Taxpayer win highlights value of expert testimony on technological advancement and uncertainty …
A new ruling by the Tax Court of Canada shows that with the aid of properly presented evidence on facts, taxpayers can win back SR&ED claims that CRA has rejected on scientific grounds.
For the full video of this presentation, please visit:
https://www.edge-ai-vision.com/2021/01/can-you-patent-your-ai-based-invention-a-presentation-from-fitch-even-tabin-flannery-llp/
Thomas Lebens, Partner at Fitch, Even, Tabin & Flannery LLP, presents the “Can You Patent Your AI-Based Invention?” tutorial at the September 2020 Embedded Vision Summit.
Patenting inventions is one way to capitalize on the hard work and creativity that drives an innovative product, but recent cases have made things difficult for innovators whose inventions are expressed in software systems and processes. Software itself frequently cannot be patented. But this is not to say that AI-based vision and embedded vision inventions are unpatentable.
This presentation gives you an update on the latest developments in software patentability and helps you navigate this landscape to best protect your innovative efforts.
For the full video of this presentation, please visit:
https://www.edge-ai-vision.com/2021/01/can-you-patent-your-ai-based-invention-a-presentation-from-fitch-even-tabin-flannery-llp/
Thomas Lebens, Partner at Fitch, Even, Tabin & Flannery LLP, presents the “Can You Patent Your AI-Based Invention?” tutorial at the September 2020 Embedded Vision Summit.
Patenting inventions is one way to capitalize on the hard work and creativity that drives an innovative product, but recent cases have made things difficult for innovators whose inventions are expressed in software systems and processes. Software itself frequently cannot be patented. But this is not to say that AI-based vision and embedded vision inventions are unpatentable.
This presentation gives you an update on the latest developments in software patentability and helps you navigate this landscape to best protect your innovative efforts.
Latest ruling could curtail oral testimony as alternative to documentation...
On June 8, 2015, Justice Randall S. Bocock of the Tax Court of Canada in Edmonton upheld CRA assessments whereby software as service provider Highweb & Page Group Inc. was denied SR&ED ITCs on R&D expenditures of $25K in TY2007 and $38K in TY2008.
In this edition:
• Anja Beriro considers the selection and award criterion in light of the European General Court’s decision in Alfastar Benelux SA v European Commission
• Alex Kynoch brings us up to date with latest developments in the NATS (Services) Limited v Gatwick Airport Limited dispute and the November judgement which focuses on issues surrounding NATS’ particulars of claim
• Nichola Evans takes an incisive look at the effect of the Jackson reforms on case management and the latest Court of Appeal guidance
• we have the first of a series of articles from Neil Walker in which he takes an in-depth look at initial considerations for local authorities when thinking about land development collaboration/joint venture projects
• we have a rather festive state aid story from Sharon Jones to round off our December issue in style!
Software developer had contract for health records system in Belize
The Tax Court of Canada has awarded generous (95%) legal costs to a software developer who successfully appealed a denied SR&ED claim to the Tax Court of Canada and subsequently filed a motion to the court for increased costs. Such cost awards are often less than 50%; awards in the range of 80% are seen if there have been settlement offers; 95% is almost unheard of.
Patentability of Computer Related Inventions (CRIs) in IndiaArun Narasani
The patentability requirements for Computer Related Inventions (CRIs) under Indian Patent Law have been unclear. It is generally understood that a CRI must demonstrate “technical effect” and the relevant claims must have “machine limitation”, in addition to the basic patentability requirements of novelty, inventive step, and industrial applicability.
However, the phrase “technical effect” has not been defined properly. Further, the legal basis for technical effect requirement has not been clarified.
In this session, we will take a close look at the guidelines for examination of CRIs published recently by the Indian Patent Office to gain some insights regarding the "technical effect" requirement.
Take Aways:
- Understand evolution of patent law with reference protection of CRIs
- Understand “technical effect” requirement and legal basis for the requirement
- Understand patentability of CRIs in India through examples
The Development of E-Commerce in Nigeria - Olushola AbiloyeAcas Media
THE IMPACT OF SUPREME COURT DECISION IN KUBOR v. DICKSON (2014) 4 NWLR (Part 1345) 534-594 ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF E-COMMERCE IN NIGERIA: ISSUES AND PROSPECTS
Patents on Software and Business Methods: Have the Rules Changed?Karl Larson
The standard for patentable subject matter under Bilski is a “machine-or-transformation test,” which restricts patenting to inventions that are either tied to a particular machine or apparatus, or that transform a particular article into a different state or thing.
Why record keeping is important for maximising R&D tax credit claimAlexander Clifford
To unlock the incredible opportunity of R&D tax credits for your innovative business, you need to provide various evidence to HMRC to strengthen your claim and prevent the risk of a time-consuming enquiry. Whether you're a small startup or a large enterprise, understanding the nuances of effective record-keeping can make all the difference in harnessing the incentives designed to fuel innovation and elevate your business to new heights. This article will guide you through the reasons why record keeping is vital for your R&D tax credit claim and provide practical guidelines on what to include in your records as you carry out your research and development or when you’re claiming retrospectively.
Filing requirements bolstered, loopholes closed
On September 16, 2016 the Canadian Department of Finance released a package of draft technical amendments to the Income Tax Act (ITA).
Included in the 33 pages of technical changes are four amendments to existing legislation governing SR&ED tax deductions and credits.
In Canada, tax is paid at both federal and provincial (i.e. state) levels of government.
Both the federal government and most provincial governments provide funding for scientific and technological R&D through a system of tax credits.
The official title of this system of R&D tax credits is the Scientific Research & Experimental Development tax credit abbreviated SR&ED.
The SR&ED program is administrated by the Canada Revenue Agency abbreviated CRA.
All taxpayers anywhere in Canada are eligible to receive R&D tax credits at the federal level. Eligibility for R&D tax credits at the provincial level is predicated on two considerations; First the province must have an R&D credit and second, you must be a taxpayer in that province.
In addition to being done by a Canadian taxpayer, the R&D work must be done in Canada.
More Related Content
Similar to Bulletin #57 - New TCC Ruling Favours Taxpayer on "Shop Floor" SR&ED
Latest ruling could curtail oral testimony as alternative to documentation...
On June 8, 2015, Justice Randall S. Bocock of the Tax Court of Canada in Edmonton upheld CRA assessments whereby software as service provider Highweb & Page Group Inc. was denied SR&ED ITCs on R&D expenditures of $25K in TY2007 and $38K in TY2008.
In this edition:
• Anja Beriro considers the selection and award criterion in light of the European General Court’s decision in Alfastar Benelux SA v European Commission
• Alex Kynoch brings us up to date with latest developments in the NATS (Services) Limited v Gatwick Airport Limited dispute and the November judgement which focuses on issues surrounding NATS’ particulars of claim
• Nichola Evans takes an incisive look at the effect of the Jackson reforms on case management and the latest Court of Appeal guidance
• we have the first of a series of articles from Neil Walker in which he takes an in-depth look at initial considerations for local authorities when thinking about land development collaboration/joint venture projects
• we have a rather festive state aid story from Sharon Jones to round off our December issue in style!
Software developer had contract for health records system in Belize
The Tax Court of Canada has awarded generous (95%) legal costs to a software developer who successfully appealed a denied SR&ED claim to the Tax Court of Canada and subsequently filed a motion to the court for increased costs. Such cost awards are often less than 50%; awards in the range of 80% are seen if there have been settlement offers; 95% is almost unheard of.
Patentability of Computer Related Inventions (CRIs) in IndiaArun Narasani
The patentability requirements for Computer Related Inventions (CRIs) under Indian Patent Law have been unclear. It is generally understood that a CRI must demonstrate “technical effect” and the relevant claims must have “machine limitation”, in addition to the basic patentability requirements of novelty, inventive step, and industrial applicability.
However, the phrase “technical effect” has not been defined properly. Further, the legal basis for technical effect requirement has not been clarified.
In this session, we will take a close look at the guidelines for examination of CRIs published recently by the Indian Patent Office to gain some insights regarding the "technical effect" requirement.
Take Aways:
- Understand evolution of patent law with reference protection of CRIs
- Understand “technical effect” requirement and legal basis for the requirement
- Understand patentability of CRIs in India through examples
The Development of E-Commerce in Nigeria - Olushola AbiloyeAcas Media
THE IMPACT OF SUPREME COURT DECISION IN KUBOR v. DICKSON (2014) 4 NWLR (Part 1345) 534-594 ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF E-COMMERCE IN NIGERIA: ISSUES AND PROSPECTS
Patents on Software and Business Methods: Have the Rules Changed?Karl Larson
The standard for patentable subject matter under Bilski is a “machine-or-transformation test,” which restricts patenting to inventions that are either tied to a particular machine or apparatus, or that transform a particular article into a different state or thing.
Why record keeping is important for maximising R&D tax credit claimAlexander Clifford
To unlock the incredible opportunity of R&D tax credits for your innovative business, you need to provide various evidence to HMRC to strengthen your claim and prevent the risk of a time-consuming enquiry. Whether you're a small startup or a large enterprise, understanding the nuances of effective record-keeping can make all the difference in harnessing the incentives designed to fuel innovation and elevate your business to new heights. This article will guide you through the reasons why record keeping is vital for your R&D tax credit claim and provide practical guidelines on what to include in your records as you carry out your research and development or when you’re claiming retrospectively.
Filing requirements bolstered, loopholes closed
On September 16, 2016 the Canadian Department of Finance released a package of draft technical amendments to the Income Tax Act (ITA).
Included in the 33 pages of technical changes are four amendments to existing legislation governing SR&ED tax deductions and credits.
In Canada, tax is paid at both federal and provincial (i.e. state) levels of government.
Both the federal government and most provincial governments provide funding for scientific and technological R&D through a system of tax credits.
The official title of this system of R&D tax credits is the Scientific Research & Experimental Development tax credit abbreviated SR&ED.
The SR&ED program is administrated by the Canada Revenue Agency abbreviated CRA.
All taxpayers anywhere in Canada are eligible to receive R&D tax credits at the federal level. Eligibility for R&D tax credits at the provincial level is predicated on two considerations; First the province must have an R&D credit and second, you must be a taxpayer in that province.
In addition to being done by a Canadian taxpayer, the R&D work must be done in Canada.
In Canada R&D tax credits are provided at both the federal and provincial (state) levels.
Today the Canadian province of Ontario tabled its 2016 – 2017 budget which included cuts in two of the province’s three R&D tax credits...
Cuts to Canada's federal SR&ED tax credits make provincial credits more vital than ever
In Canada, R&D tax credits are offered by both federal and provincial governments. However, it's all too easy to lose sight of what comes from where.
If CRA has entirely or partially denied your SR&ED claim, there are two steps you can take to have their decision reviewed and potentially overturned. These two steps are the same whether the issue is "technical" or "expenditure" related, i.e. CRA has ruled that an R&D activity does not qualify as SR&ED, or that an amount claimed in respect of such activity does not attract an SR&ED benefit.
Court seeks impartiality of CRA staff who act as expert witnesses
In January 2015 the Tax Court of Canada in Ottawa began to hear an appeal by HLP Solutions Inc. concerning CRA’s denial of SR&ED ITCs on two software development projects.
Bad News for SR&ED Claimers with Government Loans
In November 2014 Immunovaccine Technologies Inc. made application to the Supreme Court of Canada for leave to appeal decisions against it by the Tax Court of Canada and the Federal Court of Appeal...
New Minimum Claim Threshold | Accelerated Benefits Eliminated on Some Transaction Types
In Canada R&D tax credits are provided at both the national (Canada) level and by the individual provinces (states).
SR&ED-Related Notice of Objection Filings Increased by Factor of 25 Since 2007
Government statistics obtained by Scitax via Canada’s “Access to Information” process indicate that the number of Notice of Objection filings taxpayers made to the Canada Revenue Agency on SR&ED tax credits has skyrocketed over the last seven years.
As a result of changes to the Income Tax Act and Tax Court Canada Act being introduced through the 2013 federal budget process, the limit on tax court appeals of income tax matters made under the informal procedure will shortly increase from $12,000 to $25,000.
The SR&ED units located in Toronto West (Mississauga) and Hamilton will be amalgamated and both will report to an Assistant Director located in Hamilton, who will in turn report to the Director of the Hamilton TSO.
Cuts to SR&ED program less than expected . . . . .
Canada’s 2012 Federal budget tabled on March 29th 2012 proposes the following changes to Canada’s SR&ED tax credit program.
Substantial changes to SR&ED tax credits on the horizon . . . . . .
(17-Oct-2011) A six-member panel, appointed by the Canadian Federal Government, released its report on the efficacy of various economic-stimulus programs intended to increase private sector R&D and technological innovation.
The Mowat Institute at the University of Toronto’s School of Public Policy has issued a new economic policy report entitled Canada’s Innovation Underperformance: Whose Policy Problem Is It? authored by Tijs Creutzberg.
Deadline 18-Feb-2011
Back in October 2010 the Canadian Federal Government announced the formation of an “Expert Panel” headed by Open Text Chairman Tom Jenkins. Deadline for industry input to this panel is 18-Feb-2011
Ontario and U.S. Programs offer different approaches to help fund innovation in medical technology
In this bulletin, we highlight two new government funding incentive programs for private
companies in the biotech / medical-device sectors.
Discover the innovative and creative projects that highlight my journey throu...dylandmeas
Discover the innovative and creative projects that highlight my journey through Full Sail University. Below, you’ll find a collection of my work showcasing my skills and expertise in digital marketing, event planning, and media production.
RMD24 | Debunking the non-endemic revenue myth Marvin Vacquier Droop | First ...BBPMedia1
Marvin neemt je in deze presentatie mee in de voordelen van non-endemic advertising op retail media netwerken. Hij brengt ook de uitdagingen in beeld die de markt op dit moment heeft op het gebied van retail media voor niet-leveranciers.
Retail media wordt gezien als het nieuwe advertising-medium en ook mediabureaus richten massaal retail media-afdelingen op. Merken die niet in de betreffende winkel liggen staan ook nog niet in de rij om op de retail media netwerken te adverteren. Marvin belicht de uitdagingen die er zijn om echt aansluiting te vinden op die markt van non-endemic advertising.
RMD24 | Retail media: hoe zet je dit in als je geen AH of Unilever bent? Heid...BBPMedia1
Grote partijen zijn al een tijdje onderweg met retail media. Ondertussen worden in dit domein ook de kansen zichtbaar voor andere spelers in de markt. Maar met die kansen ontstaan ook vragen: Zelf retail media worden of erop adverteren? In welke fase van de funnel past het en hoe integreer je het in een mediaplan? Wat is nu precies het verschil met marketplaces en Programmatic ads? In dit half uur beslechten we de dilemma's en krijg je antwoorden op wanneer het voor jou tijd is om de volgende stap te zetten.
Business Valuation Principles for EntrepreneursBen Wann
This insightful presentation is designed to equip entrepreneurs with the essential knowledge and tools needed to accurately value their businesses. Understanding business valuation is crucial for making informed decisions, whether you're seeking investment, planning to sell, or simply want to gauge your company's worth.
Tata Group Dials Taiwan for Its Chipmaking Ambition in Gujarat’s DholeraAvirahi City Dholera
The Tata Group, a titan of Indian industry, is making waves with its advanced talks with Taiwanese chipmakers Powerchip Semiconductor Manufacturing Corporation (PSMC) and UMC Group. The goal? Establishing a cutting-edge semiconductor fabrication unit (fab) in Dholera, Gujarat. This isn’t just any project; it’s a potential game changer for India’s chipmaking aspirations and a boon for investors seeking promising residential projects in dholera sir.
Visit : https://www.avirahi.com/blog/tata-group-dials-taiwan-for-its-chipmaking-ambition-in-gujarats-dholera/
Improving profitability for small businessBen Wann
In this comprehensive presentation, we will explore strategies and practical tips for enhancing profitability in small businesses. Tailored to meet the unique challenges faced by small enterprises, this session covers various aspects that directly impact the bottom line. Attendees will learn how to optimize operational efficiency, manage expenses, and increase revenue through innovative marketing and customer engagement techniques.
Buy Verified PayPal Account | Buy Google 5 Star Reviewsusawebmarket
Buy Verified PayPal Account
Looking to buy verified PayPal accounts? Discover 7 expert tips for safely purchasing a verified PayPal account in 2024. Ensure security and reliability for your transactions.
PayPal Services Features-
🟢 Email Access
🟢 Bank Added
🟢 Card Verified
🟢 Full SSN Provided
🟢 Phone Number Access
🟢 Driving License Copy
🟢 Fasted Delivery
Client Satisfaction is Our First priority. Our services is very appropriate to buy. We assume that the first-rate way to purchase our offerings is to order on the website. If you have any worry in our cooperation usually You can order us on Skype or Telegram.
24/7 Hours Reply/Please Contact
usawebmarketEmail: support@usawebmarket.com
Skype: usawebmarket
Telegram: @usawebmarket
WhatsApp: +1(218) 203-5951
USA WEB MARKET is the Best Verified PayPal, Payoneer, Cash App, Skrill, Neteller, Stripe Account and SEO, SMM Service provider.100%Satisfection granted.100% replacement Granted.
"𝑩𝑬𝑮𝑼𝑵 𝑾𝑰𝑻𝑯 𝑻𝑱 𝑰𝑺 𝑯𝑨𝑳𝑭 𝑫𝑶𝑵𝑬"
𝐓𝐉 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐬 (𝐓𝐉 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐮𝐧𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬) is a professional event agency that includes experts in the event-organizing market in Vietnam, Korea, and ASEAN countries. We provide unlimited types of events from Music concerts, Fan meetings, and Culture festivals to Corporate events, Internal company events, Golf tournaments, MICE events, and Exhibitions.
𝐓𝐉 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐬 provides unlimited package services including such as Event organizing, Event planning, Event production, Manpower, PR marketing, Design 2D/3D, VIP protocols, Interpreter agency, etc.
Sports events - Golf competitions/billiards competitions/company sports events: dynamic and challenging
⭐ 𝐅𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞𝐝 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐣𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐬:
➢ 2024 BAEKHYUN [Lonsdaleite] IN HO CHI MINH
➢ SUPER JUNIOR-L.S.S. THE SHOW : Th3ee Guys in HO CHI MINH
➢FreenBecky 1st Fan Meeting in Vietnam
➢CHILDREN ART EXHIBITION 2024: BEYOND BARRIERS
➢ WOW K-Music Festival 2023
➢ Winner [CROSS] Tour in HCM
➢ Super Show 9 in HCM with Super Junior
➢ HCMC - Gyeongsangbuk-do Culture and Tourism Festival
➢ Korean Vietnam Partnership - Fair with LG
➢ Korean President visits Samsung Electronics R&D Center
➢ Vietnam Food Expo with Lotte Wellfood
"𝐄𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐚 𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲, 𝐚 𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐣𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐧𝐞𝐲. 𝐖𝐞 𝐚𝐥𝐰𝐚𝐲𝐬 𝐛𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐯𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐥𝐲 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐛𝐞 𝐚 𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐬."
Implicitly or explicitly all competing businesses employ a strategy to select a mix
of marketing resources. Formulating such competitive strategies fundamentally
involves recognizing relationships between elements of the marketing mix (e.g.,
price and product quality), as well as assessing competitive and market conditions
(i.e., industry structure in the language of economics).
Kseniya Leshchenko: Shared development support service model as the way to ma...Lviv Startup Club
Kseniya Leshchenko: Shared development support service model as the way to make small projects with small budgets profitable for the company (UA)
Kyiv PMDay 2024 Summer
Website – www.pmday.org
Youtube – https://www.youtube.com/startuplviv
FB – https://www.facebook.com/pmdayconference
Memorandum Of Association Constitution of Company.pptseri bangash
www.seribangash.com
A Memorandum of Association (MOA) is a legal document that outlines the fundamental principles and objectives upon which a company operates. It serves as the company's charter or constitution and defines the scope of its activities. Here's a detailed note on the MOA:
Contents of Memorandum of Association:
Name Clause: This clause states the name of the company, which should end with words like "Limited" or "Ltd." for a public limited company and "Private Limited" or "Pvt. Ltd." for a private limited company.
https://seribangash.com/article-of-association-is-legal-doc-of-company/
Registered Office Clause: It specifies the location where the company's registered office is situated. This office is where all official communications and notices are sent.
Objective Clause: This clause delineates the main objectives for which the company is formed. It's important to define these objectives clearly, as the company cannot undertake activities beyond those mentioned in this clause.
www.seribangash.com
Liability Clause: It outlines the extent of liability of the company's members. In the case of companies limited by shares, the liability of members is limited to the amount unpaid on their shares. For companies limited by guarantee, members' liability is limited to the amount they undertake to contribute if the company is wound up.
https://seribangash.com/promotors-is-person-conceived-formation-company/
Capital Clause: This clause specifies the authorized capital of the company, i.e., the maximum amount of share capital the company is authorized to issue. It also mentions the division of this capital into shares and their respective nominal value.
Association Clause: It simply states that the subscribers wish to form a company and agree to become members of it, in accordance with the terms of the MOA.
Importance of Memorandum of Association:
Legal Requirement: The MOA is a legal requirement for the formation of a company. It must be filed with the Registrar of Companies during the incorporation process.
Constitutional Document: It serves as the company's constitutional document, defining its scope, powers, and limitations.
Protection of Members: It protects the interests of the company's members by clearly defining the objectives and limiting their liability.
External Communication: It provides clarity to external parties, such as investors, creditors, and regulatory authorities, regarding the company's objectives and powers.
https://seribangash.com/difference-public-and-private-company-law/
Binding Authority: The company and its members are bound by the provisions of the MOA. Any action taken beyond its scope may be considered ultra vires (beyond the powers) of the company and therefore void.
Amendment of MOA:
While the MOA lays down the company's fundamental principles, it is not entirely immutable. It can be amended, but only under specific circumstances and in compliance with legal procedures. Amendments typically require shareholder
Cracking the Workplace Discipline Code Main.pptxWorkforce Group
Cultivating and maintaining discipline within teams is a critical differentiator for successful organisations.
Forward-thinking leaders and business managers understand the impact that discipline has on organisational success. A disciplined workforce operates with clarity, focus, and a shared understanding of expectations, ultimately driving better results, optimising productivity, and facilitating seamless collaboration.
Although discipline is not a one-size-fits-all approach, it can help create a work environment that encourages personal growth and accountability rather than solely relying on punitive measures.
In this deck, you will learn the significance of workplace discipline for organisational success. You’ll also learn
• Four (4) workplace discipline methods you should consider
• The best and most practical approach to implementing workplace discipline.
• Three (3) key tips to maintain a disciplined workplace.
Bulletin #57 - New TCC Ruling Favours Taxpayer on "Shop Floor" SR&ED
1. NUMBER 57 | DECEMBER 8, 2014
New TCC Ruling Favours Taxpayer on "Shop Floor" SR&ED
Taxpayer win highlights value of expert testimony on technological advancement and uncertainty …
A new ruling by the Tax Court of Canada shows that with the aid of properly presented evidence on facts,
taxpayers can win back SR&ED claims that CRA has rejected on scientific grounds.
On October 23, 2014, Justice Gaston Jorré allowed an appeal to the Tax Court of Canada (TCC) made by
Abeilles Service de Conditionnement Inc. for tax year 2009. In addition to allowing all of the disputed
SR&ED claims, Justice Jorré also allowed costs to the taxpayer which presumably would include a
substantial portion of the legal fees plus the cost of the expert witness.
1. Background
Abeilles is located in the east end of Montreal and is 49% owned by General Electric. The company
manufactures electric motors and other component subassemblies such as heating elements, control
panels etc. used in household appliances. It has been making SR&ED claims since 2003. General Electric
is not Abeilles only customer.
In its tax year 2009 Abeilles claimed total expenditures of approximately $400K in salaries and $5K in
materials in respect of four R&D projects. All four of these projects concern improving the efficiency of
automated manufacturing assembly processes versus development of the appliance product itself. Two of
these projects were continued from prior tax years (in which they were allowed by CRA) and two were
new projects started in 2009.
The case came to trial in July 2013 after CRA rejected the claim on grounds that none of the claimed work
met the definition of SR&ED-eligible activity as set out in subsection 248(1) of the Income Tax Act. CRA's
reasons for this rejection were that the R&D work undertaken in the claimed projects was standard
practice and/or routine engineering with no technological uncertainty, no technological advancement nor
any systematic investigation. CRA also cited a lack of contemporaneous documentation to corroborate the
claimed work.
DIRECTORS:
David R. Hearn, Managing Director
Michael C. Cadesky, FCPA FCA CA BSc MBA
2. NUMBER 57 | DECEMBER 8, 2014 SCITAX BULLETIN | PAGE 2
2. Findings on Expert Testimony
Expert witness testimony was highly significant to this case. Both the taxpayer and the Crown deployed
experts with solid technological credentials: The expert witness called by the taxpayer is qualified with a
Bachelor of Science degree in Pure Mathematics, a Masters in Aerospace Engineering and a PhD in
Mechanical Engineering. The Crown’s expert – the same CRA science advisor who originally assessed
the claims – holds a Bachelor’s degree in Chemical Engineering and a master's and a doctorate in
Mechanical Engineering.
The court found that the Crown’s expert (a CRA employee) was not sufficiently impartial after the taxpayer
objected that the he was not "independent": As described in items [83, 91-97, 114] of the judgment,
Justice Jorré notes that he had not adequately separated his role as a CRA auditor from that of an expert
witness. At items [91, 95] the court observes the expert’s "confusion" between his duty to uphold the very
CRA administrative policies that formed the basis of the original assessment and his role at court which is
to "clarify" technical evidence so that the court can make its decision.
The court also noted that when assessing the original filing, the CRA’s expert had made an arithmetic
error with respect to the duration of the production trials by confusing man-hrs of work effort with days of
duration of the production trials which likely led to his viewing the claimed expenditures as excessive. See
items [99, 109, 111-113].
3. Other Findings of Note
In addition to the independence of expert witnesses, this judgment provides the following with respect to
SR&ED scientific eligibility. To access specific "items", access the judgment text via this URL:
http://www.scitax.com/pdf/Dckt_2011-2054-IT-G_23-Oct-2014_Google_Translated.pdf
3.A Increases in productivity rate and flexibility of the process are acknowledged to constitute a
"technological advancement". See items [131, 132, 133, 146, 162-164].
3.B Projects should be assessed as a whole and across multiple years, not "de-constructed" until no
eligibility remains. See items [129, 135, 150-152].
3.C A diligent search by the taxpayer that shows a lack of information public domain with respect to
how to achieve the outcome sought in the project, is adequate evidence of "technical
uncertainty". See items [155, 177].
3.D The need to develop a commercially viable (i.e. cost effective solution) can be a factor of
technological uncertainty with respect to SR&ED eligibility. See items [11, 137].
3.E Adjusting a manufacturing process can constitute "systematic investigation". See item [158].
3.F Technological progress in the manufacturing process equates to "advancement". See item [162].
3. NUMBER 57 | DECEMBER 8, 2014 SCITAX BULLETIN | PAGE 3
3.G At item [154] the court accepted that the criteria of technological uncertainty can be met by the
taxpayer not knowing how to achieve some goal that is very specific to its situation. This is a clear
distinction from the statement "Technological uncertainties may arise from shortcomings or
limitations of the current state of technology that prevent a new or improved capability from being
developed. In other words, the current state of technology may be insufficient to resolve a
problem." which appears in the definition of technological uncertainty given in CRA’s current
guidance document "Eligibility of Work for SR&ED Investment Tax Credits Policy". Although the
CRA policy goes on to offer a broader definition of technological uncertainty framed in the context
of knowledge available in the taxpayer’s community, it is the "no shortcomings or limitations of the
current state of technology" reasoning that CRA auditors all too frequently cite in their
assessments.
3.H The court acknowledged that the requirement to develop a cost effective solution was a practical
factor with respect to the criteria of technological advancement and technological uncertainty.
See items [11, 156].
3.I While contemporaneous documents are needed to corroborate the occurrence of SR&ED, those
documents need not have special content relating to SR&ED; it is sufficient to be able to cross
link the work claimed to the timeframe of the claims. See item [11].
4. Lessons Learned
Initial reaction to this ruling in the SR&ED community is that it sets a new precedent that will cause CRA
to suddenly "relax" its scientific eligibility criteria. While for reasons set out in "Conclusions" below we think
this is unlikely, there are several lessons to be taken from it:
4.A Expert witness testimony is vital to any tax court litigation concerning the scientific eligibility of
R&D work for SR&ED tax credits.
4.B In the courtroom, taxpayers must vigorously challenge the independence (and impartiality) of
expert witnesses brought forth by the Crown on behalf of CRA. In Abeilles, the taxpayer’s legal
counsel objection to the CRA expert was a critical turning point for the trial – see item [114]. One
example of a taxpayer’s failing to raise and press such objection to the court can be seen in item
[11] of Zeuter Development Corporation v. The Queen TCC 31-Oct-2006 wherein the court ruled
against the taxpayer and denied the appeal.
4.C SR&ED cases turn on a mix of "fact" (what happened) and "law" (the rules of the legislation and
court precedents). It is important to understand that the "law" is separate and distinct from
whatever policies or guidelines CRA publishes to guide it’s auditors. While CRA’s published
policies are generally well aligned with the law, there are sometimes significant differences
between the two. As noted by Justice Jorré in items [89-91], the court does not want the facts or
the law viewed through the lens of CRA policy. Abeilles is a good illustration of how taxpayer’s
can win tax court litigation of SR&ED matters by properly addressing both the facts and the law.
4. NUMBER 57 | DECEMBER 8, 2014 SCITAX BULLETIN | PAGE 4
4.D One of the key areas where CRA administrative policy seems to diverge from legislation and
jurisprudence is with respect to the difference between SR (scientific research), AR (applied
research) and ED (experimental development) each of which has its own definition in subsection
248(1) of the Income Tax Act; the primary difference between these three is that only SR and AP
make a requirement for the creation of scientific knowledge whereas the requirement for ED is
technological advancement. The CRA has recently modified the SR&ED claim form T661 such
that the same responses are required for SR, AP and ED; furthermore CRA auditors are writing
assessments citing lack of scientific knowledge creation as grounds for denying claims. In items
[163, 164] of Abeilles, Justice Jorré distinguishes that the requirement for ED (experimental
development) is "technological progress" versus the "advancement of knowledge" which was the
bar understood (and presumably applied) by the CRA auditor. See item [124].
4.E The taxpayer was able to satisfy the court on the "technological uncertainty" criteria by showing
that it had undertaken due diligence by means of searching the internet and consulting
knowledgeable persons within the orbit of its own organization. See items [155, 177].
4.F Taxpayers can recover costs (legal fees, payments to expert witnesses etc.) associated with the
litigation through the tax court process. However the extent of such recovery is determined by
various factors (including whether or not a settlement offer was made) which are beyond the
scope of this bulletin.
5. Conclusions
Many speculate that the Abeilles judgment will trigger a wholesale change in the scientific eligibility criteria
that the CRA and the courts use to assess SR&ED claims: It won’t. CRA seems thoroughly committed to
the new policy doctrine it released in December 2012 and there is not enough "new" content in Justice
Jorré's ruling to overturn the existing benchmark rulings (i.e. Jentel, CW Agencies) that have been
affirmed by the Federal Court of Appeal.
While Justice Jorré wrote (item [143]) that the five criteria for science eligibility that the FCA has affirmed
are "not absolute", he still referenced all of them in his judgement. He also (items [130, 157]) reconfirmed
the link between systematic investigation and scientific method. What he did do was provide additional
(and practical) clarity with respect to how those criteria of "law" map onto the facts of an SR&ED case. His
writings on what constitutes "technological uncertainty" (items [142, 177]) and "technological
advancement" (items [163, 164]) give a significantly broader and more clear interpretation of these criteria
than presently exists in either CRA administrative policies or previous jurisprudence.
Finally this case reinforces the value of expert witnesses in SR&ED cases and reminds taxpayers to press
for independence of any such witnesses brought forward by the CRA. It remains to be seen if in light of
this ruling, the CRA continues to deploy its own employees as experts in the tax court.
5. NUMBER 57 | DECEMBER 8, 2014 SCITAX BULLETIN | PAGE 5
LEARN MORE
Tax Court Canada judgment for Abeilles service de conditionnement inc. for tax year 2009: the French
language original and verbatim translation to English by Google Translate:
http://www.scitax.com/pdf/Dckt_2011-2054-IT-G_23-Oct-2014_Google_Translated.pdf
Tax Court Canada and Federal Court of Appeal judgments for Jentel Manufacturing Ltd. for tax year 2005:
TCC: http://www.scitax.com/pdf/Dckt_2008-3875-IT-G_11-Jun-2010.pdf
FCA: http://www.scitax.com/pdf/Dckt_A-222-10_14-Dec-2011.pdf
Tax Court Canada judgment for Zeuter Development Corporation (see item [11] re taxpayer’s failure to
object to CRA’s expert):
http://www.scitax.com/pdf/Dckt_2005-3306-IT-I_31-Oct-2006_WARNING_Informal_Procedure_No_Precedent.pdf
Article Tax Court Canada Jentel Short and Sweet Guidance on SR&ED Eligibility – Hearn / Tari /
Putterman in Canadian Tax Journal December 2011:
http://www.scitax.com/pdf/Jentel.Short.and.Sweet.Guidance.on.SR&ED.Eligibility.Canadian.Tax.Journal.Dec2011.pdf
CRA’s guidance document Eligibility of Work for SR&ED Investment Tax Credits Policy (current at date of
this publication):
http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/txcrdt/sred-rsde/clmng/lgbltywrkfrsrdnvstmnttxcrdts-eng.html
Definition of SR&ED per Subsection 248(1) of the Income Tax Act (current at date of this publication):
http://www.scitax.com/pdf/Definition.of.SR&ED.Sec_248_1.pdf