Standards-anchored reference to primary IFRS and FASB text. Not accounting advice.
AI Capitalisation
IFRS and US GAAP, one framework

The capitalise-versus-expense decision for AI spend.

Head note

AI capitalisation is recording internal AI investment and spend as an intangible asset on the balance sheet rather than expensing it through the P&L. Under IFRS, IAS 38§57 permits it only once development-phase criteria are met; under US GAAP, ASC 350-40350-40-25 permits it only for qualifying application-development costs, now gated by ASU 2025-06. Most experimentation and pre-training is expensed.

Balance sheet
CAPITALISE

Recognise the spend as an intangible asset and amortise it over its useful life.

phase boundary
Income statement
EXPENSE

Charge the spend to the P&L in the period it is incurred.

CostRouter
Select an AI cost line

Pick a cost line to route it to capitalise, expense or prepaid under IFRS.

The five governing standards

Source-of-record index →

Enter from a cost line

Priya's route. Find your GPU, data, labelling or hosting spend and see the default treatment and governing standard.

AI cost taxonomy

Enter from a standard

The auditor's route. Read IAS 38 and ASC 350-40 laid out clause by clause, with the cost lines each one governs.

Standards index

Enter from a treatment

The FP&A route. See what capitalise, expense and prepaid do to the numbers, and which standards mandate each.

Treatments

Questions a controller types

Can AI spend go on the balance sheet instead of the P&L?

Some of it, under conditions. Under IFRS, IAS 38 permits capitalisation only for development-phase costs incurred once all six recognition criteria are met. Under US GAAP, ASC 350-40 permits it for qualifying internal-use software costs once completion is probable, now framed by ASU 2025-06. Research, exploration and pre-training are expensed.

Is fine-tuning an LLM capitalisable?

It can be. Fine-tuning a base model for a defined internal use can reach development phase under IAS 38 or the application-development threshold under ASC 350-40, so costs from that point may be capitalised if the recognition tests are met and no significant development uncertainty remains.

What did ASU 2025-06 change?

ASU 2025-06 replaces the project-stage model in ASC 350-40 with a probable-to-complete recognition threshold and adds a significant-development-uncertainty condition that defers capitalisation of novel or unproven software. It is effective for annual periods beginning after 15 December 2027, with early adoption permitted.

All frequently asked questions →