← Back to context Comment by jncfhnb 2 years ago That is not an argument for tax treatment of whether something is an asset 4 comments jncfhnb Reply twodave 2 years ago I wasn’t trying to make that argument, but I were I would argue that software itself is more like a liability, or, at the most, a current asset[0]. Source code has no inherent value, and in fact the more you have the more expensive it is.[0] https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/currentassets.asp jncfhnb 2 years ago That interpretation is deeply removed from how accounting works, but even if it were a current asset it would still not be an expense twodave 2 years ago Yeah, I agree it doesn’t fit well in any of the usual accounting boxes. But I think that’s the point, right? 1 reply →
twodave 2 years ago I wasn’t trying to make that argument, but I were I would argue that software itself is more like a liability, or, at the most, a current asset[0]. Source code has no inherent value, and in fact the more you have the more expensive it is.[0] https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/currentassets.asp jncfhnb 2 years ago That interpretation is deeply removed from how accounting works, but even if it were a current asset it would still not be an expense twodave 2 years ago Yeah, I agree it doesn’t fit well in any of the usual accounting boxes. But I think that’s the point, right? 1 reply →
jncfhnb 2 years ago That interpretation is deeply removed from how accounting works, but even if it were a current asset it would still not be an expense twodave 2 years ago Yeah, I agree it doesn’t fit well in any of the usual accounting boxes. But I think that’s the point, right? 1 reply →
twodave 2 years ago Yeah, I agree it doesn’t fit well in any of the usual accounting boxes. But I think that’s the point, right? 1 reply →
I wasn’t trying to make that argument, but I were I would argue that software itself is more like a liability, or, at the most, a current asset[0]. Source code has no inherent value, and in fact the more you have the more expensive it is.
[0] https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/currentassets.asp
That interpretation is deeply removed from how accounting works, but even if it were a current asset it would still not be an expense
Yeah, I agree it doesn’t fit well in any of the usual accounting boxes. But I think that’s the point, right?
1 reply →