Recent court cases that may impact your r&d methodology

FedEx Corporation v. United States, No. 08-2423 (2009)

• Internal-use software can be qualified

• See more details here

Union Carbide v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo (2009)

• Process-related r&d is qualified

• See more details here

Trinity Industries, Inc. v U.S., U.S. District Court, N.D. Texas, 2010-1 U.S.T.C. 50,219 (2010)

• One-off’s can be qualified

• See more details here

TG Missouri Corporation v Commissioner 133 T.C. No 13, (2009)

• Tooling can be qualified

• See more details here

U.S. v Arthur R McFerrin; Dorothy F McFerrin, No. 08-20377 (2009)

• Include “trial and error”

• Direct supervision of r&d activity qualified

• See more details here

Shami v Commissioner (T.C. Memo 2012-78)

• Executives may be included (and Cohan rule used) if they play role in r&d

• See more details here

Bayer Corp. v. United States (No. 2:09-cv-00351) 2012

• Limits use of sampling for identification of qualified business components

• See more details here

Suder v. IRS – T.C. Memo 2014-201 (2014)

• Senior mgt may be included

• Wage allocations may be estimated by knowledgeable & credible persons (reinforced Cohan rule)

• See more details here

#courtcases