Blog Layout

Navigating the Impact of IRC Section 174 on Government Contract Research Firms: Strategies for Survival

Kevin Hoskins and Associates • April 10, 2024

(This is a synopsis of the best information that we have found on Section 174 and its impact on Government Contract Research First. Please contact govIRG if you have questions or would like clarification, and we will direct you to the right resources regarding your needs.)

 

Introduction:

The enactment of IRC Section 174, mandating the capitalization of specific research and experimental expenses, has sent ripples of concern throughout the business landscape, particularly affecting contract research firms. This legislation has raised critical questions about the deductibility of research-related expenditures and posed challenges for companies reliant on such activities for revenue generation. In this article, we delve into the implications of Section 174 on contract research organizations (CROs) and explore potential strategies for navigating these turbulent waters.

 

Understanding the Shift:

Historically, under IRC Section 162, research and experimental expenses were deductible as ordinary and necessary business expenses. However, the recent amendment to Section 174 necessitates the capitalization and amortization of these expenditures over five years. This change has significant ramifications for businesses, particularly those engaged in government contract research activities. The distinction between "expenses" and "expenditures" has become crucial in determining the tax treatment of research-related costs.

 

Challenges Faced by Contract Research Firms:

Government contract research firms rely on the immediate deduction of research expenses to maintain profitability and sustain operations. The requirement to capitalize such expenses threatens their financial viability and could potentially hinder their ability to compete in the market.

Considering the challenges posed by Section 174, contract research firms must carefully evaluate their options and adopt proactive strategies to mitigate risks and ensure continued viability. Here are three potential approaches:

 

1. Compliance with Section 174:

One option is to adhere strictly to the provisions of Section 174 by capitalizing all research and experimental expenditures. While this may appear to be the safest choice from a compliance perspective, it could impose significant financial burdens on businesses, potentially impeding growth and expansion efforts.

 

2. Strategic Non-compliance:

Alternatively, some firms may choose to disregard the rules outlined in Section 174, banking on the expectation that legislative amendments will retroactively address the issue. However, this approach carries inherent risks and uncertainty, as it relies on the anticipation of future regulatory changes.

 

3. Leveraging Section 162:

A more nuanced approach involves leveraging the provisions of Section 162 to continue deducting research costs directly related to revenue-generating projects. By categorizing research expenses as ordinary and necessary business expenses, firms can mitigate the adverse effects of Section 174 while maintaining tax compliance.

 

Consultation and Disclosure:

Regardless of the chosen strategy, government contract research firms are advised to seek guidance from tax advisors to assess the implications of Section 174 on their specific circumstances. Additionally, attaching an IRS Form 8275 Disclosure Statement to tax returns can provide protection against potential penalties associated with non-compliance with Section 174. This statement should clearly articulate the rationale behind the chosen tax treatment and demonstrate adherence to applicable tax laws.

 

Conclusion:

The implementation of IRC Section 174 has introduced unprecedented challenges for government contract research firms, threatening their financial stability and operational efficiency. In navigating the complexities of this regulatory landscape, proactive planning and strategic decision-making are paramount. By carefully assessing their options and seeking expert guidance, contract research firms can adapt to the new tax regime while safeguarding their long-term viability and competitiveness in the marketplace.

 

References:

Jim Casart, Co-Founder of the GovCon Alliance

Rick Kleban, Founder and President of Sycamore Growth Group

James Bean, Senior Research Analyst at Sycamore Growth Group


November 5, 2024
The Single Audit threshold for organizations that receive Federal awards has been increased from $750,000 to $1 million, effective for fiscal periods starting on or after October 1, 2024. This adjustment is designed to streamline audit requirements and is intended to allow federal oversight resources to focus on larger awards. Here is a look at what this change means for organizations and how to prepare. What Is a Single Audit? A Single Audit is an audit of a non-federal entity’s financial statements and federal award expenditures, conducted to ensure that federal funds are used in compliance with relevant laws and regulations. Single Audits must adhere to Generally Accepted Auditing Standards (GAAS), Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards (GAGAS) issued by the Comptroller General of the United States, and the Uniform Guidance. These audits assess compliance with federal award conditions and verify that organizations follow applicable financial and regulatory requirements. The Uniform Guidance, outlined in Title 2 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 200, establishes the standards for recipients of federal funds. It includes rules on cost principles, administrative requirements, and audit obligations to promote consistency in the management of federal awards. The New $1 Million Threshold – WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR BUSINESSES? Starting in fiscal years beginning on or after October 1, 2024, only organizations with federal expenditures of $1 million or more in a single fiscal year will be required to undergo a Single Audit. This threshold increase is intended to lessen the audit burden for entities with smaller awards and allocate audit resources toward higher-dollar programs. This change may benefit various organizations, including universities, non-profits, healthcare providers, and smaller government entities, that receive federal funding but typically fall below the $1 million expenditure mark. Key Points to Consider 1. Reduced Audit Burden : Organizations with federal awards under $1 million will no longer need to undergo a Single Audit, which may reduce administrative expenses and allow staff to focus more on their core programs. 2. Focused Oversight : With a higher threshold, federal audit efforts can concentrate on larger awards, where potential compliance risks may be greater. 3. Compliance Responsibility : Even if a Single Audit is not required, entities must still comply with federal requirements for award expenditures and conditions. Internal audits and controls remain essential for ensuring compliance.  4. Preparing for the Change : Organizations with federal expenditures that may vary across fiscal years should monitor their spending closely to determine when a Single Audit is needed. Resources for Navigating Single Audit Requirements While the threshold has increased, maintaining compliance with federal standards remains critical. The following resources provide additional information on Single Audits and compliance under Uniform Guidance: - Council on Governmental Relations (COGR): 2024 Uniform Guidance Readiness www.cogr.edu/sites/default/files/UG%20Readiness%202024_5th%20Look_Final%20Draft_9.17.24.pdf - U.S. Department of Health & Human Services: Office of Inspector General - Single Audit FAQs oig.hhs.gov/compliance/single-audits/frequently-asked-questions-faqs/single-audits-faqs/ The increase in the Single Audit threshold is likely to reduce administrative demands for many organizations. However, maintaining sound internal controls for managing and reporting federal funds remains essential. Preparing now for these changes will help organizations transition smoothly and stay compliant with federal requirements. Consulting with audit professionals or compliance advisors is recommended to ensure internal processes align with the latest federal guidelines. About govIRG govIRG is the government contract specialist with deep expertise across CFO Services, Contracts Management, Accounting, Accounting System Implementations, and Human Resources. Our mission is to provide government contractors with peace of mind by simplifying compliance and increasing business value. With a dedicated team focused on the unique needs of government contractors, govIRG delivers tailored solutions that streamline processes, ensure regulatory compliance, and foster business growth. We are the audit professionals you need. If you have any questions, please contact us.
By Chuck Anderson and Associates at govIRG October 4, 2024
Government contractors with cost-reimbursable contracts are required to submit provisional billing rates (PBRs) annually. While this may seem like a tedious compliance requirement, it’s actually an exercise that all companies should perform in some form. The insights gained not only help with billing on cost-reimbursable contracts but also offer a deeper understanding of a company’s finances. Developing PBRs is essentially a budgeting exercise that provides indirect rates representing the company’s break-even point. These rates are then used for invoicing on cost-reimbursable contracts in the following year. There are various ways to determine these rates, but the key requirement is that the process be well-documented and the data organized in a clear, intuitive format. Before starting the budgeting process, it’s crucial to ensure your Chart of Accounts (COA) is structured to categorize costs by “objective.” Typically, this structure will divide your COA into sections for recording costs such as Direct, Fringe, Overhead, G&A, and Unallowable. With this setup, you can easily identify and present the necessary details for calculating and submitting your PBRs. The budgeting process itself will vary based on the size, structure, and complexity of your business. The goal is to balance the time and cost of developing the budget with the accuracy of the results. govIRG can help you find the “sweet spot” to deliver an accurate forecast with the right level of effort. Our team can support this process at whatever level is appropriate for your company. Whether you need simple calculations and presentation or a deep dive into the details, we have the expertise to help you efficiently and accurately prepare your annual PBR.  Government contractors operate in a world where compliance is key. While developing PBRs may seem like a compliance obstacle, it’s actually a great opportunity to improve your company’s management. govIRG’s comprehensive approach to compliance management helps contractors avoid cash flow issues, stay compliant with government regulations, and ultimately increase the value of their business.
By Kevin Hoskins August 23, 2024
SBIR , or Small Business Innovation Research , and STTR , or Small Business Technology Transfer , are government-funded programs designed to engage small businesses in research and development efforts across the United States. These programs aim to boost the commercialization of federally funded research, enhance national investment, and foster technological innovation. The difference between SBIR and STTR The SBIR program is a three-phase award system that offers qualified small businesses the opportunity to propose innovative solutions that address the federal government’s specific research and development needs. The three phases are as follows: Phase I focuses on creating a proof of concept for the innovation; Phase II involves continuing research and development efforts; and Phase III is dedicated to pursuing commercialization in the private sector. STTR is intended to promote technology transfer by facilitating cooperative research and development between small businesses and research institutions. The key distinction from SBIR is that STTR requires the small business to formally partner with a research institution. At the time you apply for a SBIR you might also be eligible for “TABA (Technical and Business Assistance)” funds that is in addition to the SBIR funding to help you with your IP (Intellectual Property), Accounting System setup, and other things. You might also be eligible for R&D (Research & Development) Credits when you win an SBIR. GovIRG is committed to helping businesses thrive by simplifying compliance and increasing their business value. Our goal is to help businesses understand the available options and resources that can set them on the path to success. Some of this article references information found from SBIR.gov and U.S. Department of Education.
More Posts
Share by: