R&D Tax Credit Issues Paper. It’s arrived and it’s a worry….but don’t panic just yet
The much-anticipated R&D Tax Credit issues paper finally arrived last Friday. The consultation paper is available on the Treasury website. And like the refrain of the old song, given that we have been waiting for the paper to appear since the Federal Budget in May, one would be justified in crooning “Is that all there is?”
The New Research and Development Tax Incentive
The first thing to note is that the paper, entitled “The new research and development tax incentive”, has been issued by the Treasury. This is a big surprise as Treasury officials did not attend the consultation sessions on the R&D tax concession held last year as part of the National Innovation Review. Furthermore, the two pre-consultation sessions held in June this year were headed up by a representative of the Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research rather than a Treasury official.
The impression that Treasury has taken control of the process is reinforced by the fact that responses to the paper, due by Monday, October 26, are to be submitted to the Business Tax Division of the Treasury. This is all a great worry. Is it now the case that the destiny of the Federal Government’s flagship innovation program is no longer in the hands of the government department actually responsible for innovation? This matter will need to be pursued with vigour. The process is subject to a tight timeframe as draft legislation is mooted by the end of the year.
The paper itself is an odd amalgam of decisions apparently already made and areas for discussion where there is no guidance as to what the thoughts of the authorities actually are. It includes a series of unsubstantiated assertions about the operation of the current R&D tax concession and betrays an extremely poor understanding of how business R&D (BERD) occurs. It is easy to get carried away by the disappointing quality of the paper’s analysis and it will predictably attract a firestorm of criticism from the business community with regards to the number of restrictions to eligible activities and expenditures that the Treasury appears to be advocating.
However, now is not the time to panic.
Firstly, there a number of positives to reflect on:
- Increased rates of benefits
- Removal of the complexities associated with the premium
- Extension of the rebate concept
- More generous provisions relating to overseas R&D
- Allowing foreign ownership of generated IP
- Improvements to R&D software rules
Achieving Workable Outcomes
Secondly, the huge concerns raised by the discussion regarding ‘Eligible R&D activity’ in the report need to be vented but then channelled into achieving workable outcomes. The Government needs to be reminded of the main policy game here – improving Australia’s overall R&D effort. There is a need to learn from the lessons from 1996 where the Coalition’s introduction of significant reductions to the R&D Tax Concession led to a collapse of Australia’s BERD over the next 5 years. We are already behind our competitors. Unnecessary restrictions will run the risk of Australia dropping off the back of the pack.
Businesses and Stakeholder Organisations to Have Their Say
Finally, the consultation process must be approached as a real opportunity to turn around the poor performance of the administration in program delivery in recent years. The new Credit, however defined, will fail if it is delivered by the same administrative mindset currently associated with the R&D Tax Concession. The experiences of taxpayers need to be submitted directly to the authorities so that this message is clearly heard.
MJA will be working with its clients, industry bodies and other interested parties to ensure that all the relevant issues are raised in the consultation process. We would be delighted to assist you in this regard in whatever manner you deem appropriate.
To discuss the matters raised in this MJA Update in greater detail, please contact Kris Gale on (02) 9810 7211 or using our contact form
How are we doing?
It’s always helpful to have your feedback on the articles we prepare, and the approach we’re taking in dealings with the government. You can help us by filling out a Comment below this post on our website, and giving us any feedback you have on how we’re performing, or how we could improve.
Proposed R&D Planning Changes: Good for Government – Bad for Business
R&D Plan Consultation
In the last working week of 2008 we received draft guidelines for R&D planning from AusIndustry for discussion. R&D planning has been a requirement of the R&D tax concession since 2001 and is actually part of the definition of R&D activities in the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936.
There are serious deficiencies with the current R&D Planning Guidelines, despite the consultations prior to their introduction, but they have proven to be workable since their introduction.
R&D Planning Should be a “Carrot” not a “Stick”
MJA has a long track record of supporting a component of the R&D tax concession that links R&D activities to business strategy. In fact, our first submissions on this point were made way back in 1995.
Initially, our recommendation was for companies that commit to R&D planning to be rewarded with higher rates of deduction (a “carrot”), rather than the “stick” approach adopted by government. Instead we have a system that rewards form over substance and tends to see R&D plans as a compliance documents, where the absence of a plan can lead to a claim being denied.
And so the government set out, in response to the June 2007 New Elements of the R&D Tax Concession Evaluation Report, to simplify and streamline the R&D planning process.
But “simplified and streamlined” actually increases compliance costs
The government, in requesting feedback on the draft guidelines, said “[t]he draft guidelines are simplified and streamlined in comparison to the existing guidelines”. Whilst this is true in that the document is shorter, implementing the draft guidelines in their current form has the potential to significantly increase compliance costs without delivering any further business value.
Our principal objection to the new planning guidelines is that they force compliance questions about the eligibility of possible, future, planned activities into a rigorous legalistic framework to be addressed in advance of work being undertaken.
Under the current guidelines it is sufficient to outline the program of R&D activities, the intended “Innovation” or “High Levels of Technical Risk” in the activities and the objective of the R&D project. A form was provided, but it was not intended to be prescriptive. These requirements, although favouring form over substance, were sufficient to identify potentially eligible projects (including some that may or may not be undertaken, let alone claimed).
Further proposed changes, dealing with authorisation procedures, estimation of expenditure by planned R&D activity, accompanied by a lack of detail on planning updates and frequency as well as approval of updates means that the changes proposed are far-reaching and affect organisations whether large or small.
If this guideline is approved it is a victory of means over ends; of bureaucracy over business.
MJA Submission on R&D Planning
We have written a detailed submission to goverment on the proposed R&D planning guidelines. You can download a PDF below, together with the proposed R&D planing guideline and see what the issues are.
AusIndustry Draft R&D Planning Guidelines
MJA Submission on Draft R&D Plan Guideines
Although submissions formally closed on 30 January 2009, we suspect that few corporates or other parties will have responded due to the Christmas/New Year break.
If that’s the case, and you want to make a submission to AusIndustry on these guidelines, please forward your comments either by email to rdtaxcon@innovation.gov.au with the heading “Consultation on proposed R&D Plan Guideline” or by post to:
The Manager
R&D Tax Concession Program Management
AusIndustry
GPO Box 9839
Canberra ACT 2601
How are we doing?
It’s always helpful to have your feedback on the Submissions we prepare, and the approach we’re taking in dealings with the government. You can help us by filling out a Comment below this post on our website, and giving us any feedback you have on how we’re peforming, or how we could improve.
Guide to R&D Tax Concession Updated – R&D Tax Concession Rulings Withdrawn
AusIndustry and the ATO have been jointly publishing a Guide to the R&D Tax Concession for some years now.
On 6 August 2008 the ATO released an update to Part C of the Guide to the R&D Tax Concession covering Expenditure on Research and Development. This completes the June 2008 update (Version 4.1) process as Part A (Introduction) and Part B (Research and Development Activities) were released by AusIndustry recently.
Changes incorporated in the updated guide include:
- Changes to the legislation on the Tax Offset including extending right of appeal to offsets, extend the time for claiming an offset, apply the $20,000 minimum,
- Improve the allocation of the 175% incremental concession between companies within the group
- Extend the 175% incremental concession to Australian subsidiaries of multinational enterprises (MNE) where the R&D activities are on behalf of the MNE.
- Other general changes to bring the Guide up to date with current legislation and ATO views.
In the process of releasing the update, a number of older rulings were withdrawn from this date. These are:
- IT 2442: This is an early general ruling on R&D expenditure
- IT 2451: This ruling discusses investor funding of R&D and “on own behalf” issues
- IT 2552: This ruling gives a detailed guide to costing R&D expenditure.
These 3 rulings are pre-1992 rulings. As such they only gave guidance and were not legally binding on the ATO. In the Notice of Withdrawal for each ruling the ATO states that “material in these rulings which is current is now included in Part C of the Guide to the R&D Tax Concession”. “The withdrawal of [these rulings] does not mean that the views expressed in that Ruling have changed.”
However, their replacement with the Guide rather than new public binding rulings fails to maintain or improve certainty for taxpayers. Given that the ATO has recently sought public comment on a potential ruling on “Guaranteed returns to investors” (s73CA) we can expect new rulings in due course. Notably, IT 2635 on risk provisions and syndicated R&D as the last pre-1992 ruling was not withdrawn.
We are currently completing a detailed review of the updated Guide.
Contact us if you would like more information.
