Demystifying Extraordinary Utilities
Unlock hidden value in your R&D Tax Credit claims by distinguishing between general overhead and the high-intensity energy costs of innovation.
The Core Concept
Understanding "Extraordinary Utilities" requires distinguishing between the cost of keeping the lights on and the cost of powering discovery. Toggle below to explore the legal definition and its financial significance.
In the context of the Research & Development (R&D) Tax Credit, "Extraordinary Utilities" refers to the specific consumption of electricity, water, gas, or other energy sources that is directly attributable to qualified research activities.
Under Treas. Reg. § 1.174-2, general overhead costs—such as lighting the hallway, heating the administrative offices, or powering the HR department's computers—are excluded from Qualified Research Expenses (QREs). However, when a "pilot model," prototype, or specialized testing equipment draws power significantly beyond standard operations, this excess is classified as "extraordinary" and becomes a claimable expense.
The importance of identifying Extraordinary Utilities lies in maximizing the credit value. Many companies default to claiming only wages and supplies, overlooking the massive energy costs associated with heavy industrial R&D.
For industries like manufacturing, chemical processing, or data centers, utility costs can rival supply costs. By segregating these expenses through a proper methodology, a company can add tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars to their QRE base.
- ✓ Increases total QRE base.
- ✓ Lowers effective tax rate.
- ✓ Justifies investment in high-efficiency R&D equipment.
- ✓ Requires substantiation, improving overall record-keeping.
Real-World Example
Adjust the sliders to see how a "Pilot Model" impacts utility classification.
Imagine a foundry testing a new alloy. The blast furnace (the "Pilot Model") runs for 30 days. Standard facility lights cost $1,000. The furnace costs significantly more.
*This amount can be added to your QREs. Note: General overhead (the remaining portion) is typically excluded.
Utility Consumption Breakdown
Visualization: General Overhead vs. Extraordinary R&D Usage
Determination Matrix
Not every kilowatt counts. Use this logic flow to understand how the IRS views utility expenses under Section 174.
General Overhead?
Are the utilities used for general building heating, A/C, lighting, or administrative functions?
Mixed Use?
Is the meter shared between R&D equipment and general facility use?
Extraordinary?
Is the utility used exclusively for a Pilot Model or R&D process (e.g., cryogenics, furnace)?
Path to Clarification & Compliance
1. Sub-Metering
Install sub-meters on specific high-energy R&D equipment. This provides indisputable data to the IRS regarding exact consumption.
2. Engineering Utility Study
If metering isn't feasible, hire an engineer to perform a load analysis. They can calculate usage based on equipment rating and hours of operation (Square Footage allocation is usually insufficient).
3. Maintain Usage Logs
Keep detailed logs of when the "Pilot Model" is running versus when the facility is in standard production mode.
Comprehensive Analysis of Extraordinary Utilities: Regulatory Compliance and Strategic Importance in U.S. R&D Tax Credit Law
I. Executive Summary: The Critical Exception in Qualified Research Expenses (QREs)
Extraordinary Utilities represent a critical, yet narrowly defined, exception within the framework of Qualified Research Expenses (QREs) under U.S. federal R&D tax credit law (Internal Revenue Code Section 41). Generally, utility costs are characterized by Treasury Regulation § 1.41-2(b)(2)(i) as expenditures for general and administrative (G&A) overhead, which are explicitly ineligible for the credit.1 This default categorization prevents the inclusion of costs associated with running a general facility, such as routine office climate control or standard building illumination, from counting toward the tax incentive. However, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) regulations provide a singular avenue for qualification: expenditures for “certain extraordinary utilities”.2 When a taxpayer can establish that the specialized nature (“special character”) of the qualified research activity (QRA) necessitated consumption far exceeding typical facility use, the additional, exceptional expense may be treated as a cost of “supplies used in the conduct of qualified research”.3 This classification is pivotal because it allows high-energy, capital-intensive research to incorporate essential operational costs into the credit calculation base.
The importance of this provision lies in its role as a necessary counterbalance for industries engaging in specialized, high-intensity development, such as advanced manufacturing, materials science, or high-performance computing. For example, amounts paid for standard laboratory lighting or routine climate control are non-qualified G&A costs. In stark contrast, the energy consumed specifically to operate high-energy equipment integral to the research—such as electricity powering high-output lasers, nuclear research apparatus, or powerful plasma etching tools—may be treated as a qualified supply expenditure to the extent the costs are extraordinary.3 Given the stringent requirement that the taxpayer must establish the “extraordinary nature” of the expense and the explicit rejection by the IRS of simple allocation methods (like square footage comparison) 5, compliance teams must develop meticulous documentation demonstrating the direct, extraordinary linkage between the utility consumption and the qualified research activity itself. This high burden of proof ensures that only truly essential, non-routine utility expenditures are allowed, making robust substantiation an absolute necessity for minimizing audit risk.
II. Statutory and Regulatory Foundation of Research and Development Tax Credits
A. Overview of IRC Section 41: Contextualizing the R&D Incentive
The Credit for Increasing Research Activities, codified in Internal Revenue Code (IRC) Section 41, is an incremental tax credit intended to incentivize businesses to perform research and development activities within the United States.6 This legislative effort aims to spur domestic R&D growth by providing a dollar-for-dollar offset against taxable income for qualifying businesses. The foundation of the credit calculation rests upon determining the total amount of Qualified Research Expenses (QREs) incurred during the taxable year.
The term QRE is defined by the code through three primary categories of expense: (1) taxable wages paid or incurred to employees for performing, supervising, or directly supporting qualified services 4; (2) the cost of supplies used or consumed in the conduct of qualified activities 4; and (3) a percentage (generally 65%) of amounts paid for contract research performed by external vendors on behalf of the taxpayer.4 Expenditures for Extraordinary Utilities fit exclusively within the second category, “Supplies,” representing a niche but critically important subset of eligible costs.
B. The Definition of “Supplies” and General Exclusions
The definition of “supplies” for R&D tax credit purposes encompasses any tangible property used or consumed in the performance of qualified research.7 This typically includes items such as raw materials, components used in the fabrication and testing of prototypes, and scrap material resulting from qualified research.6
However, the definition of supplies explicitly excludes certain types of expenditures. Specifically, supplies cannot include tangible property of a character subject to allowance for depreciation (i.e., capital assets), land, or improvements to land.7 Critically, supplies also exclude costs related to general administrative services.8 This general exclusion establishes the default treatment for most facility-related costs.
Default Rule for Utilities
The default rule governing utility expenses dictates that, absent a specific exception, these costs are treated as general and administrative overhead.1 Expenditures for utilities, such as electricity, gas, and water, used for the general operation of a facility—even a research facility—do not qualify as in-house research expenses under Treasury Regulation § 1.41-2(b)(1) and are therefore not includible in QREs.1 This rule reinforces the legislative intent that the credit should subsidize costs directly traceable to the specific research activity, not the general infrastructure supporting the business.
C. The Role of Extraordinary Utilities as a Regulatory Counterbalance
The creation of the Extraordinary Utilities exception serves as a necessary regulatory mechanism, particularly for capital-intensive R&D sectors. IRC § 41 generally disallows capital expenditures—the purchase cost of large, long-lived equipment—as QREs because these costs are recovered through depreciation.7
Highly specialized research, particularly in fields such as advanced manufacturing, aerospace, or semiconductor fabrication, often requires the use of extremely expensive, high-energy equipment (e.g., specialized testing chambers, electron microscopes, or massive environmental simulators). If the law were structured to exclude both the capital cost of this equipment and the massive energy cost required to operate it, the R&D credit would disproportionately favor labor-intensive R&D (where salaries constitute the bulk of QREs) over capital-intensive R&D.
By allowing the inclusion of utility costs that are “additional” and “extraordinary” due solely to the demands of the research 3, the provision effectively permits companies engaged in high-cost, specialized research to monetize the crucial operational energy cost associated with that unique equipment. This mechanism ensures that the R&D tax credit remains technologically neutral, providing an incentive structure that supports a diverse range of domestic innovation activities, regardless of whether the primary expense is labor or specialized energy consumption.
III. The Meaning and Importance of Extraordinary Utilities
A. Defining the “Extraordinary Utilities” Exception
The provision for Extraordinary Utilities is codified in Treasury Regulation § 1.41-2(b)(2)(ii), which dictates the precise conditions under which utility expenses may be included in the QRE base. This is the only exception to the general rule that utilities constitute non-qualifying G&A costs.2
The regulation requires the taxpayer to establish two critical components to justify the inclusion of the expense 3:
- The “Special Character” of the Qualified Research: The research itself must possess unique technical requirements that necessitate unusually high energy consumption. This means the consumption must be tied directly to the experimental or technological uncertainty being addressed, distinguishing it from routine production or standard testing processes.
- “Additional Extraordinary Expenditures”: The utility expenditure must be in excess of what would typically be incurred for general facility operation. It must be demonstrated that these additional costs were necessitated solely by the demands of the qualified research activity (QRA).
Only to the extent that the taxpayer can meet this burden of proof—demonstrating that the unique research demanded these high expenditures—are those costs treated as amounts paid or incurred for supplies used in the conduct of qualified research.3
B. Critical Importance for Capital-Intensive Sectors
For enterprises operating in high-tech manufacturing, pharmaceuticals, or advanced materials development, the cost of powering specialized research equipment can represent a substantial portion of total R&D investment. In industries requiring climate-controlled clean rooms, extensive server farms for high-performance computing (HPC), or power-hungry testing apparatus, utility costs tied to core research equipment can, in some cases, exceed the costs associated with research wages. Accurately identifying and claiming these costs as Extraordinary Utilities significantly increases the QRE base 6, thereby maximizing the value of the tax credit.
To delineate qualifying from non-qualifying expenses, the regulation provides a necessary contrast 3:
- Non-Qualified Costs: Amounts paid for general laboratory lighting and routine facility climate control are classified as G&A expenses and do not qualify.
- Qualified Costs (Example): Amounts paid for electricity used specifically in the operation of high-energy research equipment, such as that required for laser research or nuclear research, may qualify as expenditures for supplies used in the conduct of qualified research to the extent they are extraordinary.3
C. The Necessity of Temporal and Functional Segregation
The strict requirement that the expense must be “additional” and tied to the “special character” of the QRA imposes a profound requirement for detailed expense tracking beyond simple spatial allocation. In a real-world scenario, a taxpayer might operate a specialized testing facility that uses high-energy equipment for a qualified research experiment for a limited duration (e.g., 4 hours of high-temperature stress testing) and then uses the same laboratory space for routine, non-qualified activities (e.g., standard product assembly or non-experimental quality control) for the remainder of the day.
In this mixed-use environment, the utility expense is only deemed “extraordinary” during the time the qualified research activity is physically occurring and demanding the exceptional energy load. Therefore, simply allocating utility costs based on the square footage of the research facility fails to meet the regulatory standard because it averages the high-intensity research period with the low-intensity administrative or non-qualified periods.
Effective compliance necessitates tracking utility consumption not just spatially (by the building or room) but also functionally and temporally—by linking the consumption precisely to the specific QRA project and the verifiable execution time of the high-energy operation. This complexity compels the taxpayer to integrate precise cost accounting with engineering data, validating the period, duration, and purpose of the energy use to isolate the extraordinary portion.
IV. Substantiation and Audit Risk: Navigating the High Bar
A. IRS Audit Techniques Guide (ATG) Perspective on Review
Due to the exceptional nature of Extraordinary Utilities—existing as the sole deviation from the general utility G&A exclusion—the IRS subjects these claims to rigorous scrutiny during audit. The IRS Audit Techniques Guide (ATG) underscores that the examiner’s focus is not merely on the magnitude of the expense but fundamentally on the justification for claiming that the expense is “extraordinary” and necessitated by the unique demands of the research.5
For taxpayers, this means that simple financial ledgers and utility invoices are insufficient. The core of the substantiation defense must rest upon documentation that proves the underlying engineering and technical necessity. Furthermore, the ATG provides specific instructions for IRS personnel regarding disallowance: if an examiner denies a claim based on inadequate substantiation, the examiner’s methodology and a detailed analysis of why the taxpayer’s evidence was unreliable, insufficient, or misleading must be enumerated in detail.5 This provision emphasizes the necessity for taxpayers to present an exceptionally robust, detailed rationale upfront, as a vague or poorly documented claim invites a focused and technically supported disallowance.
B. The Insufficiency of Simple Allocation and the Need for Engineering Studies
A critical element of the substantiation requirement is the explicit regulatory rejection of generalized allocation methods. The IRS explicitly states that merely comparing the square footage electricity use in an administrative building with that of a research facility is insufficient to establish the extraordinary nature of the expenditure.5
The underlying deficiency in square footage comparison arises because utility consumption in high-tech R&D environments is rarely uniform; it is highly concentrated in specialized zones (e.g., high-density data centers, clean room equipment, or specialized reactors). Simple averaging via square footage fails to capture the true energy demands of these high-intensity areas and improperly mixes high-intensity research use with low-intensity common area use.
The rejection of this simplistic allocation method forces the taxpayer to meet a demanding Data Density Requirement. Since the regulatory standard demands proof of “additional extraordinary expenditures” 3, taxpayers must invest in specialized data collection infrastructure and analysis. The cause of this complexity is the strict regulatory standard; the effect is the mandatory investment in solutions such as sub-metering systems, collection of energy consumption data directly from specialized equipment nameplates, or commissioning detailed engineering analyses to establish the precise allocation of energy (e.g., kilowatt-hours) consumed directly by the qualified research apparatus, segregated from the general facility load. This level of technical proof is essential to isolate the qualifying utility costs.
C. Essential Documentation for Audit Defense
Successful substantiation of Extraordinary Utilities requires a convergence of financial, technical, and operational records. Financial documentation alone is inadequate; it must be paired with engineering documentation that validates the necessity of the consumption.9
Table I outlines the types of documentation critical for surviving an IRS audit relating to Extraordinary Utilities claims:
Table I: Critical Documentation for Extraordinary Utilities Substantiation
| Key Documentation Element | Type | Regulatory Purpose (Why it Matters) | Supporting Citation/Requirement |
| Engineering Narratives & Schematics | Technical/Process | Establishes the “special character” of the research and the technical necessity of the consumption, justifying the high energy demand. | Treas. Reg. § 1.41-2(b)(2)(ii) 3 |
| Dedicated Utility Invoices & General Ledgers | Financial/Accounting | Provides financial traceability, proving the expense was incurred and recorded consistently as a qualified supply cost. | General Documentation requirements 9 |
| Sub-Metering Records and Data Logs | Operational/Quantitative | Isolates the exact energy consumption of the research equipment, separating it definitively from general facility (G&A) use. | Counteracts the explicit inadequacy of square footage allocation 5 |
| Equipment Utilization Logs (Time/Purpose) | Operational/Temporal | Proves the temporal linkage of high-energy use directly to the documented Qualified Research Activities (QRAs), distinguishing qualified use from production use. | Requirement to establish “additional extraordinary expenditures” tied to qualified research time 3 |
| Allocation Methodology Papers | Legal/Tax | Documents the engineering or scientific basis used to apportion shared utility costs in a mixed-use facility, particularly where direct sub-metering is infeasible. | Required when mixed use occurs; informed by general allocation principles 10 |
V. Operational and Financial Compliance Linkages
A. Allocating Costs in Mixed-Use Facilities
Few corporations operate facilities that are dedicated exclusively to qualified research. More often, research occurs alongside administrative functions, production prototyping, and standard quality control. When utility services are delivered through shared lines, a significant challenge arises in accurately allocating the extraordinary portion of the expense. Since the IRS has rejected simple square-footage allocations 5, the taxpayer must develop and consistently apply a sound allocation methodology.
This methodology must be rooted in engineering principles that accurately measure or estimate the consumption directly attributable to the specific high-energy research equipment. For instance, if a large industrial chiller supports both R&D clean rooms and commercial production facilities, the allocation must be based on a defensible metric, such as the proportional cooling load demanded by the qualified research zones versus the commercial zones, or based on measured time logs of equipment use in QRA. While the specific utility allocation guidance is scant, the principle of rigorous, documented allocation is supported by parallel rules governing the allocation of funding in research contracts.10 A failure to demonstrate a scientifically justifiable and auditable allocation methodology will likely result in the disallowance of the entire claimed utility expense.
B. Interaction with IRC Section 280C and Capitalization
All QREs, including the qualified portion of Extraordinary Utilities, are subject to mandatory adjustments under IRC Section 280C. Section 280C(c) requires that if a taxpayer claims the R&D credit, the amount otherwise allowed as a deduction for those QREs must be reduced by an amount equal to the credit claimed.5 This provision prevents a double benefit—receiving both a credit and a full deduction for the same expense.
More recently, the landscape has been complicated by the mandatory capitalization of Specified Research or Experimental Expenditures (SREs) under Section 174 for tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2022. The interaction between the Section 280C reduction and the newly required capitalization of SREs has introduced significant compliance ambiguity. Revised IRC Section 280C(c) states that if the R&D credit exceeds the amount allowable as a deduction for QREs, the amount chargeable to a capital account (as SREEs under Section 174) shall be reduced by the amount of such excess.11 However, the revised statute has been criticized for failing to fully address the necessary adjustments to the capitalized basis under Section 174, leaving open questions regarding the calculation of amortization and the overall impact on the tax basis of the capitalized research expenditures.11 Compliance teams must carefully navigate these rules to ensure the utility costs are treated correctly as capitalized or amortized expenses after the Section 280C adjustment.
C. International Tax Implications
For multinational enterprises (MNEs), the decision to claim Extraordinary Utilities significantly impacts not only domestic tax liability but also the allocation and apportionment of global income under IRC Section 861 regulations.12 R&E expenditures, including QREs claimed for the credit, form the base that MNEs must allocate between domestic and foreign source income.
An increase in the domestic QRE base through the inclusion of Extraordinary Utilities increases the overall R&E expense pool subject to apportionment rules found in Treasury Regulation § 1.861-17.12 Under these rules, a portion of the domestic R&E expense is often required to be apportioned to foreign source income to calculate the Foreign Tax Credit (FTC) limitation.
Consequently, increasing the claim for Extraordinary Utilities, while maximizing the domestic R&D credit, simultaneously increases the amount of R&E expense allocated to foreign source income. This allocation reduces the taxpayer’s net foreign source taxable income. Since the FTC limitation is calculated based on net foreign source income, a substantial claim for Extraordinary Utilities can inadvertently reduce the MNE’s allowable foreign tax credit limit, potentially leading to stranded foreign tax credits. Therefore, the strategic decision to claim Extraordinary Utilities is not merely a domestic tax optimization but a global sourcing decision that requires complex modeling of its ripple effects on international tax compliance and effective tax rates.
VI. Recommendations for Regulatory Clarification and Future Guidance (Next Steps)
The current regulatory guidance on Extraordinary Utilities, rooted in legacy examples like “laser or nuclear research” 3, fails to adequately address the complexity and scale of modern research methodologies. To reduce taxpayer uncertainty, enhance compliance, and modernize the applicability of IRC § 41, the following regulatory clarifications are strongly recommended.
A. Addressing the Digital Economy: Cloud and HPC Utility Costs
Modern R&D is increasingly driven by computational power, utilizing massive high-performance computing (HPC) infrastructure, proprietary data centers, and advanced cloud processing. While the cost of leasing or renting computers, including payments to Cloud Service Providers (CSPs) for server space used in development, is explicitly recognized as a QRE 4, the energy cost required to run a taxpayer-owned dedicated R&D data center remains ambiguous under the traditional Extraordinary Utilities definition.3 The energy demands of training large machine learning models, running bioinformatics simulations, or performing computational fluid dynamics are highly concentrated and indispensable to the research.
The IRS/Treasury Department should issue definitive guidance confirming that the utility consumption required for proprietary, high-density data processing infrastructure used exclusively for qualified research activities (e.g., dedicated server racks or experimental cooling systems) qualifies as an Extraordinary Utility supply. This action would align the regulation with contemporary R&D practice, preventing the unintended exclusion of core costs in the digital research economy.
B. Need for Definitive Quantitative Metrics to Define “Extraordinary”
The current reliance on establishing the expense based on the “special character” of the research and proving it is “additional” and “extraordinary” remains qualitative and highly subjective, leading to inconsistent application and high audit risk.5
To move beyond this subjectivity, the IRS should establish quantifiable benchmarks for what constitutes “extraordinary” utility consumption. A recommended solution is the definition of criteria for a rebuttable presumption of “extraordinary” based on measurable consumption metrics. For instance, the guidance could define a threshold based on energy usage intensity (e.g., Kilowatt-hours per unit volume or area) that exceeds a specified percentage (e.g., 150% to 200%) of documented standard commercial or industrial usage for similar building types. Establishing such quantitative safe harbor rules would provide certainty to taxpayers and shift the focus of audits from subjective interpretations of technical necessity to objective, measurable consumption data.
C. Establishing Standardized, Acceptable Allocation Methodologies
Current guidance primarily operates in the negative, explicitly rejecting simple allocation methods like square footage comparison.5 This leaves taxpayers without a clear roadmap for allocating costs in the prevalent mixed-use facility scenario. The lack of defined acceptable methods creates unnecessary audit controversy regarding the sufficiency of the taxpayer’s chosen methodology.
The IRS should formalize acceptable allocation methodologies in a Revenue Procedure. This procedure should detail a tiered system of acceptable methods in order of regulatory preference and robustness: (1) Direct Sub-metering, which offers the highest level of accuracy; (2) Engineering Load Calculations based on verifiable equipment nameplate power ratings combined with verifiable utilization logs of QRA activity; and (3) Time-Based Allocation, linked directly to precise QRA execution schedules when direct measurement is impractical. Formalizing these tiered methods would significantly lower compliance costs by providing clear, auditable rules of engagement and minimizing disallowance based solely on the methodology employed.
Table II summarizes these proposed regulatory next steps:
Table II: Recommendations for Regulatory Clarification and Next Steps
| Area Requiring Guidance | Current Ambiguity/Risk | Proposed IRS/Treasury Action | Chain-of-Thought Justification |
| Defining “Extraordinary” | Reliance on “special character” is qualitative, leading to subjective audit findings and uncertainty. | Establish quantitative safe harbor thresholds based on verifiable energy usage intensity (KWh per unit area) relative to industry standards. | Provides objective metrics for compliance, reducing audit disputes and increasing taxpayer certainty. |
| Allocation Methods for Mixed Use | Current guidance rejects simple methods 5 but fails to provide concrete, approved alternatives. | Issue a Revenue Procedure detailing acceptable tiered allocation methodologies (e.g., Sub-metering, Engineering Estimates, Time Logs). | Lowers compliance costs and increases the likelihood of proper apportionment by offering clear, regulatory-approved processes. |
| Modern Computing Utility Costs | Energy for proprietary R&D data centers and HPC is massive, but unclear if it fits the legacy “laser or nuclear research” supply definition.3 | Clarify inclusion parameters for high-intensity computing energy costs, linking them explicitly to either the Supply or Computer Rental QRE category.4 | Ensures the R&D credit remains a relevant and effective incentive for digital, computational, and AI-focused research activities. |
VII. Conclusion
Extraordinary Utilities function as a vital, yet legally precarious, exception to the general rule that utility expenses constitute non-qualifying General and Administrative overhead. Codified in Treasury Regulation § 1.41-2(b)(2)(ii), this category permits the inclusion of utility costs only where the taxpayer can establish that the “special character” of the qualified research demanded “additional extraordinary expenditures.” This strict standard is critical for capital-intensive industries, providing a necessary counterbalance to the exclusion of depreciable research equipment from QREs.
Compliance in this area necessitates a profound commitment to granular, functionally-based substantiation, moving far beyond generalized allocation methods. The IRS explicitly rejects basic metrics like square footage comparison, compelling taxpayers to utilize engineering analysis, sub-metering, and meticulous time logs to isolate the exact consumption directly attributable to the QRA. The financial implications extend globally, as increased claims for Extraordinary Utilities raise the R&E apportionment base, potentially impacting Foreign Tax Credit limitations for MNEs.
To address the growing technical complexity of modern R&D and reduce systemic audit risks, the Treasury Department and the IRS must urgently issue clarifying guidance. This includes establishing quantitative metrics for the definition of “extraordinary,” formalizing acceptable allocation methodologies, and specifically addressing the inclusion of high-intensity computing and data center energy costs within the supply expense category. Successful management of Extraordinary Utilities demands that tax professionals integrate advanced engineering data and operational records with strict adherence to the regulatory requirements, ensuring that every claimed expenditure is meticulously justified and traceable.
Are you eligible?
Why choose us?
Pass an Audit?
What is the R&D Tax Credit?
The Research & Experimentation Tax Credit (or R&D Tax Credit), is a general business tax credit under Internal Revenue Code section 41 for companies that incur research and development (R&D) costs in the United States. The credits are a tax incentive for performing qualified research in the United States, resulting in a credit to a tax return. For the first three years of R&D claims, 6% of the total qualified research expenses (QRE) form the gross credit. In the 4th year of claims and beyond, a base amount is calculated, and an adjusted expense line is multiplied times 14%. Click here to learn more.
Never miss a deadline again
Stay up to date on IRS processes
Discover R&D in your industry
R&D Tax Credit Preparation Services
Swanson Reed is one of the only companies in the United States to exclusively focus on R&D tax credit preparation. Swanson Reed provides state and federal R&D tax credit preparation and audit services to all 50 states.
If you have any questions or need further assistance, please call or email our CEO, Damian Smyth on (800) 986-4725.
Feel free to book a quick teleconference with one of our national R&D tax credit specialists at a time that is convenient for you.
R&D Tax Credit Audit Advisory Services
creditARMOR is a sophisticated R&D tax credit insurance and AI-driven risk management platform. It mitigates audit exposure by covering defense expenses, including CPA, tax attorney, and specialist consultant fees—delivering robust, compliant support for R&D credit claims. Click here for more information about R&D tax credit management and implementation.
Our Fees
Swanson Reed offers R&D tax credit preparation and audit services at our hourly rates of between $195 – $395 per hour. We are also able offer fixed fees and success fees in special circumstances. Learn more at https://www.swansonreed.com/about-us/research-tax-credit-consulting/our-fees/
Choose your state
