Navigating the Research Frontier: The IRC $\S 41(d)$ Four-Part Test and Its Exhaustive Application to the Illinois R&D Tax Credit (Credit Code 5340)

Qualified Research (QR) is defined by the federal IRC $\S 41(d)$ Four-Part Test, which requires activities to be technologically based, aimed at resolving uncertainty through a systematic process of experimentation, and intended to create a new or improved business component.1 Illinois closely adheres to this federal standard (35 ILCS 5/201(k)), offering a 6.5% nonrefundable credit on incremental qualified research expenses (QREs) conducted exclusively within the state.3

The Illinois Research and Development (R&D) Tax Credit is a critical economic mechanism designed to foster in-state technological innovation, aligning closely with the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) Section 41 for increasing research activities.4 Leveraging this state incentive necessitates a deep technical understanding of the federal qualification standard, coupled with rigorous adherence to Illinois-specific statutory and administrative requirements, particularly concerning geographic sourcing and calculation methodology. This report provides a detailed, expert-level analysis of the IRC $\S 41(d)$ definition of Qualified Research and its specific implementation and guidance from the Illinois Department of Revenue (IDOR).

Section I: The Foundational Requirement—Decoding Qualified Research (IRC $\S 41(d)$)

The foundational eligibility for the Illinois R&D credit rests entirely on the federal definition of “Qualified Research,” articulated by the four-part test under IRC $\S 41(\mathrm{~d})$ and elaborated in Treasury Regulation 26 CFR $\S 1.41-4$.5 To qualify, research activities must meet all these requirements and must not be otherwise excluded under $\S 41(\mathrm{~d})(3)$ or $\S 41(\mathrm{~d})(4)$.5

I.A. The Two Preliminary Screens: IRC $\S 174$ and Business Component

The qualifying research activity must first pass two primary statutory screens before the core technological tests are applied, ensuring the activity is genuinely experimental and commercially targeted.

1. The Section 174 Requirement (Cost Deductibility)

The initial prerequisite dictates that the expenditures associated with the research activities must be expenses that could be treated as deductible under IRC $\S 174$.2 This confirms that the activities possess the essential characteristic of being research or experimental in nature. The intent behind this requirement is to distinguish true R&D—activities aimed at generating information that eliminates a technical uncertainty—from routine commercial activities, such as quality control, marketing, or general administrative functions. Expenditures that fail the Section 174 test are immediately disqualified from being considered Qualified Research Expenses (QREs).

2. The Business Component Test (Qualified Purpose)

The research activities must be undertaken for the development or improvement of a specific “business component” of the taxpayer.1 A business component can be defined broadly as any product, process, invention, technique, formula, or piece of computer software.1 Critically, the improvement sought must relate to the function, performance, reliability, or quality of that component.1 This links the technical research effort directly to a tangible, useful commercial outcome, whether the component is ultimately held for sale, lease, license, or simply for the taxpayer’s internal use.1

I.B. Deconstructing the Core Three-Part Technological Test

Once an activity satisfies the $\S 174$ and Business Component screens, it must meet the three core technological requirements that define true Qualified Research. These three criteria are often combined with the $\S 174$ requirement to form the complete “Four-Part Test”.2

1. Requirement 1: Elimination of Uncertainty (Technical Challenge Identification)

Research activities must be undertaken specifically for the purpose of discovering information intended to eliminate uncertainty.5 This means the taxpayer must clearly identify a technical unknown—a challenge regarding the capability, the appropriate methodology, or the optimal design of the new or improved business component.5 Uncertainty is legally defined as existing if the information available to the taxpayer at the start of the project does not establish one of these three elements: the capability to develop or improve the component, the method for doing so, or the appropriate design.5 Research focused purely on cost reduction or aesthetic changes, without resolving a technical unknown, will fail this crucial test.

2. Requirement 2: Technological in Nature (Application of Hard Sciences)

The information sought for discovery must be “technological in nature”.5 This refers to research rooted in the principles of physical science, engineering, or computer science. The activity must involve the application of these fundamental scientific disciplines to address the identified uncertainty.6

A critical clarification in the regulatory text significantly broadens the credit’s applicability: the determination that research is undertaken for the purpose of discovering information that is technological in nature does not require the taxpayer to seek knowledge that exceeds, expands, or refines the common knowledge of skilled professionals in that specific field.5 The implication of this rule is profound. The R&D credit is not reserved solely for fundamental scientific breakthrough research. Instead, the focus shifts to the resolution of the taxpayer’s internal technical uncertainty. Consequently, companies concentrating on applied research—such as optimizing an existing product design, integrating novel components, or improving manufacturing processes through technical means—are fully eligible, provided they can rigorously document the internal uncertainty they resolved.

3. Requirement 3: Process of Experimentation (Systematic Methodology)

Substantially all of the activities constituting the research must be elements of a “process of experimentation” related to the qualified purpose.5 This requires a systematic methodology, ensuring that the research is not haphazard but follows a disciplined scientific approach.6

The process of experimentation involves:

1. Identifying the technical uncertainties.
2. Developing hypotheses designed to overcome those uncertainties.
3. Conducting systematic trials, modeling, simulations, or trial-and-error tests to validate or disprove the hypotheses.
4. Analyzing the results to refine or redesign the approach.2

Because the “technological in nature” criterion is relatively broad, the IRS—and, by extension, the IDOR—places significant emphasis during audits on the veracity and documentation of this systematic process. Auditors will meticulously target test reports, detailed technical notes, and design iteration records to verify that the R&D was systematic, iterative, and directly aimed at resolving the specific, identified technical uncertainty, rather than being mere routine engineering, debugging, or standard manufacturing setup.

Section II: Illinois Adoption and Legislative Conformity (35 ILCS 5/201(k))

The Illinois R&D tax credit is codified in the Illinois Income Tax Act (IITA) Section 201(k).3 While the state credit’s technical qualification standards align almost entirely with the federal framework, the statute introduces crucial geographic and mechanical constraints.

II.A. Statutory Mandate and Full Federal Conformity

The Illinois statute mandates near-total adherence to the federal qualification standards. A nonrefundable credit may be claimed against Illinois corporate income tax liability for expenditures qualifying under IRC $\S 41$.3 The administrative code further clarifies this alignment, stating that “Qualified research is defined in IRC section 41(d)”.7 Furthermore, “Qualifying expenditures” are defined as those which would be allowable under IRC $\S 41$ for increasing research activities.7 This means that if an activity fails any part of the federal Four-Part Test, it is immediately disqualified from the Illinois credit.

II.B. The Essential “Research in Illinois” Criterion

The primary distinguishing factor for the state credit is the requirement for strict geographical sourcing. Qualifying expenses must be “attributable to research in Illinois“.1

This locational requirement has profound compliance implications for multi-state or remote-work businesses. The Illinois statute explicitly excludes research conducted outside of Illinois.3 For combined groups or large corporations operating across state lines, this mandates meticulous, granular tracking of employee time, supplier receipts, and contract research locations. Expenses related to activities that qualify under IRC $\S 41$ but occur outside of Illinois must be isolated and excluded from the state credit calculation.4

A significant compliance challenge arises for unitary groups, which are permitted to file consolidated claims.4 While the consolidated filing structure simplifies reporting, the underlying expense sourcing requires robust geographical tracking at the employee level. Tax directors must enforce stringent internal systems, such as daily location tracking within time logs, to accurately allocate wages and contract payments geographically. This proactive measure is necessary to prevent auditors from challenging the claims based on a lack of concrete proof that the activities were conducted within Illinois borders.

II.C. Illinois Incentive Mechanics and Stability

The Illinois R&D tax credit provides substantial stability and clear economic benefits through its mechanics and legislative duration.

Credit Rate and Calculation

The credit is equivalent to 6.5% of qualifying incremental expenditures.3 Qualifying expenditures for increasing research activities are defined as the excess of qualifying expenses incurred for the current tax year over qualifying expenses incurred for the base period.1

Nonrefundable Status and Carryforward

The credit is nonrefundable, meaning it can only offset the taxpayer’s liability for the Illinois income tax (IITA Section 201(a) and (b)).3 It cannot result in a cash refund. However, any unused credit amounts may be carried forward for a maximum of five years.4 This carryforward provision grants taxpayers flexibility, especially for large, capital-intensive R&D projects that may not immediately generate sufficient taxable income to utilize the full credit.

Sunset Provision and Legislative Certainty

The longevity of the incentive is a critical factor for capital planning. The credit was recently extended by Public Act 103-0595, ensuring it is available for tax years ending on or after December 31, 2004, and extending through tax years ending prior to January 1, 2032.1

This extension through 2031 positions Illinois competitively, assuring businesses that the state subsidy will persist for the typical development lifecycle of most long-cycle R&D projects. A defined expiration date seven or more years in the future mitigates the legislative and regulatory risk associated with project longevity, allowing entities, particularly those in high-volume sectors like pharmaceuticals, manufacturing, and technology, to budget multi-year R&D investments in Illinois with high confidence.4

Section III: IDOR Calculation and Administrative Guidance

The Illinois R&D tax credit employs the Alternative Simplified Method (ASM), a common framework used to determine the incremental increase in research activities.6 Successful compliance requires adherence to specific IDOR guidance regarding both expense types and base period calculation.

III.A. Qualifying Research Expenses (QREs) Attributable to Illinois

Qualifying expenses for the Illinois credit must meet the federal definition under IRC $\S 41(b)$ and must be sourced to research activities conducted entirely within Illinois.4

III.B. The Alternative Simplified Method (ASM) Calculation

The credit calculation is structured to incentivize increased R&D spending over historical levels.

The calculation follows the formula prescribed in 35 ILCS 5/201(k):

$$\text{Credit} = 6.5\% \times (\text{Current Year Illinois QREs} – \text{Base Amount})$$

The Base Amount is determined by averaging the Illinois-sourced QREs incurred during the three taxable years immediately preceding the current taxable year.4

III.C. IDOR Administrative Rules for Base Period Determination

IDOR Administrative Code 86 Ill. Adm. Code 100.2160 provides essential clarity on establishing the base amount, particularly when a company’s history in Illinois is complex or limited:

1. Zero-QRE Years: If the taxpayer incurred no qualifying expenditures during a base period year, the qualifying expenditures for that year must be recorded as zero, regardless of whether the taxpayer was in existence or conducting any business in the state during that year.10
2. Partial-Year Activity: If the taxpayer was conducting business in Illinois for only part of a base period year, the qualifying expenditures must be adjusted through annualization. The QREs actually incurred must be multiplied by 365 and then divided by the number of days the taxpayer was doing business in Illinois during that portion of the year.10
3. Inclusion of Prior Ineligible Years: A key rule dictates that QREs incurred in taxable years where the taxpayer did not qualify for the credit (or during the gap period prior to the credit being available) must still be included in the computation of qualifying expenditures for the base period.10

The explicit IDOR rule that a zero QRE year is counted as zero in the base calculation presents a powerful strategic advantage for new businesses or those initiating R&D operations in Illinois. Since the ASM is designed to reward incremental investment, minimizing the historical base maximizes the current credit. For instance, if a company initiates R&D in Year 4, their base amount calculation (based on Years 1, 2, and 3) will incorporate the zero expenditures from the non-existent or inactive years, dramatically lowering the average. This approach effectively allows the credit to be claimed on a greater portion of the full QREs incurred in the current year, providing a significant state policy incentive to attract new R&D investment to Illinois.4

Section IV: Statutory Exclusions and High-Risk Activities

Not all research activities qualify for the credit, even if they appear innovative. IRC $\S 41(\mathrm{~d})(4)$ explicitly excludes certain activities, and these exclusions are fully adopted and enforced by the IDOR.3

IV.A. Standard Federal Exclusions Adopted by Illinois

The following research activities are legally barred from constituting Qualified Research:

• Research after Commercial Production: Activities related to a business component once commercial production has commenced.3
• Adaptation and Duplication: Activities aimed at adapting an existing product or process solely to meet a particular customer’s requirement, or efforts undertaken merely to duplicate an existing business component.3
• Efficiency and Marketing: Research conducted via surveys, management studies, or market research.3
• Funded Research: Research to the extent funded by a government entity or another person, provided the taxpayer does not retain financial risk or all substantial rights to the research results.3
• Non-Scientific Research: Research in the social sciences, arts, or humanities.3
• Out-of-State Research: As noted, research conducted outside of Illinois.3

A critical compliance consideration arises regarding the funded research exclusion. Taxpayers involved in federal contracts or collaborative private research must structure their agreements to retain sufficient ownership rights to the research product and bear financial risk. This meticulous legal structuring is necessary to ensure the activity is not deemed “funded,” thereby preserving the eligibility for the Illinois state credit.

IV.B. IDOR Scrutiny of Internal Use Software (IUS)

The development of computer software is heavily scrutinized, particularly software developed primarily for the taxpayer’s own internal use.11 Although Illinois adopts the federal exclusion for certain internal-use software 3, the bar for qualification is set exceptionally high.

Internal Use Software (IUS) must satisfy a rigorous three-part high threshold test in addition to the standard Four-Part Test. The IUS must be:

1. Innovative: The software must result in a reduction in cost, increase in speed, or other measurable improvement that is substantial and economically significant.
2. Significant Economic Risk: The taxpayer must commit significant resources to the development, and there must be substantial uncertainty that the development will result in a functional product.
3. Not Commercially Available: The software must not be available for purchase, lease, or license from a third party.

IDOR examiners benefit from federal guidelines, which provide a risk-ranking for software activities.11 Auditors generally classify routine maintenance, data collection tasks, or configuring commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) software as high risk activities likely to fail qualification. Conversely, developing novel algorithms or custom middleware to integrate disparate, complex systems often constitutes low-risk qualified research.

Furthermore, the evolving business landscape introduces unique boundary issues, especially concerning Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) providers. IDOR guidance addressing the taxability of SaaS components 12 suggests that the Department is attuned to the complex nature of these offerings. There is a corresponding risk that R&D claims related to service-enabling components could be challenged, with auditors attempting to classify them as IUS if they are not definitively held for commercial sale, lease, or license. Taxpayers must proactively document the specific intended commercialization model and the technical function of the software development to defend its non-IUS classification.

Section V: Practical Application and Compliance Example

Compliance requires translating the abstract legal definitions of the Four-Part Test into defensible, documented business actions. The following example demonstrates the application of the tests and the subsequent incremental credit calculation.

V.A. Case Study: Applying the Four-Part Test to Process Improvement

Consider Nut & Co., an Illinois-based manufacturer seeking to improve its pecan processing operation.13 The company aims to design and develop a revolutionary aspirator system (a mechanism using fluid dynamics) to remove meat from pecan shells, targeting a 15% increase in usable meat yield compared to current commercial equipment due to reduced breakage.13

Table 1: Application of the Four-Part Test to Nut & Co.’s R&D Activity

V.B. Numerical Example: Calculating the Incremental Illinois Credit

The Illinois credit calculation utilizes the Alternative Simplified Method (ASM), based on the average QREs from the three preceding tax years.4

Assumption: Tax Year (TY) 2024 is the current claim year. All QREs are 100% sourced to qualified activities performed within Illinois.

Table 2: Illinois R&D Credit Calculation (Alternative Simplified Method)

Calculation Steps for TY 2024:

1. Base Period QREs Sum: $\$800,000 + \$1,100,000 + \$1,200,000 = \$3,100,000$
2. Base Amount (3-Year Average): $\$3,100,000 / 3 = \$1,033,333$
3. Incremental QREs: $\$1,500,000 – \$1,033,333 = \$466,667$
4. Illinois R&D Tax Credit: $6.5\% \times \$466,667 = \textbf{\$30,333}$

This calculation demonstrates the incremental nature of the credit.4 Had this taxpayer been a startup with zero QREs in 2021 and 2022 (per the IDOR zero-QRE rule 10), the Base Amount would be calculated as $(\$0 + \$0 + \$1,200,000) / 3 = \$400,000$. In that case, the credit would be $6.5\% \times (\$1,500,000 – \$400,000) = \$71,500$, illustrating how the zero-base application substantially rewards new R&D investment within the state.4

Section VI: Documentation, Audit Defense, and IDOR Dispute Process

Given the complexity of the Four-Part Test and the specific state sourcing requirements, robust, contemporaneous documentation is the cornerstone of a successful R&D tax credit claim.14

VI.A. Establishing Contemporaneous Documentation Standards

Documentation must effectively link the financial expenditures to the technical activities that pass the four-part test.

Financial Linkage and Cost Centers

Taxpayers must establish specialized cost centers to accurately capture the basis of the Illinois credit.3 These financial systems must link general ledger entries directly to qualified R&D projects. Given that wages are typically the largest QRE category, and IDOR explicitly flags poor wage documentation as a compliance risk 3, the need for precise tracking is paramount.

Time-Tracking Rigor

Employees performing, supervising, or directly supporting qualified research must maintain detailed time logs. These logs must specify the project, the activity performed, and the time spent, differentiating between routine engineering tasks and direct R&D activities (e.g., time spent compiling data directly associated with R&D vs. time spent on routine production monitoring).3 This time tracking must be captured contemporaneously—at or near the time the activities occurred—to maintain credibility during an audit.14

Technical Evidence

Documentation must substantively support the technical narrative of uncertainty and experimentation. This includes:

• Detailed project plans defining the initial goals and scope.
• Technical narratives defining the specific capability, methodology, or design uncertainties being addressed.
• Hypothesis development logs.
• Detailed test result spreadsheets, failure analysis reports, and design iteration documentation.14

VI.B. Navigating the IDOR Audit and Appeals Process

Taxpayers must prepare for the possibility of an audit by IDOR’s Audit Bureau.15 Because the nonrefundable credit can be carried forward for five years 4, the statutory period for retaining documentation is significantly extended. Prudence dictates maintaining detailed records for at least the full five-year carryforward period plus the standard statute of limitations (typically three to four years), meaning documentation should be preserved for eight to ten years post-filing date. This extended retention is necessary because a successful challenge to QREs in an early year can result in consequential adjustments to carried-forward credits used in later years, leading to a much larger overall adjustment.

IDOR Dispute Options

If a taxpayer receives a notice from IDOR indicating a proposed deficiency, assessment, or claim denial (such as the R&D credit), several formal dispute options are available 16:

1. Informal Conference Board (ICB) or Fast Track Resolution (FTR): These options allow for review and resolution by IDOR prior to the formal issuance of an assessment or claim denial.
2. Formal Protest (Administrative Hearing or Tax Tribunal): If the taxpayer receives a Notice of Deficiency (NOD) or Notice of Claim Denial, they generally have 60 days to file a formal protest.16

• The Independent Tax Tribunal is available if the amount of tax liability (excluding penalty and interest) exceeds $15,000, or if total penalties and interest exceed $15,000.16
• Crucial Rule for Claim Denials: If the taxpayer is disputing a claim denial (which is how the R&D credit disallowance is often framed), the administrative hearing or Tax Tribunal is the only option available. The taxpayer cannot waive this administrative process and go directly to circuit court.16

In audit defense, experienced professionals understand that auditors often pivot their strategy from challenging the existence of technological uncertainty to proving that one of the statutory exclusions applies (e.g., adaptation, funded research, or internal-use software). Therefore, compliance documentation must not only establish the Four-Part Test but must also proactively document why the activity is not subject to an exclusion, such as demonstrating the commercial intent of software or the retention of financial risk in a contract.

Conclusion

The Illinois R&D Tax Credit, codified under 35 ILCS 5/201(k) and extended through 2031, represents a substantial 6.5% nonrefundable incentive for corporations and pass-through entities investing in technological innovation within the state.

The core regulatory burden lies in the full adoption of the IRC $\S 41(\mathrm{~d})$ Four-Part Test, requiring activities to systematically resolve technological uncertainty in the development of a business component. The analysis confirms that successful claim defense rests on two critical, intersecting pillars of compliance:

1. Technical Qualification: Demonstrated through clear documentation that the activities satisfied the four tests, particularly the Process of Experimentation, which verifies the systematic nature of the research. The low regulatory threshold for “discovering information” ensures that applied R&D (e.g., process improvements in engineering and manufacturing) qualifies alongside fundamental research.
2. Illinois-Specific Compliance: Strict adherence to the state’s geographic sourcing requirement mandates that 100% of claimed QREs must originate from activities conducted in Illinois. Furthermore, utilizing the Alternative Simplified Method (ASM) requires taxpayers to apply IDOR’s specific administrative rules for base period calculation, a provision that strategically favors new R&D entrants by counting non-existent prior-year activities as a zero base.

For tax practitioners and business leaders, the immediate priority must be the implementation of robust, contemporaneous time-tracking systems and cost centers to defend wage allocations, which IDOR identifies as a high-risk compliance area. Proactive documentation of technical processes and legal structuring of contracts to avoid statutory exclusions are necessary safeguards to maximize the economic benefit of this enduring Illinois incentive.

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/