The tax treatment of research and development (R&D) expenses is one of the biggest issues facing Congress as the year winds down. Since the beginning of 2022, companies have had to spread deductions for R&D costs out over five years, instead of deducting them immediately. This policy, known as R&D amortization, reduces economic growth by penalizing investment generally, especially in R&D-intensive industries.
R&D investment is not spread evenly across the economy—it is concentrated heavily in a few sectors. Manufacturing accounts for most private sector R&D, at 58 percent, while the Information industry (composed largely of software and data processing) accounts for another 22.4 percent, and Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services accounts for 10.8 percent.
![]()
Correspondingly, these industries would see the largest benefits from returning to full expensing for R&D investment, according to Tax Foundation’s industry modeling.
All three industries would see a reduction in tax liability of over 20 percent in 2023. Meanwhile, Wholesale Trade would see the fourth-largest tax reduction, at just over 5 percent. Unsurprisingly, this modeling shows that these industries are the most negatively impacted by the existing policy of R&D amortization.
![]()
In dollar terms, manufacturing faces the largest tax increase as a result of R&D amortization, at $31.7 billion in 2023, followed by Information at $3.7 billion and Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services at $2.0 billion (see Table 2).
Industrial policy has become a major topic of debate in policy circles today. While many disagree over what constitutes industrial policy, it generally involves a strategic government effort to reallocate resources towards industries of interest, often in the manufacturing sector, as a strategy to improve long-run growth. At least in theory, those industries of interest are ones with high potential for productivity growth and technological development.
The industrial policy advocate might argue that certain high-tech industries should receive specific subsidies, due to their potential for new, innovation-enhancing technology. The CHIPS and Science Act, passed and signed into law this year, included one such policy, creating a tax credit for semiconductor manufacturers. The critic would argue that such subsidies are unneeded, reflect a handout to well-connected incumbent firms, and ultimately undermine that industry’s ability to stand on its own.
But no matter which side of the industrial policy debate you take, R&D amortization looks foolish. It is a targeted penalty on exactly the types of high-tech industries industrial policy advocates want to support. Meanwhile, from the perspective of the industrial policy critic, the policy violates neutrality across industries, as it punishes industries that rely on R&D investment over ones that do not. If anything, R&D amortization is an example of de-industrial policy: a government policy choice that distorts markets against manufacturing and technology.
Take semiconductors, for example. According to detailed industry-level data from the National Science Foundation, semiconductor and other electrical components manufacturers performed over $35 billion in domestic R&D in 2019, a staggering 7 percent of the total $492 billion domestic R&D businesses performed that year. Semiconductor industry R&D dwarfed the R&D spending of entire major sectors of the economy, including Finance and Insurance, Wholesale Trade, Retail Trade, and Transportation and Warehousing.
Therefore, forcing companies to amortize R&D costs, rather than deduct them immediately, disproportionately penalizes the R&D-intensive semiconductor industry, even though politicians of both parties have made government support for semiconductors a priority.
R&D amortization hurts investment broadly and punishes the very cutting-edge industries needed to maximize long-run economic growth.
| Sector | Domestic R&D Performed (2019), billions | Corresponding NAICS Codes |
|---|---|---|
| Manufacturing | $285.67 | 31–33 |
| Mining | $2.72 | 21 |
| Utilities | $0.28 | 22 |
| Wholesale Trade | $1.19 | 42 |
| Transportation and Warehousing | $9.89 | 48–49 |
| Information | $110.23 | 51 |
| Finance and Insurance | $8.92 | 52 |
| Real Estate, Rental, and Leasing | $1.37 | 53 |
| Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services | $53.23 | 54 |
| Health Care Services | $2.27 | 621–23 |
| All Other Sectors | $17.20 | 23, 44-45, 55-56, 624, 71-72, 81 |
| Total | $492.96 | |
| Source: National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics, “Business Enterprise Research and Development: 2019,” National Science Foundation, Apr. 28, 2022, https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsf22329. Author’s calculations. | ||
| 2023 Reduction in Tax Liability from Canceling R&D Amortization ($ Billions) | 2023 Percent Reduction in Tax Liability from Canceling R&D Amortization | Corresponding NAICS Codes | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mining | $0.21 | 1.4% | 21 |
| Construction | $0.05 | 2.7% | 23 |
| Manufacturing | $31.69 | 25.4% | 31-33 |
| Wholesale Trade | $1.24 | 5.2% | 42 |
| Retail Trade | $0.94 | 2.3% | 44-45 |
| Transportation and Warehousing | $0.04 | 0.6% | 48-49 |
| Information | $3.67 | 23.1% | 51 |
| Finance, Insurance, and Management Services | $0.51 | 0.7% | 52, 55 |
| Real Estate, Rental and Leasing | $0.02 | 0.5% | 53 |
| Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services | $1.97 | 29.4% | 54 |
| Administrative and Waste Management Services | $0.01 | 0.3% | 56 |
| Accommodation and Food Services | $0.07 | 1.7% | 72 |
| Miscellaneous Services | $0.13 | 1.9% | 61, 62, 71, 81 |
| Agriculture and Utilities | $0.04 | 0.6% | 11, 22 |
| Source: Tax Foundation Taxes and Growth Model, October 2022. | |||
By: Kyle Hulehan
Title: Return to R&D Expensing Crucial for Manufacturing and Technology Investment
Sourced From: taxfoundation.org/rd-expensing-rd-amortization/
Published Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2022 14:55:15 +0000
----------------------