Daniel Reyes

I want to put a number behind it rather than pick one. Give me a week — I will benchmark against comparable practices in the city and send you the working.

The compensation study is attached.

The defensible range for a principal architect at your revenue is $215,000–$255,000. I would set both of you at $228,000 from the December run — comfortably inside the range, and it keeps the QBI wage test clear with room to spare.

This is a suggestion, not a requirement. Say the word and I will brief Marcus directly.

Spoke to Marcus, the December run is set. One more item while I have the file open: I noticed the Pier 9 amendment adds a tenant improvement allowance of $64,000.

That is not rent, and it should not be booked as income in one year. Can you send the amendment across so I can look at how it is structured?

Read it. The allowance is a reimbursement against qualifying work, not a lease inducement — so it reduces the depreciable basis of the improvements rather than hitting income. Better outcome and no election needed.

I have added it to the 2026 workpapers.

Separately — at this profit, the 401(k) is no longer the biggest lever available to you. A cash balance plan stacked on top of it would let each of you defer a further $90,000–$140,000 a year, depending on age.

It is a commitment rather than a switch: the contribution is broadly mandatory once the plan exists, so it suits profit you expect to repeat. Worth thirty minutes. Can you send me a payroll census?