A smart workaround for tech founders with offshore teams
The Problem: Not All R&D Is Created Equal
Under the One Big Beautiful Bill, U.S. companies can now fully expense qualified domestic R&D under new IRC §174A — but there’s a catch: Only R&D performed inside the U.S. qualifies for this immediate deduction.
That means if you're using offshore developers — say in Ukraine, India, or Latin America — those wages don’t qualify for §174 expensing, even if the work is mission-critical.
The Strategy: License Back the IP, Deduct the Fees
Here’s how smart founders are getting around it:
Step 1: Set up an offshore subsidiary
The entity employs your foreign dev team
It owns the code or IP initially created abroad
It charges your U.S. company a licensing fee or cost-plus development fee
Step 2: Your U.S. C-Corp licenses the software
The U.S. entity uses or resells the foreign-developed product
License payments or royalties are deductible business expenses
Even though you can’t expense the offshore dev wages under §174, you still get a write-off
Step 3: Optimize the structure
Use arm’s-length transfer pricing
Ensure proper IP assignment and use agreements
Consider leveraging a cost-sharing agreement if future IP will be co-developed
💡 Example
Let’s say your startup:
Has a Delaware C-Corp as the main company
Employs 5 developers in Romania through a wholly owned subsidiary
Generates revenue in the U.S. from a SaaS platform built by that team
Under the OBBB:
You can’t expense Romanian dev wages under §174A
But if the Romanian entity licenses the software back to the U.S. C-Corp…
The U.S. company can deduct $300,000+ per year in license or royalty fees
You’ve effectively turned a non-deductible R&D cost into a deductible operating expense.
Key Legal + Tax Considerations
You must document your intercompany pricing and IP rights clearly
Be ready to produce transfer pricing documentation if audited
Local tax compliance (e.g. Romania, India) is still required
Consider treaty implications and potential withholding taxes on cross-border payments
If structured correctly, this setup is fully legal, tax-efficient, and increasingly common in global software development.
Who Should Consider This?
This strategy is ideal if you’re:
A startup or SaaS company with overseas dev teams
A U.S. C-Corp planning to license or commercialize products built abroad
Already using Upwork, Toptal, or offshore contractors and want to move to a structured entity
Working with VCs who expect clean IP rights and compliant tax positioning
Combine With Domestic R&D Expensing
Your U.S.-based engineers still qualify for §174 expensing — and may trigger R&D credits under §41.
The goal: Fully expense U.S. R&D, deduct foreign dev through royalties or licensing — and document everything to stay compliant.
Want Help Structuring It?
We help founders:
Build compliant offshore subs
Draft intercompany license agreements
Layer this with §174 expensing and QSBS eligibility
Optimize global tax positioning
This isn’t just a tax loophole — it’s a global growth strategy under the new tax law.