NY Bill Would Provide Tax Credit For Open Source Contributors

An anonymous reader writes: For many years, the open source software community has made the distinction between "free as in freedom" (the software can be used or modified as the user sees fit) and "free as in beer" (the software is available at no cost). Some have added a third type of free: "free as in puppy". Like a puppy, adopting open source software has ongoing cost. What many people don't consider is that developing open source software has a cost, too. Many developers purchase extra hardware for testing or pay for code hosting, a website, etc. A pending bill in the New York Senate aims to help offset those costs. The bill, sponsored by Senator Daniel Squadron (D-26th) and co-sponsored by Senator Ruth Hassell-Thompson (D-36th), would provide a tax credit of 20% of "expenses associated with the development of open source and free software", up to an annual maximum of $200. Based on a 2006 report by the Center for American Progress, this bill appears to be the first of its kind introduced to a state legislature. I'd rather they require that any software developed at taxpayer expense be released as open source.

Comments

Software at taxpayer expense?

[damn_registrars]

I'd rather they require that any software developed at taxpayer expense be released as open source.

That's not as clear of a metric as one might expect. We have lots of research efforts now that are jointly funded by government and private funds; would they need to be released as open source? And how do you dictate the release schedule for the code? Does it need to be updated regularly or can it just be released when there is something relating to it published somewhere? And who will host it, for how long? Will the authors be held responsible for making sure that their code compiles on other peoples' hardware?

It's a good idea but the execution of it is not trivial. I can think of plenty of software in my field of work that has been at least partially funded by the government that I would love to see released but some of the above matters make it impossible or impractical to get a good release of it out publicly.

Re:Software at taxpayer expense?

[xtronics]

"That's not as clear of a metric as one might expect. "
Clear enough

"We have lots of research efforts now that are jointly funded by government and private funds; would they need to be released as open source?"

Yes! -- next question?

" And how do you dictate the release schedule for the code? "

Post the commits

Fake problems to muddy the water. It the tax payer pays for even part of it - or supplies the infrastructure - it belongs to the public - not Washington elite coneys. Enough of this 'cartel-socialism' where only the buddies of the insiders get the goodies.

Re:Software at taxpayer expense?

[El Cubano]

On top of what you say, there are lots of places in the government that focus on tech transfer. The very essence of it is that the government and one or more private entities jointly share in the development cost and risk. The government then usually gets some perpetual royalty-free right to the product of the endeavor, while the commercial interest gets the right to further develop the technology and market/sell to the commercial public. There is almost always a requirement that those two don't interfere with each other. The biggest concern is usually on the part of the commercial interests which worry that the government will give away the technology at some later time, thereby destroying their market. So, there is usually a prohibition on just that sort of thing when a tech transfer takes place.

To make the "all software developed at tax payer expense open source" thing come true, the government would have to completely re-think the idea of how tech transfer works. Don't get me wrong. I am in favor making as much government-funded software as possible open source. I'm just saying it is more complex than that.

$200? What a joke

[selectspec]

Meanwhile companies that contribute to open source can write down the entire expense of development including salaries, benefits, software, facility, and equipment.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

And you wonder why taxes are hell

[xxxJonBoyxxx]

$200? Why bother with the paperwork? Only, now there will be more paperwork, as the state spends hundreds of thousands of dollars to implement the program and add the little checkbox to a form somewhere.

My real take is even more cynical: this will be sold to the public as "$200 for independent open source software developers" but the final version will have a mysterious change in it that allows corporations with thousands of machines running some little piece of open source code to take a couple of million-dollar tax credits for "contributing to open source". In fact, the presser the politicians put out is little more than a sales brochure: "I'm offering up a tax credit for open source contributors (wink wink) - please contact my office (write a big check) if you want to know more (get in on the tax break for your company)."

Re:And you wonder why taxes are hell

[DidgetMaster]

Wait until you get the 20 pages of tax forms (and the 100 pages of instructions) required to claim this tax deduction. You might have to keep track of every line of code you wrote and document how long it took you to code it. If you make more than $50,000 in income, be prepared to have this deduction reduced or completely eliminated by the AMT or some other tax tacked on. Also save everything for 7 years in case of an audit (claiming this deduction will also increase your chances of being audited).

Smart programmers don't re-invent the wheel, eithe

[raymorris]

> It's a good idea but the execution of it is not trivial.

100% agreed. The biggest thing that jumps out at me, in terms of making that a -requirement-, is that 95% of software projects involve adding to existing systems, not writing an entire system from scratch. Even for a brand-new agency, you're going to use Active Directory or something similar, not author your own AD from scratch.

At my last job, I spent three years writing software for a government agency in an environment which included a big GPLv3 system I was responsible for, which stored all of its data in Microsoft SQL server and ran on Windows, using the Microsoft database driver. It interfaced with legacy Scantron systems, using Scantron's API code under their license. Being non-stupid, I used a lot of libraries and copy-pasted functions that were under GPLv2, CC, and BSD licenses. There is no license that all the software I wrote could be released under. I did release a lot of it under GPLv3, but a -requirement- that it all be released under any specific type of license would mean we simply couldn't do the project at all, the code would never have been written and we'd still be stuck with paper and pencil Scantrons for everything.