Tax software no patent

For example, if an additional element reflects an improvement in the functioning of a computer, then the judicial exception might be integrated.

However, the invalidity defense based on subject matter eligibility has remained prevalent for software and electronic companies because most computer-implemented methods achieve some purpose other than improving the functioning of a computer. As vehicles were traditionally full of mechanical widgets and internal combustion engines, this subject matter eligibility-based defense was not relevant, notwithstanding a rare case where a mechanical patent was invalidated because the drive shaft as claimed was deemed to be an abstract idea.

But now that automakers are producing vehicles that are increasingly or mostly computerized and electric, and are faced with software patent infringement suits, they may be tempted to adopt patent eligibility-based defenses similar to the ones used by software companies.

Software patents in the vehicular space, as compared to the more abstract software space, can be strategically drafted to better withstand patent eligibility attacks. For example, if a claim is drafted to recite a clear practical application that makes the vehicle perform better, such as a software method that assists the vehicle in reducing energy consumption from point A to B, then invalidating such a patent on the grounds of patent eligibility may be more challenging.

Although in the short-term, automakers may be successful in invalidating software patents that are less strategically draft, they should take note that in the longer term, this subject matter eligibility-based invalidity defense may be less viable since vehicular software-based patents may be more likely to integrate any abstract ideas or judicial exceptions into a practice application.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances. All Rights Reserved. Password Passwords are Case Sensitive.

Forgot your password? Free, unlimited access to more than half a million articles one-article limit removed from the diverse perspectives of 5, leading law, accountancy and advisory firms.

We need this to enable us to match you with other users from the same organisation. It is also part of the information that we share to our content providers "Contributors" who contribute Content for free for your use. Learn More Accept. Intellectual Property. Srinivasa and Peighton M. Your LinkedIn Connections with the authors.

Patti Jr. Burnside and Claire R. Bergeson and Carla N. Aronie and David L. Read This Freedman U. Millar and Tracy P. Valdetero and Jessica D. Ludd and Karen J. Morgan Healthcare Conference Greene and Michael R. Rivers and Paul M. Carra and K. Koelzer and Julia A. Church and Elaine C. Schilling and Stephanie A. Nielsen and Philip J. Morgan Healthcare Conference, Boubker and Kyle Y.

Carra and Mark N. Also, the medical-expenses field is mapped to the medical-expenses category Finally, the miscellaneous-deductions field is mapped to: the job-expenses category , the tax-preparation-expenses category , and the investment-expenses category Furthermore, intermediate value - 2 is allocated to the education-expenses category Thus, at the end of the method these categories include allowed values. We now describe embodiments of graphical user interfaces for use in the income-tax preparation program.

In FIG. In some embodiments, the window also includes real-time or dynamic content that shows the user what he is and is not qualified to deduct based on the entered values that have been provided so far. Furthermore, the window includes another window This window is a persistent feature in the user interfaces that is dynamically updated based on additional information, if any, that is provided by the user.

After collecting entered values from the user, the income-tax preparation program may display a results window, such as the results window in FIG. This results window displays a set of entered values and a corresponding set of allowed values i. Note that user is able to compare these values without printing out the income-tax return. If the user activates this link, an explanation of the difference is provided, for example, in another window. In some embodiments, the explanation is generic.

This is illustrated in window , which explains that there is a floor of 7. However, in some embodiments the explanation is specific to the user's tax situation and includes a calculation of the allowed value based on one or more entered values. This is illustrated in window for the case of a medical expense deduction. Furthermore, in some embodiments the contribution from average deductions to the average tax savings may be displayed separately from the contribution from average credits to the average tax savings.

We now discuss data structures that may be used in the computer system FIG. This data structure may include entered values for one or more users. This data structure may include values for one or more users. The foregoing descriptions of embodiments of the present invention have been presented for purposes of illustration and description only.

They are not intended to be exhaustive or to limit the present invention to the forms disclosed. Accordingly, many modifications and variations will be apparent to practitioners skilled in the art. Additionally, the above disclosure is not intended to limit the present invention.

The scope of the present invention is defined by the appended claims. What is claimed is: 1. A method for explaining a financial calculation, wherein the method is implemented in a computer system which comprises a processor and a memory, the method comprising: receiving a first value from a user of an income-tax preparation program, wherein the first value corresponds to a tax deduction or a tax credit;. The method of claim 1 , wherein the first value corresponds to at least one of: mortgage interest, medical expense, job expenses, tax-preparation expenses, investment expenses, and education expenses.

The method of claim 1 , wherein the explanation includes a tax deduction floor corresponding to the first value. The method of claim 3 , wherein the explanation is further based on additional information entered by the user.

The method of claim 4 , wherein the explanation includes a computation of the allowed tax deduction based on the tax deduction floor and the user's adjusted gross income. The method of claim 1 , wherein the explanation includes a calculation that specifies how the second value is determined from the first value. The method of claim 6 , wherein the calculation includes a first mapping from the first value to an entry in a tax form and a second mapping from the entry in the tax form to the second value.

The method of claim 1 , wherein displaying the first value and the second value comprises displaying a first set of financial values entered by the user and a second set of financial values which are to be applied in the income-tax return, and wherein the first set of financial values includes the first value and the second set of financial values includes the second value.

The method of claim 1 , further comprises displaying average tax savings for the user. The method of claim 9 , wherein the average tax savings includes average deductions and average credits. The method of claim 10 , wherein contribution from average deductions to the average tax savings is to be displayed separately from contribution from average credits to the average tax savings.

The method of claim 1 , further comprises displaying recommendations on how to increase a user refund in a current tax year. The method of claim 1 , further comprises displaying recommendations on how to increase a user refund in a subsequent tax year. The method of claim 1 , further comprising displaying a user refund in a different window. The method of claim 14 , wherein the different window is configured to display a total user deduction.

A computer program product for use in conjunction with a computer system, the computer program product comprising a computer-readable storage medium and a computer-program mechanism embedded therein for configuring the computer system, the computer-program mechanism including: instructions for receiving a first value from a user of an income-tax preparation program, wherein the first value corresponds to a tax deduction or a tax credit;.

A computer system, comprising: a processor;. USB1 en. Method and system for identifying business expenditures with vendors and automatically generating and submitting required forms. Systems and methods for determining impact chains from a tax calculation graph of a tax preparation system. System and method for customizing a user experience based on automatically weighted criteria. The headlines for the tax reform focused on the reduction in the corporate tax rate and the new passthrough tax deduction.

For example, certain self-generated intangible assets are now treated as ordinary assets taxed at higher ordinary tax rates.

Entrepreneurs in industries such as software, pharmaceuticals and Fintech will want to pay special attention. Before the change took effect on January 1, , nearly all intangible business assets qualified as capital assets. Only a relatively small category of intangible assets were treated as ordinary. Software was among the most important: even under the old rules, software was sometimes treated as ordinary.

Gain from the sale of a copyright by the creator of the copyright was treated as ordinary income, just like selling inventory or services. Besides copyrights, items such as literary, musical and artistic compositions were also ordinary. The IRS applied the rule not only to copyrights themselves, but also to property eligible for copyright protection, even if there was no copyright. Therefore, software coders seeking capital gain treatment were sometimes out of luck, even when they never applied for a copyright.

The programmer disclaimed copyright protection and deliberately did not register a copyright because he desired to keep the source code a secret. Nevertheless, the Tax Court held that, because the program was eligible for copyright protection, the source code fell under the rule governing copyrights. Since it was also sold by the creator of the source code, the gain on the sale of the program was taxed as ordinary income. App Example: George creates a new App that does not include any open source code.