ARTICLE
16 September 2021

IRS Agents Tighten The Thumb Screws On R&D Credit

DW
Dickinson Wright PLLC

Contributor

Dickinson Wright PLLC, founded in 1878, is a full-service business law firm with 550+ lawyers across the United States and Canada, covering over 40 practice areas and industry groups. Headquartered in Detroit, the firm provides practical, business-focused legal solutions and invests in technology and personnel to support efficient, innovative service delivery. Dickinson Wright maintains independently verified information security and risk management controls, including ISO/IEC 27701:2019 certification, reflecting a commitment to protecting sensitive client matters. The firm handles complex transactions and high-stakes litigation and is regularly recognized by leading legal industry organizations for the quality of its work.
Recent taxpayer experiences suggest that IRS agents are becoming more aggressive in denying taxpayer claims of research and development tax credits through narrow construction of the so-called "substantially all" test of Code § 41(d)(1)(C) ...
United States Tax
Dickinson Wright PLLC are most popular:
  • within Insolvency/Bankruptcy/Re-Structuring and International Law topic(s)

Recent taxpayer experiences suggest that IRS agents are becoming more aggressive in denying taxpayer claims of research and development tax credits through narrow construction of the so-called "substantially all" test of Code § 41(d)(1)(C) which requires that the research activities constitute "elements of a process of experimentation."

Under Treas. Reg. §1.41-4(a)(5), a process of experimentation must be a process designed to evaluate one or more alternatives to achieve a result where the capability or the method of achieving that result is uncertain at the beginning of the taxpayer's research activities. Thus, the IRS  requires a process that fundamentally relies on the principles of physical or biological science, engineering or computer science for the following:

  • Identification of uncertainty concerning the development or improvement of a business product or component;
  • Identification of one or more alternatives intended to eliminate that uncertainty; and
  • Identification and the conduct of a process of evaluating the alternatives (through, for example, modeling, simulation, or a systematic trial and error methodology).

However, in the IRS' view, a taxpayer may perform research activities, and the research activities may, in fact, develop or improve the function, performance, reliability, or quality of a product. However, such activities may still NOT count toward the "substantially all" test because a taxpayer failed to establish its activities also constitutes "elements of a process of experimentation" within the narrow meaning of the applicable Treasury regulations.

The question of whether a taxpayer's activities meet the narrower "elements of a process of experimentation" test is inherently "factual," and taxpayers and the IRS frequently disagree on which activities constitute elements of a process of experimentation.   Moreover, the IRS appears to be raising this issue more frequently and to have been emboldened by its recent win in Little Sandy Coal Co., Inc. 2021 T.C. Memo 2021-15, putting taxpayers on notice that additional care, planning, and record-keeping are likely to be required to establish entitlement to credit for their research activities.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

[View Source]

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More