Bonus Depreciation Under OBBBA: What AE Tax Advisors Want Real Estate Investors to Understand

One of the most consequential tax law changes affecting real estate investors over the past several years was the passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), which made 100% bonus depreciation permanent. Before OBBBA, bonus depreciation was phasing down on a

defined schedule: 80% in 2023, 60% in 2024, 40% in 2025, 20% in 2026, and zero in 2027. The phase-down was disrupting real estate tax planning across the country. OBBBA reset the structure entirely.

AE Tax Advisors, the Billings, Montana, tax advisory firm specializing in real estate tax strategy, has integrated the OBBBA bonus depreciation rules into its planning framework, and the implications for real estate investors are significant enough that the strategy warrants a structured walkthrough.

The mechanics of bonus depreciation under current law are worth understanding clearly.

Bonus depreciation allows immediate Year 1 deduction of qualifying property, generally property with a recovery period of 20 years or less under the Modified Accelerated Cost Recovery System (MACRS). This includes most personal property used in a business, qualifying improvement property, and the components of real estate identified through cost

segregation studies as falling into 5-year, 7-year, or 15-year MACRS classes.

The combination with cost segregation is where the strategy becomes powerful for real estate investors. A standard real estate purchase results in depreciation over 27.5 years (residential) or 39 years (commercial), far too slow to yield meaningful current-year tax benefits. But a cost segregation study identifies the building components that actually qualify for shorter recovery periods, and bonus depreciation then accelerates those components into Year 1 deductions.

The math under OBBBA is meaningful. Consider a $2 million residential rental property with $1.6 million of depreciable basis. A 27.5-year depreciation schedule produces roughly $58,000 in annual depreciation. With cost segregation identifying 30% of the basis ($480,000) as 5-, 7-, or 15-year property, and 100% bonus depreciation applied to those components, the Year 1 depreciation jumps to approximately $480,000 plus the standard depreciation on the remaining 70%, roughly $521,000 total in Year 1.

The strategic implications are substantial. For real estate investors with sufficient material participation to qualify for active loss treatment, including short-term rental investors and real estate professionals, the Year 1 depreciation can offset other active income, including W-2 wages, business income, and active investment income. The strategy produces tax savings in the year of acquisition that can fundamentally change the investment economics.

AE Tax Advisors’ role is to execute the strategy correctly across multiple dimensions.

The first is identifying qualifying property at the time of acquisition. Not all real estate qualifies for the full benefit. New construction qualifies. Properties acquired from unrelated parties qualify. Properties acquired in like-kind exchanges are subject to specific rules. AE Tax Advisors evaluates each acquisition against the qualifying criteria.

The second is executing the cost segregation study. The firm coordinates with engineering professionals to produce IRS-defensible studies that accurately identify the accelerated components. The quality of the study matters because aggressive or improperly documented cost segregation can be disallowed during an audit.

The third is the active loss treatment structure. Bonus depreciation produces deductions, but whether those deductions can offset active income depends on the investor’s overall tax structure. AE Tax Advisors works through the material participation analysis, the §469

grouping elections, and the documentation requirements that determine whether the deductions actually flow through to active income offset.

The fourth is the multi-property coordination. Investors with multiple properties need to coordinate the bonus depreciation strategy across the portfolio, and the firm’s annual $7,800 advisory engagement includes ongoing coordination for acquisitions, dispositions, and operational changes.

The fifth is the Form 3115 catch-up opportunity for property already in service. Properties acquired before cost segregation was performed can often be brought into compliance retroactively, capturing the missed depreciation as a current-year deduction without amending prior returns.

For real estate investors evaluating their tax strategy in light of OBBBA’s permanent 100% bonus depreciation, the AE Tax Advisors framework is among the more substantive technical resources currently available. The strategy is permanent. The execution is technical. And the team, IRS Enrolled Agents and licensed CPAs serving clients in all 50 states, has developed the expertise needed to cleanly capture the available benefit.

Disclaimer: The content in this article is provided for general knowledge. It does not constitute legal advice, and readers should seek advice from qualified legal professionals regarding particular cases or situations.

She Left the Classroom, Not the Conversation: Former Educator Stacie McClam Returns to School Through Film

As students head back to classrooms across the Bay Area, the filmmaker behind MR. ADVOCATE is drawing on her years as an educator to ask whether schools are preparing children for a future already being reshaped by artificial intelligence.

Every August, the back-to-school season signals a return to familiar routines: new teachers, new schedules, new expectations and another year of conversations about curriculum, achievement and what students need to succeed.

For former educator and filmmaker Stacie McClam, however, this school year raises a question that would have sounded very different when she first entered the classroom.

What does it mean to prepare a child for the future when artificial intelligence is already becoming part of that child’s present?

McClam is exploring that question through MR. ADVOCATE, her new 51-minute drama set inside an urban elementary school where standardized-test preparation collides with one teacher’s effort to introduce his third-grade students to artificial intelligence.

But the story behind the film begins years before McClam ever called it “action.”

A Teacher Who Found Another Classroom

Before becoming a filmmaker, McClam was an educator.

She taught in schools in the United States and abroad, gaining a firsthand view of the demands placed on teachers, the pressures facing school leaders and the ways institutional priorities can shape what happens between a teacher and a child.

Her connection to education goes even further back. McClam has spoken about being bused to schools outside her neighborhood as a child, while her grandmother’s experience teaching in segregated Virginia gave her another generational lens on educational systems and opportunity. Her later experience as a law school graduate added yet another perspective on systems, advocacy and accountability. Those experiences have become part of the foundation of her work as a filmmaker.

In some ways, filmmaking has become another classroom for McClam.

Instead of standing in front of students, she now places difficult questions in front of audiences.

“I merge advocacy and film to challenge systems that undervalue our children and staff,” McClam has said.

That distinction is important because MR. ADVOCATE is not intended to position McClam as the person with all the answers about artificial intelligence.

She is asking people to have the conversation.

AI Has Already Entered the Schoolhouse

That conversation has become increasingly urgent.

College Board research released in 2025 found that the percentage of surveyed high school students reporting the use of generative AI for schoolwork rose from 79% in January to 84% by May 2025. Students reported using AI for tasks including brainstorming, revising essays and conducting research.

The numbers suggest that the central question for schools may no longer be whether students will encounter AI.

They already have.

The more difficult questions involve how schools will teach students to evaluate what AI produces, use it responsibly, preserve independent thinking and understand when human judgment matters more than technological convenience.

That is where McClam’s experience as an educator gives MR. ADVOCATE an interesting perspective.

She is not observing the education system solely from the outside. She has worked inside it.

And rather than making AI the hero or villain of her film, she uses it as the catalyst for a larger examination of what schools value.

When One Teacher Challenges the Routine

Photo Courtesy: Stacie McClam

MR. ADVOCATE follows Nathan Edwards, a new teacher working at an elementary school heavily focused on standardized-test preparation.

Edwards decides his students should have an opportunity to understand a technology increasingly shaping the world beyond their classroom. He develops an interactive AI Show that gives the children hands-on exposure to artificial intelligence.

The idea quickly creates tension.

What begins as an effort to introduce students to something new becomes a larger struggle involving teachers, administrators, parents and the institution itself.

The conflict allows McClam to move beyond the familiar debate over whether AI is “good” or “bad.”

Instead, the film asks something more fundamental:

What is school supposed to prepare children to do?

Is academic success enough if students are not developing curiosity, adaptability, critical thinking and the ability to navigate technologies that will likely affect their lives and careers?

And if access to those learning opportunities differs from one classroom or community to another, what happens to educational equity?

Ivan and a Cast Representing More Than Characters

Photo Courtesy: Ivan (actor, singer & dancer)

Those questions also make the timing of the project particularly meaningful for the actors bringing McClam’s story to life.

Among them is Ivan, a 13-year-old actor, singer and dancer whose own creative journey began at an unusually young age. His film biography notes that he recorded his first song at age 4 and, by age 9, had become the youngest artist signed to Concord Records and the youngest performer to join Kidz Bop.

Ivan and the other members of the cast have expressed excitement about participating in a project arriving at such a timely moment.

For Ivan in particular, the subject is not theoretical.

His generation is growing up alongside artificial intelligence.

Children his age will not have the experience many adults have had of remembering life before algorithms, smart devices and generative AI became embedded in everyday culture. They will instead be asked to determine how to live, learn, create and eventually work alongside increasingly sophisticated technology.

That gives the younger performers in MR. ADVOCATE a role that extends beyond acting.

They represent the students adults are debating about.

McClam’s broader multigenerational ensemble includes Rodney Damon Collins, Conrad Cheeks, BZ Cullins, Andre K. Jefferson, Jere’Miah McGhee, Rapheal Gavin, Arturo Spell and Tehan Davis. Together, they portray a school community in which teachers, administrators, students and families experience change from very different perspectives.

The film also goes beyond technology to examine grief, depression, burnout and the emotional lives of Black male educators, adding another layer to its exploration of what happens inside schools that is rarely captured by test scores alone.

The System Becomes Part of the Story

That may ultimately be what separates McClam’s work from a conventional film about artificial intelligence.

Technology is important.

But so is the system surrounding it.

In MR. ADVOCATE, the central challenge is not simply teaching children how to interact with AI. It is whether an institution built around established measurements of success can create room for new ideas before those ideas become necessities.

That question reflects a tension educators know well.

Teachers are frequently asked to prepare students for an unpredictable future while operating inside systems governed by very specific expectations in the present.

McClam has lived inside that tension.

Now she is dramatizing it.

MR. ADVOCATE is also the first installment of her planned THE SYSTEM Trilogy, which is expected to examine the opportunities and challenges surrounding AI across elementary, middle and high school environments.

Back to School, and Back to the Question

The film’s Bay Area theatrical premiere is scheduled for Aug. 15 at Cinemark Century Hilltop 16 in Richmond, California, with additional university, community and historically Black college and university screenings being developed.

The timing is difficult to miss.

Across the country, students are returning to school at precisely the moment educators, parents and policymakers are attempting to determine what role artificial intelligence should have in education.

McClam is not asking audiences to leave MR. ADVOCATE agreeing with her.

She is asking them to leave talking.

For a woman who began her professional journey in education, perhaps that is not so far removed from teaching after all.

The classroom has changed.

The conversation continues.

About Stacie McClam

Stacie McClam is a former educator, law school graduate, filmmaker and founder of School Dismissed, a production company using storytelling to examine the systems shaping students and educators. Drawing on her experiences teaching in the United States and abroad, McClam creates films exploring educational equity, artificial intelligence, mental health and institutional change. MR. ADVOCATE is the first installment of her planned THE SYSTEM Trilogy. Learn more at www.MRAdvocateFilm.com.

San Francisco Biotech Epicrispr Raises $90M for FSHD Program

Biotech Epicrispr has closed a $90 million Series C as its experimental EPI-321 therapy advances through a Phase 1/2 FSHD study. The South San Francisco company says the funding will support later-stage development, manufacturing and its epigenetic medicine platform. Here is what the financing and early clinical data show so far.

Key Takeaways

  • Epicrispr Biotechnologies announced the $90 million Series C on August 11, 2026.
  • EPI-321 is being studied in adults with facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy, or FSHD.
  • Epicrispr announced on July 7 that enrollment and dose escalation in its Phase 1/2 trial were complete.
  • Interim data from three evaluable participants showed increased lean muscle volume at six months, though the findings remain preliminary.
  • Additional clinical data are expected later in 2026, according to the company.

Epicrispr Biotechnologies said the $90 million financing will support the development of EPI-321, additional programs built around its Gene Expression Modulation System, or GEMS, and expanded manufacturing capabilities.

The August 11 round was co-led by Octagon Capital and Janus Henderson Investors. Fidelity Management & Research Company, Cormorant Asset Management, Duquesne Family Office, Sanofi Ventures, funds managed by abrdn Inc., Angelini Ventures, Readout Capital and existing backers also participated.

“This financing positions us to advance EPI-321 into pivotal studies, expand our pipeline,” CEO Amber Salzman said in the company announcement. Any move into a pivotal study would depend on the program’s continuing clinical development.

The financing follows a $68 million Series B announced in March 2025, which supported EPI-321’s transition into human testing. For a company operating within the broader South San Francisco biotech landscape, the new round arrives as EPI-321 moves further into its first clinical study.

Early EPI-321 Data Show a Signal, Not a Verdict

EPI-321 is being evaluated in a Phase 1/2, open-label, dose-escalation trial identified as NCT06907875. ClinicalTrials.gov describes the study as assessing safety, tolerability, biological activity and possible early signs of efficacy in adults with FSHD Type 1.

Participants receive a single intravenous dose of the experimental therapy. The study is also measuring changes in DUX4 expression, methylation of the D4Z4 region, muscle imaging and other indicators of disease activity.

Epicrispr announced July 7 that enrollment and dose escalation had been completed. The ClinicalTrials.gov record, which was last updated April 22, still lists the study as recruiting, meaning the registry had not yet reflected the company’s more recent enrollment announcement when last updated.

The financing comes after Epicrispr released interim findings on June 26 from the first three evaluable participants in the initial cohort. According to the company, all three had increased lean muscle volume at six months compared with baseline. The average increase was approximately 370 milliliters, or about 0.8 pounds of muscle mass.

Those findings are preliminary and come from a very small number of participants in an uncontrolled early-stage study. An increase in muscle volume does not by itself establish improved strength, mobility or long-term clinical benefit.

Biotech Epicrispr Targets DUX4 Without Cutting DNA

San Francisco Biotech Epicrispr Raises $90M for FSHD Program

Photo Credit: Unsplash.com

Biotech Epicrispr is developing EPI-321 to regulate the activity of DUX4, a gene associated with the biological processes that drive FSHD.

FSHD is a genetic muscle disorder that can affect muscles of the face, shoulders and upper arms and may progress to other muscle groups. Disease severity and progression can differ substantially among individuals.

In FSHD, reduced methylation around the D4Z4 region can permit abnormal DUX4 expression in skeletal muscle. EPI-321 is designed to re-methylate that region and suppress DUX4 activity without permanently cutting or changing the underlying DNA sequence.

The therapy uses an adeno-associated virus vector to deliver an epigenetic editor to muscle tissue. The editor includes a nuclease-dead CRISPR-associated protein designed to bind to a targeted genomic region rather than cut DNA. ClinicalTrials.gov describes measurements of DUX4 expression and D4Z4 methylation among the study’s secondary outcomes.

The approach places Epicrispr within a wider field examining how genetic and computational tools can be applied to disease research, alongside broader developments in healthcare technology in San Francisco.

South San Francisco Base Adds Local Biotech Context

Epicrispr lists its headquarters at 7000 Shoreline Court in South San Francisco, placing the company inside one of the Bay Area’s established life sciences clusters.

The financing announcement follows several clinical milestones for EPI-321. Interim data were reported June 26, enrollment and dose escalation were announced as complete July 7, and the $90 million financing followed on August 11.

The sequence shifts attention toward the additional clinical data Epicrispr says it expects later in 2026. Those results could provide more information about safety, biomarkers, muscle imaging and functional measurements across a larger group of participants.

EPI-321 remains experimental. Its safety and effectiveness have not been established, and the current study is designed in part to determine an appropriate dose and gather evidence needed to guide subsequent clinical research.

For Biotech Epicrispr, the $90 million round provides additional resources as that testing continues. The significance of the early muscle-volume findings will depend on longer follow-up, data from more participants and whether biological changes correspond with clinically meaningful outcomes.

Frequently Asked Questions

What Is Epicrispr Biotechnologies Developing?

Epicrispr Biotechnologies is developing EPI-321, an experimental epigenetic therapy for facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy. The therapy is designed to suppress abnormal DUX4 expression without permanently changing the underlying DNA sequence.

How Much Did Biotech Epicrispr Raise?

Biotech Epicrispr announced a $90 million Series C financing on August 11, 2026. The company says the proceeds will support EPI-321 development, other programs, manufacturing capabilities and its GEMS platform.

What Is the Status of the EPI-321 Trial?

Epicrispr announced on July 7, 2026, that enrollment and dose escalation in the Phase 1/2 first-in-human study had been completed. The company has said additional clinical data are expected later in 2026.

What Did the Early EPI-321 Results Show?

Epicrispr reported that the first three evaluable participants showed increases in lean muscle volume six months after treatment, averaging about 370 milliliters. The results remain preliminary because they involve a small number of participants in an ongoing open-label study.

Is EPI-321 an Approved Treatment for FSHD?

No. EPI-321 remains an experimental therapy being evaluated in clinical testing, and its safety and effectiveness have not been established.