The Strategic Divergence: Decoupling from Federal IRC § 174 Amortization and the Michigan R&D Tax Credit

Decoupling in Michigan refers to the legislative act of separating the state’s tax code from federal Internal Revenue Code (IRC) Section 174A, which would otherwise allow for the immediate expensing of domestic research and development (R&D) costs. Under this regime, businesses must capitalize and amortize these expenses over five or fifteen years for Michigan tax purposes, even if they are fully deducted on a federal return.1

This policy shift, codified through Public Act 24 of 2025, represents a fundamental move toward state-level fiscal protectionism and a departure from Michigan’s traditional “rolling conformity” with federal tax laws. By rejecting the immediate expensing provisions of the federal One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), the Michigan Legislature aimed to prevent an estimated $2 billion reduction in state revenue over five fiscal years.2 To mitigate the resulting financial burden on innovative firms, the state concurrently established a new, refundable Michigan R&D tax credit, creating a dual-layered compliance environment where meticulous record-keeping is required to manage the permanent differences between federal expensing and state-mandated amortization.5

The Federal Context: The Restoration of Section 174A

To comprehend the implications of Michigan’s decoupling, one must first analyze the volatile federal landscape that precipitated this legislative response. For decades, IRC Section 174 provided taxpayers with the flexibility to choose between immediate expensing and deferred amortization for research and experimental (R&E) expenditures. This flexibility was eliminated by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) of 2017, which mandated that for tax years beginning after December 31, 2021, all R&E costs must be capitalized and amortized over five years for domestic activities and fifteen years for foreign activities.2

The signing of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) on July 4, 2025, fundamentally reset this policy. The OBBBA introduced IRC Section 174A, which reinstated and made permanent the immediate deduction for 100% of domestic R&E expenditures in the year incurred.7 The OBBBA also provided a generous suite of transition rules, including an optional “catch-up” deduction in 2025 for costs previously capitalized during the 2022–2024 mandatory amortization window.9

Federal Treatment Comparison: TCJA vs. OBBBA

For federal purposes, Section 174A was designed to simplify compliance and enhance the liquidity of R&D-heavy industries like life sciences and automotive engineering.10 However, because many states, including Michigan, use federal taxable income as the starting point for their own tax calculations, this federal “tax cut” essentially threatened to automatically shrink state tax bases across the country.15

Michigan’s Response: The Mechanism of Decoupling

Michigan has historically functioned as a “rolling conformity” state, meaning it automatically adopted changes to the Internal Revenue Code as they were enacted by Congress.2 However, the fiscal impact of the OBBBA was deemed too severe by the Michigan Department of Treasury, which estimated that full conformity would result in a $540 million revenue loss for the 2025–2026 fiscal year alone.3

On October 7, 2025, Governor Gretchen Whitmer signed House Bill 4961, which became Public Act 24 of 2025. This legislation formally advanced Michigan’s IRC conformity date to January 1, 2025, for both corporate and individual income tax purposes.16 Crucially, while it updated the general link to the federal code, it specifically “decoupled” from five major business tax provisions found in the OBBBA.2

The Core Decoupling Provisions of Public Act 24

The state’s move to decouple from Section 174A means that for the purposes of calculating Michigan Corporate Income Tax (CIT), taxpayers must act as if the OBBBA’s expensing provision was never enacted.3 Instead, they must continue to apply the capitalization and amortization rules established by the TCJA and in effect on December 31, 2024.17

Local State Revenue Office Guidance: Treasury Notices and Procedures

The Michigan Department of Treasury has provided specific instructions on how taxpayers must reconcile their federal returns with Michigan law. The primary mechanism for this reconciliation is the “add-back” of federal deductions on the Michigan return, followed by a state-specific subtraction for the allowed amortization.1

Adjustment Mechanisms for Corporate Taxpayers

For tax years beginning after December 31, 2024, corporate taxpayers must compute their Michigan taxable income by making adjustments on Form 4891 (Michigan Corporate Income Tax Annual Return).21 Because the federal return will reflect a full 100% deduction of domestic research costs under Section 174A, Michigan requires the following:

1. The Full Add-Back: The entire amount of domestic R&E expenditures expensed on the federal return must be added back to Michigan business income.1
2. State-Mandated Amortization: A deduction is then allowed for the current year’s portion of the capitalized expense, calculated over five years for domestic research and fifteen years for foreign research, typically using the mid-year convention.1
3. Exclusion of Transition Rules: Michigan explicitly decouples from federal transition rules that allow for the “catch-up” deduction of unamortized 2022–2024 costs.18 At the state level, these costs must continue their original five-year amortization schedule without acceleration.16

Guidance for Unitary Business Groups (UBGs)

Unitary Business Groups face more complex reporting requirements. Treasury guidance stipulates that each individual member of a UBG must compute its own Section 174 and Section 163(j) adjustments separately before they are aggregated on the group return.16 This is critical because if a member leaves the UBG, the unamortized basis of its R&D expenditures must follow that specific entity to its new filing group or separate return.25

The Michigan R&D Tax Credit: A Strategic Mitigation Tool

To balance the increased tax liability caused by mandatory amortization, the Michigan Legislature reintroduced a state-level R&D tax credit via Public Acts 186 and 187 of 2024.5 This credit is designed to reward businesses that conduct research physically within the state of Michigan.5

Eligibility and Definitions

The credit is available to authorized businesses, including C-corporations and certain flow-through entities (S-corps, LLCs, partnerships) that are employers subject to Michigan withholding tax.26 Eligibility is tied to “qualifying research and development expenses,” which Michigan defines strictly by referencing IRC Section 41(b)—the same definition used for the federal R&D tax credit.28

The “Base Amount” Calculation

A crucial aspect of the credit is the rolling three-year base amount. This is defined as the average annual qualifying research expenses incurred during the three calendar years immediately preceding the year for which the credit is claimed.29 If a company has fewer than three years of research history, the average is based on the years available; if they have no prior R&D history, the base amount is zero.27

Treasury Guidance on the “Tentative Claim” Process

Unlike the federal R&D credit, the Michigan version is subject to a $100 million annual statewide cap ($25 million reserved for small businesses and $75 million for large businesses).28 To manage this cap, the Treasury has established a mandatory “Tentative Claim” process:

• Deadlines: For 2025 calendar year expenses, the tentative claim must be filed by April 1, 2026. In subsequent years, the deadline moves to March 15.26
• Actual Data Required: Estimates are not permitted for the tentative claim; it must be based on actual expenses incurred during the calendar year.35
• Proration: If total statewide claims exceed the $100 million cap, the Treasury will prorate the awarded credits and notify taxpayers via its website by April 30.31

Case Study: The Practical Application of Decoupling

The financial impact of decoupling is best illustrated through a practical example of a Michigan-based manufacturing firm.

Scenario: Precision Engineered Components (PEC)

PEC is a small business with 150 employees. In 2025, it invests $1,000,000 in qualifying domestic research conducted entirely in Michigan. PEC’s average R&D spend for the 2022–2024 base period was $600,000.

Federal Tax Impact

Under the OBBBA, PEC takes an immediate deduction of $1,000,000 on its federal return.7 This provides PEC with an immediate tax benefit of $210,000 (at the 21% federal corporate rate) and significantly improves cash flow for reinvestment.

Michigan Tax Impact (Decoupled)

Because Michigan decouples from Section 174A, PEC must perform a state-level adjustment. PEC adds back the $1,000,000 federal deduction and instead calculates its Michigan-allowable amortization for 2025:

$$\text{Michigan Amortization} = \frac{\$1,000,000}{5} \times 0.5 \text{ (Mid-year convention)} = \$100,000$$

The resulting net add-back of $900,000 ($1,000,000 – $100,000) increases PEC’s Michigan taxable income. At Michigan’s 6% CIT rate, this decoupling creates a state tax burden of $54,000 that would not have existed if the state had conformed to federal law.5

Michigan R&D Credit Integration

To offset this burden, PEC files a tentative claim for the Michigan R&D credit. As a small business, PEC’s credit is calculated as follows:

1. 3% on Base Amount: $\$600,000 \times 0.03 = \$18,000$
2. 15% on Excess: $(\$1,000,000 – \$600,000) \times 0.15 = \$60,000$
3. Total Tentative Credit: $\$78,000$

Assuming the statewide cap is not reached and no proration occurs, PEC receives a $78,000 refundable credit.11 This not only covers the $54,000 tax increase caused by decoupling but provides an additional $24,000 in net benefit, effectively turning a potential tax hike into a net innovation incentive.

Secondary Impacts: Software Development and Foreign Research

The decoupling also carries specific nuances for software development and international research. Under the TCJA and the subsequent OBBBA, software development is explicitly treated as a research expenditure subject to Section 174 capitalization or Section 174A expensing.8

Software Development Nuances

In Michigan, because the state conforms to the 2024 version of Section 174, software development must be capitalized and amortized over five years.1 This creates a particular challenge for the state’s emerging technology sector, where software is often the primary R&D asset. Unlike physical manufacturing property which may qualify for other state-level credits, software R&D is almost entirely reliant on the new R&D credit to offset the mandatory capitalization.5

Foreign Research Expenses

It is important to note that both federal and Michigan laws are aligned regarding foreign research. Both regimes require a fifteen-year amortization period for research conducted outside the United States.1 Furthermore, the new Michigan R&D tax credit cannot be claimed for foreign research; it is strictly reserved for activities physically conducted within Michigan borders.28

Economic Analysis: The Business Community’s Perspective

The decoupling move has been met with significant resistance from professional organizations and the business community. The Michigan Chamber of Commerce characterized the move as a “permanent tax increase” that undermines the state’s competitiveness.37

Advocacy and Competitiveness Concerns

The Chamber argued that by breaking the link with the federal code, Michigan job providers would face a $2 billion tax hike over five years.38 Critics have pointed out that while Michigan businesses will now have to pay higher state taxes, competitors in neighboring states that maintain conformity will benefit from the immediate cash flow advantages of federal expensing.37 Furthermore, the decoupling adds a “administrative headache,” as businesses must now track two separate sets of depreciation and amortization schedules for their federal and state returns.1

The State’s Strategic Rationale

In contrast, state proponents of the decoupling legislation view it as an essential step for infrastructure solvency. The revenue preserved by decoupling—estimated at $677 million in the first year—is a key component of a broader roads funding deal.4 This plan redirects the saved tax revenue into the Neighborhood Road Fund and the Michigan Transportation Fund, aiming to generate $1.85 billion annually for infrastructure.4

Compliance and Future Outlook

As Michigan enters the 2025 tax year, the importance of proactive tax planning has never been higher. The decoupling from Section 174A is not a temporary timing difference; unless the legislature passes future conforming legislation, it remains a permanent divergence in the state tax code.20

Key Compliance Action Items

• Track Michigan-Based Expenses: Companies must isolate QREs conducted in Michigan to calculate the state credit while maintaining separate records for all domestic R&E subject to state-level amortization.6
• Evaluate Estimated Payments: Businesses should adjust their quarterly estimated tax payments for 2025 to account for the loss of immediate state deductions for R&D and bonus depreciation.2
• Monitor University Collaboration: Given the additional 5% bonus credit, firms should explore partnerships with Michigan research universities to maximize their total credit yield.11
• Adhere to the Tentative Claim Timeline: Missing the April 1, 2026, deadline for 2025 calendar year activities will result in the loss of the credit entirely for that year.32

Conclusion: A New Era for Michigan Innovation

The decoupling of Michigan’s tax code from federal IRC Section 174A marks the beginning of a complex chapter for the state’s innovation economy. While the mandatory capitalization of research costs under Public Act 24 of 2025 presents a significant financial hurdle, the reintroduction of the refundable Michigan R&D tax credit offers a powerful countervailing incentive.5

This dual-layered policy framework requires businesses to move beyond simple federal tax alignment. Innovative firms must now adopt sophisticated accounting methods to navigate the “add-back” requirements on their Michigan returns while simultaneously positioning themselves to claim state-level credits.1 For the state, the success of this strategy will be measured by its ability to fund critical infrastructure through preserved revenue without stifling the very innovation that drives its long-term prosperity. As the Michigan Department of Treasury finalizes its Revenue Administrative Bulletins and filing forms, the burden of compliance shifts to the taxpayer, for whom the “meaning of decoupling” is now a direct and vital component of their annual bottom line.

R&D Tax Credit Preparation Services

Swanson Reed is one of the only companies in the United States to exclusively focus on R&D tax credit preparation. Swanson Reed provides state and federal R&D tax credit preparation and audit services to all 50 states.

If you have any questions or need further assistance, please call or email our CEO, Damian Smyth on (800) 986-4725.
Feel free to book a quick teleconference with one of our national R&D tax credit specialists at a time that is convenient for you.

R&D Tax Credit Audit Advisory Services

creditARMOR is a sophisticated R&D tax credit insurance and AI-driven risk management platform. It mitigates audit exposure by covering defense expenses, including CPA, tax attorney, and specialist consultant fees—delivering robust, compliant support for R&D credit claims. Click here for more information about R&D tax credit management and implementation.

Our Fees

Swanson Reed offers R&D tax credit preparation and audit services at our hourly rates of between $195 – $395 per hour. We are also able offer fixed fees and success fees in special circumstances. Learn more at https://www.swansonreed.com/about-us/research-tax-credit-consulting/our-fees/