Trademarks are renewed (have a legal life) or expire. You typically amortize goodwill over the useful life, and I remember reading how Goodwill assigned to a customer list was even expensed all at once for a business with recurring or subscription services, and they could show the loss of customers that did not renew. Pub 535 has info about this, and franchises are covered in there.
This looks useful: "The IRS disallowed the deduction on the basis that the rights had an indefinite duration."
There is a section for Government Allotments or Quotas.
https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/agriculturallaw/2018/11/non-depreciable-items-on-the-farm-or-ranch...
"Because the actions of Congress were completely unpredictable, the Tax Court held that the peanut program base acreage allotment was indeterminant and the associated cost to the taxpayer was not depreciable. Later, in C.C.A. [social security number removed] (Jul. 16, 2004), the IRS noted that three additional farm bills had become law since the Tax Court’s ruling in Wenzel and the peanut program continued. That lead the IRS to conclude that the duration of the peanut program could not be determined with reasonable certainty or accuracy. Consequently, the IRS determined, the peanut base acreage allotment did not have a determinable useful life and could not be depreciated."
"But a transferable right to receive a premium price for a fixed quantity of milk in accordance with a regional milk marketing order has been held to be amortizable (e.g., the cost could be spread over the useful life – 15 years) when it has a statutory expiration date and is not expected to be renewed. For example, in Van de Steeg v. Comr., 60 T.C. 17 (1973), aff’d., 510 F2d 961 (9th Cir. 1975), the taxpayers were dairy farmers who marketed their milk production subject to a Federal Milk Marketing Order. On several occasions they purchased an intangible asset (referred to as a "class I milk base") which they used in their dairy business. They claimed depreciation for the milk base and IRS disallowed the deduction on the basis that the asset had an indeterminable useful life – it depended on the will of the Congress whether or not to extend the program. The Tax Court (affirmed by the Ninth Circuit) held that the program that created the class I milk base always contained an express termination date and the existence of two extensions did not change the fact that a termination date always existed, even though the date had changed. While the IRS disagrees with the Van de Steeg opinion, it did announce that it would follow it. Rev. Rul. 75-466, 1975-2 C.B. 74."
*******************************
"Level Up" is a gaming function, not a real life function.
