Recent court cases that may impact your r&d methodology
- jwilmot17
- Dec 2, 2014
- 1 min read
FedEx Corporation v. United States, No. 08-2423 (2009)
Internal-use software can be qualified
Union Carbide v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo (2009)
Process-related r&d is qualified
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
TG Missouri Corporation v Commissioner 133 T.C. No 13, (2009)
Tooling can be qualified
U.S. v Arthur R McFerrin; Dorothy F McFerrin, No. 08-20377 (2009)
Include “trial and error”
Direct supervision of r&d activity qualified
Shami v Commissioner (T.C. Memo 2012-78)
Executives may be included (and Cohan rule used) if they play role in r&d
Bayer Corp. v. United States (No. 2:09-cv-00351) 2012
Limits use of sampling for identification of qualified business components
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)
Recent Posts
See AllCongress enhanced the r&d tax credit opportunity for taxpayers with the passage of the Protecting Americans from Tax Hikes (PATH) Act of...
The House voted on May 20th to permanently restore the research and development tax credit. The House passed a similar bill in May 2014,...
The research and development tax credit officially expired at the end of 2013. The Tax Increase Prevention Action of 2014 (TIPA) was...