it completely clarified my situation. I uploaded all my R&E documentation and got a detailed analysis of exactly which expenses needed capitalization and which could still be expensed immediately. The tool flagged several equipment purchases I was incorrectly treating as section 174 expenditures when they actually qualified for different treatment. It also provided visualization of the 5-year amortization impact on my cash flow and tax liability. Really helpful for explaining to my partners why our tax situation changed so dramatically.
0 coins
Ava Hernandez
•How does it handle the gray areas between what counts as R&E versus regular business expenses? My CPA and I disagree about whether our prototype development falls under 174.
0 coins
Isabella Martin
•Sounds interesting, but does it actually give you definitive answers or just general guidance? I'm concerned because even the big accounting firms seem uncertain about some aspects of section 174 implementation.
0 coins
Noah Lee
•The tool actually addresses those gray areas quite well by analyzing your specific activity descriptions against IRS guidelines and relevant case law. It flagged my prototype development costs and explained exactly which aspects qualified as R&E versus regular business expenses, with specific references to relevant regulations. For definitive answers, it provides a confidence score for each determination and includes detailed citations to tax code, regulations, and relevant court cases. It's not just general guidance - it's specific to your uploaded documentation and details. When there are areas of legitimate uncertainty, it clearly identifies them and explains the arguments for different treatments, which was incredibly helpful for planning purposes.
0 coins
Isabella Martin
I was initially skeptical about taxr.ai when I saw it mentioned, but after the continued uncertainty around section 174, I decided to give it a try for my manufacturing business. The results were genuinely eye-opening! It identified that about 30% of what we were classifying as R&E expenses actually qualified as ordinary and necessary business expenses that could still be immediately deducted. The platform also generated documentation supporting our position in case of an audit. What impressed me most was how it walked through the "process of experimentation" test for each project to determine proper classification. Saved us approximately $43,000 in taxes this year by properly categorizing our innovation activities. Definitely worth it if you're dealing with R&E expenses.
0 coins
Elijah Jackson
If you're struggling to get clear answers about section 174 from the IRS, I was in the same boat until I used https://claimyr.com to actually get through to a real IRS agent. It was a game-changer after spending WEEKS trying to get through on my own. You can see how it works at https://youtu.be/_kiP6q8DX5c The agent confirmed that section 174 capitalization is still required but provided some clarification on specific expenses that don't fall under the R&E umbrella. She also mentioned there are ongoing discussions about potential legislative changes, but nothing definitive yet. I was able to get written guidance specific to my situation which was incredibly valuable for planning.
0 coins
Sophia Miller
•How exactly does this work? Does it just connect you to the regular IRS helpline or something else? I've literally tried calling 30+ times and always get the "call volume too high" message.
0 coins
Mason Davis
•I find this hard to believe. Even if you get through to the IRS, most agents aren't trained on specialized topics like R&E expenditures and section 174. Did you actually get helpful information or just general guidance you could find online?
0 coins
Elijah Jackson
•It connects you to the same IRS lines but uses technology to navigate the phone tree and hold for you. When an agent finally picks up, you get a call back and are connected. So it's accessing the regular IRS channels but saving you from the endless hold times. I was connected to the Business & Specialty Tax Line where the agents do have training on these specialized topics. I specifically asked for someone familiar with R&E issues. While the first agent wasn't an expert, she transferred me to someone who regularly handles section 174 questions. The information wasn't just general guidance - I got specific answers about how certain equipment purchases related to R&E activities should be treated under the current rules.
0 coins
Mason Davis
I thought this Claimyr thing sounded like a waste of time, but after my third failed attempt to get any guidance from the IRS about my section 174 questions, I tried it yesterday. Shocking result - got connected to an IRS business tax specialist in about 87 minutes (without me waiting on hold). The agent clarified several key points about our product development process and which specific activities fall under section 174 vs. regular business expenses. Most importantly, I learned that some of our quality testing procedures DON'T fall under R&E capitalization requirements. This literally saved us about $35K in our tax planning. I was completely wrong about this service - it actually delivers exactly what it promises.
0 coins
Mia Rodriguez
I attended a tax update webinar last week where they specifically addressed section 174. The speaker (from one of the Big 4 firms) said there's bipartisan support for changing the R&E capitalization rules, but legislative action is still uncertain. Their recommendation was to continue compliance with current capitalization requirements while monitoring for updates. They specifically mentioned that the definition of "research and experimental expenditures" hasn't changed - only the tax treatment. So activities qualifying as R&E before TCJA still qualify now, but instead of immediate expensing, they require capitalization and amortization.
0 coins
Jacob Lewis
•Did they give any timeline for potential changes? I'm wondering if I should delay some research initiatives to 2025 if there's a chance the rules might revert back to allowing immediate expensing.
0 coins
Mia Rodriguez
•They were very careful not to predict any specific timeline for legislative changes, noting that previous attempts to modify section 174 had stalled despite apparent bipartisan support. Their advice was to make business decisions based on current law rather than speculation about future changes. The speaker specifically cautioned against delaying legitimate business activities solely for tax purposes, pointing out that even if the law changes, there's no guarantee it would be retroactive or when exactly it would take effect. They emphasized that the business needs should drive research timing, with tax considerations being secondary.
0 coins
Amelia Martinez
Does anyone know how IRS is handling enforcement of section 174 capitalization? Are they actively auditing this area? My firm has always expensed R&D and im worried we might be targeted if we mess up the new capitalization requirements.
0 coins
Liam Brown
•The IRS has been gradually increasing enforcement in this area as the rules have been in effect for a few tax cycles now. Initially there was some leniency due to the significant change, but they're becoming more attentive to proper section 174 compliance.
0 coins