zlacker

The "Section 174" tax change always gets brought up, but wouldn't that be kind of a "tail wagging the dog" explanation? Surely, if it's worth it for a business to hire talent, then it's still worth it regardless of some esoteric tax rule. Are there actually companies sitting there in their Hiring meetings saying "Gee, we really need to expand our business and hire some engineers--if it wasn't for this tax law, we'd be hiring!"

>>ryandr+(OP)
If it becomes meaningfully more expensive to hire talent, it needs to be meaningfully more worth it to hire.

It's more like if before the law was passed they'd hire 5 new devs, now they can only afford 3 and have to make do until more revenue comes in

>>ryandr+(OP)
Cashflow problems regularly kill business. Now you need a much higher cash buffer than before (in parent example where is that 800k coming from?). Combine with much tighter VC market and there are definitely many startups closing up shop because of this.