blank+calendar

At SR&ED Education and Resources, we’re taking the time to document all the changes that have occurred to the Scientific Research & Experimental Development (SR&ED) program over the years. In our “From the Archives” series, you’ll be able to see how the program has evolved since its inception in 1986. Stay current with the program by understanding the historical context.

In 2007, the Department of Finance released a document entitled An Evaluation of the Federal Tax Credit for Scientific Research and Experimental Development.1 Using recent literature on the subject, the study examined the SR&ED tax credit “taking into consideration the responsiveness of the private sector to changes in the price of R&D, the spillovers on the rest of the economy from the additional R&D, the economic cost of raising taxes to fund the credit and the administration and compliance costs associated with the credit.”

The Department of Finance’s Position on the SR&ED Tax Credit

The authors begin the report by giving a clear picture of how the Department of Finance views the success of its R&D spending—particularly the SR&ED tax credit program.

“R&D tax incentives help correct the failure of the market to provide a socially desirable amount of R&D capital by compensating firms for the spillover benefit their research provides to others,” they say. “These incentives may also help alleviate financing constraints on R&D investment, particularly those faced by smaller firms.”

The authors reference the statistics of a 1997 study performed by the Department of Finance that found the SR&ED tax credit “generates $1.38 in incremental R&D spending per dollar of foregone tax revenue.” They go on to explain that this report will act as an update on that 1997 study.

SR&ED Conclusions

In analyzing the SR&ED program, the authors found that the tax credit was not generating the same incremental R&D spending it was in 1997; however, this does not appear to be a point of concern.

“The point estimate is a positive welfare effect of about 11 cents per dollar of revenue forgone,” they say. “While this may appear to be a modest return, it is roughly equivalent to the government investing funds raised by distortionary taxes.”

In spite of findings suggesting “using direct and indirect assistance jointly may undermine their effectiveness,” the authors ascertain that all forms of R&D funding should be able to work harmoniously.

“We conclude that there is presently no evidence-based reason to choose between tax credits, grants and publicly performed R&D as alternative ways to deliver support for R&D,” they say.

This article is based on a SR&ED document at the time:  An Evaluation of the Federal Tax Credit for Scientific Research and Experimental Development (2007) 2

Do you have questions about SR&ED history or current trends? Start a discussion on our group on LinkedIn.

Do you really know SR&ED? Sign up for the Comprehensive Guide to SR&ED for everything there is to learn about the program.

Show 2 footnotes

  1. Parsons, M. and Phillip, N. (September 2007.) An Evaluation of the Federal Tax Credit for Scientific Research and Experimental Development. Retrieved from: http://publications.gc.ca/site/eng/9.565154/publication.html.
  2. Parsons, M. and Phillip, N. (September 2007.) An Evaluation of the Federal Tax Credit for Scientific Research and Experimental Development. Retrieved from: http://publications.gc.ca/site/eng/9.565154/publication.html.

Elizabeth Lance

Elizabeth is known as the "SR&ED Maven" in the industry. With a love of documentation and the nuances of language, she is often engaged by multi-million dollar companies to help improve documentation and workflow processes. Her favourite sentence (which she hears regularly) is "Accepted as Filed". Find out more about her on LinkedIn.

0 Comments

Leave a Reply

error: This content is Copyright InGenuity Group Solutions Inc. Please contact the site administrator if you wish to use this content.
%d bloggers like this: