Direct comparison
Supplies vs. Equipment (2 CFR 200.1)
Supplies vs. equipment under 2 CFR 200.1: the $10,000 cost/life test, the computing-device exception, and why misclassifying one is an audit finding.
Ask about Supplies vs. Equipment (2 CFR 200.1)
Answers are drawn from this comparison and the rest of the CASRAI corpus, with a link to every source.
Answers are AI-generated from CASRAI’s own published pages and can be wrong, so check the linked sources before relying on one; your question is logged without personal data — never sold, never used to train a third-party model — to show us what CASRAI is missing, so please do not type personal or confidential details. How we use this
How do Supplies, Equipment compare side by side?
The table below compares Supplies, Equipment across 10 procurement-relevant dimensions, from regulatory definition through typical examples.
Side-by-side comparison
| Dimension | Supplies | Equipment |
|---|---|---|
| Regulatory definition | All tangible personal property other than property meeting the Equipment definition (2 CFR 200.1) | Tangible personal property, including IT systems, with a useful life of more than one year and a qualifying per-unit acquisition cost (2 CFR 200.1) |
| Cost threshold | No fixed per-unit floor -- an item stays a supply regardless of cost unless it meets the equipment definition | Per-unit acquisition cost equal to or exceeding the lesser of the institution's capitalization level or $10,000 (raised from $5,000, April 2024 revision, effective for awards on/after Oct 1, 2024) |
| Useful-life test | Not determinative -- a low-cost item with a multi-year useful life is still a supply | Must exceed one year, in addition to meeting the cost threshold -- both conditions are required together |
| Computing devices | Explicitly a supply, regardless of useful life, if acquisition cost is below the lesser of $10,000 or the capitalization level -- a specific carve-in in the definition | A computing device counts as equipment only once its acquisition cost meets the $10,000 (or lower institutional) threshold |
| Accounting treatment | Expensed when purchased or consumed -- never capitalized or depreciated | Capitalized and depreciated per the institution's financial-statement accounting policy |
| Prior approval to purchase | Ordinary allowability/allocability/reasonableness rules (2 CFR 200.403-200.405); no special prior-approval step | General purpose equipment needs prior written agency approval as a direct charge (2 CFR 200.439); special purpose equipment needs it only if not already in the approved budget |
| Tagging / physical inventory | No equipment-style tagging or periodic inventory requirement while in use | Must be recorded (serial number, funding source, % federal share, location, condition, disposition) and physically inventoried at least every two years (2 CFR 200.313(d)) |
| Insurance requirement | No specific mandate | Must be insured to the same extent as the institution's own comparable property, if the institution carries such insurance (2 CFR 200.313(d)(5)) |
| Disposition at project end | Aggregate residual value over $10,000 not needed on another federal award: retain for other federal work or compensate the federal share, unless immaterial (2 CFR 200.314) | Fair market value $10,000 or less: no further obligation. Above $10,000: compensate the federal share of fair market value, or follow agency disposition instructions (2 CFR 200.313(e)) |
| Typical examples | Reagents, glassware, PPE, low-cost computing devices below the threshold, disposable labware, small hand tools | A $15,000 mass spectrometer, a walk-in freezer, a research vehicle, a server exceeding the capitalization threshold |
Common questions
Common questions about Supplies vs Equipment
Is the $10,000 threshold the same for every institution?
+
$10,000 is the federal ceiling, but 2 CFR 200.1 actually uses "the lesser of the non-federal entity's own capitalization level ... or $10,000." An institution with an internal capitalization policy of, say, $5,000 must apply its own lower threshold -- it cannot use the $10,000 federal figure to treat an item its own accounting policy already classifies as equipment as a mere supply.
Why are computing devices called out specifically?
+
Laptops and similar devices routinely have a useful life of more than a year but a per-unit cost well under $10,000 -- without an explicit rule, that combination would sit in a gray zone. 2 CFR 200.1 resolves it directly: a computing device stays a "supply" unless its acquisition cost clears the lesser of the capitalization level or $10,000, regardless of how long it will actually be used.
Does the distinction apply to property acquired as cost-share or matching, not just items bought directly with award funds?
+
Yes -- the 2 CFR 200.313/200.314 tracking and disposition rules apply to property acquired under a federal award, including cost-shared or matching property used for the project, not only items purchased outright with award funds. Purely institutional purchases outside the scope of a federal award follow the institution's own property policy instead.
What happens if an item is misclassified?
+
Classifying a purchase that actually meets the equipment threshold as a "supply" to skip prior approval and tagging is a recurring finding when auditors test equipment and real property management under the OMB Compliance Supplement -- they trace acquisitions against the general ledger and flag items that should have been recorded, inventoried, or pre-approved but weren't.
Going deeper
