Navigating the Iowa Research Activities Credit: Deep Dive into the “New or Improved Business Component” Test

Executive Summary

The “New or Improved Business Component” (BC) defines the necessary subject matter of qualified research activities (QRA) under the Iowa Research Activities Tax Credit (RAC). A BC refers to any product, process, computer software, technique, formula, or invention that a taxpayer intends to sell, lease, license, or use in their trade or business.1

For research to qualify for the Iowa credit, the development or improvement of this BC must satisfy the “Permitted Purpose” test, which requires the activity to be aimed at enhancing the functionality, performance, reliability, or quality of the component.3

Section 1: The Research Activities Credit (RAC) and the Federal Foundation

The Iowa Research Activities Tax Credit (RAC) is codified primarily under Iowa Code § 15.335 and serves as a significant economic incentive for innovation within the state. Although it is administered locally, its entire technical foundation rests upon the federal research credit defined in Internal Revenue Code (IRC) Section 41.5

1.1 Statutory Basis: Alignment with IRC Section 41

Iowa tax law incorporates the federal definitions for crucial components of the credit calculation, including “qualified research expense” (QRE), “base amount,” and “basic research payment”.6 This structural alignment ensures that concepts such as technological nature, experimentation, and uncertainty—which underlie the BC test—are initially interpreted based on federal regulations and case law.5

This reliance on the federal framework imposes a fundamental operational constraint on Iowa taxpayers. To be eligible for the Iowa RAC, a business must first successfully claim and be allowed a Federal Research Credit under IRC § 41 for the same taxable year.7 Failure to substantiate the federal claim automatically nullifies the entire corresponding state claim, creating a dual compliance burden. Beyond federal compliance, the QREs must specifically be incurred within Iowa and originate from a business unit engaged in an eligible industry, further localizing the requirements.4

1.2 The Contextual Framework: Iowa’s Four-Part Test

The determination of whether an activity qualifies as QRA in Iowa hinges on satisfying the same four sequential tests defined under federal law, one of which is the focus on the BC. All four criteria must be met concurrently for expenditures related to a specific BC to be eligible 4:

1. Technological in Nature: The activities must rely fundamentally on the principles of physical or biological science, engineering, or computer science.
2. Permitted Purpose (The BC Test): This test requires the activity to be intended for the development or improvement of a new or existing business component concerning its function, performance, reliability, or quality.
3. Elimination of Uncertainty: The research must be aimed at eliminating technical uncertainty about the capability, methodology, or appropriate design of the BC.
4. Process of Experimentation: The activities must constitute elements of a rigorous, systematic process designed to resolve the identified technical uncertainty.

Section 2: Technical Analysis of the Business Component Test

The BC test is essential because it distinguishes qualifying innovative research from routine business activities. It ensures that the expenditures claimed are specifically directed toward developing technological improvements that either serve the taxpayer’s core business or are marketable to customers.

2.1 The Definition and Scope of a “Business Component”

The statutory definition of a business component is expansive, covering both physical and intellectual property: “any product, process, computer software, technique, formula, or invention”.1 This breadth means that almost any asset developed or improved by the company—whether tangible or intangible—has the potential to qualify, provided the underlying research meets the four-part test.

The components fall into two broad categories based on their intended use:

• External Components: These are tangible products (e.g., machinery, physical goods) or intangible assets (e.g., computer software, formulas) developed primarily for sale, lease, or license to outside customers.2
• Internal Components: These include processes, techniques, or inventions developed for use internally by the taxpayer in their own trade or business, such as proprietary production processes, quality control systems, or specialized manufacturing techniques.1

For eligible industries in Iowa, particularly manufacturers, the inclusion of “process” as a defined BC type creates a significant opportunity. Activities directed at refining, optimizing, or redesigning internal manufacturing processes to achieve higher throughput or lower defect rates can qualify, provided they meet the requisite technological and experimentation criteria. This emphasis on internal efficiency, often overlooked by taxpayers focused purely on external products, forms a legitimate basis for claiming the credit.

2.2 Interpretation of “New or Improved” and “Permitted Purpose”

The research activity must be undertaken with the goal of creating a new BC or achieving a significant improvement in an existing one. The statute limits qualifying improvements to four specific parameters, often referred to as the Permitted Purpose:

• Functionality: Research to expand the capability or utility of the BC.
• Performance: Research leading to increased speed, efficiency, or capacity of the BC.
• Reliability: Research aimed at enhancing durability, consistency, or longevity.
• Quality: Research intended to improve the material standard, purity, or overall standard of the component.4

Research that addresses only aesthetic considerations, simple style changes, or incremental cosmetic refinements typically fails the Permitted Purpose test because these changes do not target function, performance, reliability, or quality.

2.3 The Shrink-Back Rule in Context

In cases involving large, complex business components (e.g., an entire machine or integrated software suite), the research activity related to the overall commercial unit may fail the required qualification tests. The “shrink-back” rule is a crucial mechanism used to isolate the qualifying activities. If the largest commercial unit fails, the research activities must be re-evaluated at the level of the next smaller component or sub-component.10

The application of this rule is particularly relevant in Iowa because it allows the taxpayer to isolate the QREs related only to the truly experimental elements of the overall project. For example, if a company is developing a new production line (the largest BC) but only the design of a specialized sensor array within that line meets the technological uncertainty and experimentation tests, the shrink-back rule permits the taxpayer to claim QREs only for the research activities related to the development of that sensor array.10 This process demands granular project documentation to successfully isolate the specific component activities that pass all four tests.

Section 3: Iowa Department of Revenue (IDR) Guidance and State-Specific Compliance Hurdles

While Iowa adopts the federal definition of the BC, the state imposes crucial statutory and administrative modifications that significantly tighten eligibility and increase the technical documentation burden for taxpayers.

3.1 Codifying Eligibility: Industry Restrictions

The most distinct difference between the Iowa RAC and the federal credit is the strict limitation on eligible industries. Even if a BC successfully passes the four-part test, the taxpayer is ineligible if their trade or business falls outside the state-defined list of high-priority sectors.7

Eligible Industry Categories:

The credit is limited to businesses engaged in 7:

• Manufacturing: Including activities such as refining, purifying, combining different materials, and secondary activities like crushing, washing, sizing, or blending aggregate materials.7
• Life Sciences: Encompassing agriscience, biology, botany, zoology, microbiology, and biochemistry.
• Software Engineering: Defined as the detailed study of design and development.
• Aviation and Aerospace: Relating to the design, development, or production of aircraft, rockets, and spacecraft.

Ineligible/Excluded Sectors:

The IDR explicitly excludes several business types from claiming the RAC, even if they conduct technical research. These include agricultural producers, agricultural cooperatives, retailers, wholesalers, transportation companies, finance or investment companies, collection agencies, accountants, architects, and publishers.9

For corporate groups with diversified operations in Iowa, the BC must maintain a clear nexus to an eligible trade or business. If a BC (e.g., internal software) is developed and used across both a qualified manufacturing division and an excluded retail distribution division, only the QREs allocated to the manufacturing usage would be potentially eligible. This requirement demands sophisticated expense apportionment based on the BC’s functional application within the entity.

Table 1: Iowa Research Activities Tax Credit Eligibility Comparison

3.2 The Process of Experimentation: Iowa’s Stricter Application

The most challenging technical hurdle for the Iowa RAC concerns the Process of Experimentation test, specifically how intensely the BC-related activities must qualify as experimental.

Under IRC § 41, the “substantially all” rule is generally satisfied if 80% or more of the research activities related to the BC constitute elements of a process of experimentation.13 This 80% threshold provides a practical allowance for necessary, yet non-experimental, activities like routine testing or administrative functions.

However, recent Iowa legislation (HF 2317) explicitly removed the reference to the “substantially all” rules (IRC Sec. 41(b)(2)(B)).13 This legislative action implies that Iowa’s statute requires research activities credit claims to meet a standard where 100% of a taxpayer’s research activities related to a specific BC must constitute a process of experimentation.13 This departure from federal norms elevates the state documentation standard dramatically. Taxpayers must meticulously track and exclude time and costs related to general management, non-experimental design reviews, or quality control that is not specifically geared toward resolving technical uncertainty, as the inclusion of these non-experimental elements could lead to the disqualification of the entire BC activity.

3.3 Recent Legislative Impacts on BC Costs

While the definition of the BC remains constant, the qualified expenses associated with its development have been significantly limited by recent Iowa reforms, impacting the economic value of the credit.

• Disallowance of Computer Costs: For tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2023, the cost of leased or rented personal property, specifically including computer costs (IRC Sec. 41(b)(2)(A)(iii)), is no longer eligible to be included in Iowa QREs.13 This change disproportionately affects the development of software business components, where leased computing power is often central to the research and experimentation process.
• Supply Cost Phase-Out: The inclusion of supply expenses, critical for the physical development and prototyping of tangible BCs, is being phased out. The allowable percentage of supply costs as QREs decreases annually: 80% in 2023, 60% in 2024, 40% in 2025, and 20% in 2026. For tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2027, payments for supplies will be entirely ineligible for the Iowa QRE calculation.13

These financial restrictions diminish the overall economic incentive, compelling businesses to carefully re-evaluate their QRE calculation methodologies to account for these unique state limitations.

Section 4: Applying the Business Component Test—A Detailed Example

The following example demonstrates the application of the BC test, incorporating Iowa’s specific industry and experimentation requirements.

4.1 Case Study: Custom Robotics Manufacturer (CRM)

Taxpayer Profile: Custom Robotics Manufacturer (CRM) is an Iowa-based company specializing in advanced automated inspection systems for agricultural equipment. CRM is clearly engaged in the eligible Manufacturing sector.9

Project Goal: CRM is developing a new, proprietary sensor fusion algorithm (a Computer Software Business Component) intended to improve the accuracy and speed (Performance and Reliability Improvement) of their robotic inspection arm by integrating inputs from multiple disparate sensor types simultaneously.

Uncertainty and Experimentation: Technical uncertainty exists regarding how to filter and synchronize data streams from optical, thermal, and ultrasonic sensors to maintain positional accuracy under rapid movement (high-performance requirement). CRM performs systematic computational modeling, trial-and-error testing, and iterative coding to test hypotheses regarding data synchronization methods.

Application of the Four-Part Test:

1. Technological in Nature: The activities rely entirely on the principles of computer science, engineering, and digital signal processing. (Test Met).4
2. Permitted Purpose (The BC Test): The goal is the improvement of the robotic arm’s underlying control software by enhancing its performance and reliability through new sensor data integration. The algorithm is an invention and computer software component used in CRM’s trade or business. (Test Met).1
3. Elimination of Uncertainty: The project aims to resolve technical unknowns regarding the capability and optimal design of the new algorithm necessary for real-world application. (Test Met).
4. Process of Experimentation (The Iowa Hurdle): CRM’s engineers spent time: (a) designing and running code simulations (experimental), (b) documenting the test results (experimental), and (c) writing administrative status reports for management (non-experimental).

If the research time allocation showed 90% experimentation and 10% administrative time:

• Federal Outcome: The project would likely meet the 80% “substantially all” rule and qualify.
• Iowa Outcome: Since Iowa arguably requires 100% experimentation for the QREs claimed, the 10% non-experimental time must be scrupulously excluded from QREs. Furthermore, if CRM fails to isolate the 90% of qualified activities and the IDR interprets the standard strictly, the entire BC activity might be jeopardized, highlighting the compliance risk associated with the removal of the “substantially all” rule.13

Section 5: Administrative Claims, Program Management, and Strategic Considerations

The administrative framework supporting the Iowa RAC has evolved significantly, particularly with the introduction of legislative changes that mandate tighter fiscal control and strategic direction for the incentive.15

5.1 Evolving Program Structure and Filing Requirements

The RAC program is shifting from a standard formula-based entitlement to a competitive incentive managed by the Iowa Economic Development Authority (IEDA). This shift, coupled with an annual program cap of $40 million, means that technical qualification of the BC is only the first step; successful application requires strategic alignment.15

Eligibility is now often contingent on formal application to and award by the IEDA. Taxpayers must submit CPA-verified Qualified Research Expenditure reports, ensuring that the documentation supporting the BC and QREs is independently certified and robust.15 This process compels businesses to prioritize the development of BCs that align with the state’s stated economic goals (advanced manufacturing, bioscience, technology innovation) to maximize their chances of securing a pro-rata share of the capped credit pool.11

For filing the actual tax credit, eligible businesses must utilize Iowa Form IA 128 (Regular Credit) or IA 128S (Alternative Simplified Credit), submitting supporting documentation detailing QREs incurred within Iowa.8

5.2 Documentation Standards and Look-Back Limitations

Documentation is paramount, not only to satisfy the technical requirements of the BC test and the potential 100% experimentation rule but also because of highly restrictive deadlines for corrections.

Amended Return Limitations:

Iowa severely limits the ability of taxpayers to increase their claimed credit amount after the original filing. Under HF 2317, taxpayers seeking to claim a greater RAC amount than originally filed must submit their amended return within six months of the original return due date (including extensions).13

This restriction fundamentally alters traditional R&D tax credit planning. The federal three-year statute of limitations typically allows for extensive retrospective studies (look-back studies) to identify and substantiate previously unclaimed BC activities. Iowa’s six-month rule effectively eliminates this practice, except in cases where an increased claim results from a federal or Iowa Department of Revenue examination.13 Consequently, businesses must prioritize contemporaneous documentation of all BC development activities and QREs throughout the tax year to ensure maximum credit capture at the time of the initial filing.

5.3 Refundability and Carryforward Restrictions

The Iowa RAC has historically been valuable due to its refundability feature, meaning credits exceeding the taxpayer’s liability could be paid out in cash. However, recent legislation (HF 2317) is phasing down this benefit.13

The refundable portion of the credit exceeding tax liabilities is being reduced incrementally over five years, decreasing the cash benefit available to businesses, particularly those leveraging the credit for startup growth or capital intensive R&D:

• 2023: 90% refundable
• 2024: 80% refundable
• 2025: 70% refundable
• 2026: 60% refundable
• 2027 onwards: 50% refundable.13

Furthermore, Iowa law does not allow taxpayers to carry forward the unused portion of their refundable credits. The business must elect to either take the partially reduced refund or credit the overpayment against the following year’s tax liability.13 This contrasts with the federal approach, where excess credits often have a 20-year carryforward period.16

Conclusion and Actionable Recommendations

The “New or Improved Business Component” provides the foundation for determining qualified research expenditures under the Iowa Research Activities Credit, mirroring the federal IRC § 41 definition of what constitutes eligible innovation. However, Iowa’s implementation introduces substantial complexities related to eligibility, documentation rigor, and administrative deadlines.

The crucial deviations—including strict industry exclusions, the implied 100% experimentation requirement, the phase-out of certain QRE types (supplies and computer leases), and the highly restrictive six-month window for filing amended claims—mean that Iowa compliance demands a higher degree of granularity and timeliness than federal compliance.

Actionable Recommendations for Tax Strategy

1. Mandatory Pre-Screening for Industry Eligibility: Prioritize verification that all BC development activities occur exclusively within a qualifying trade or business sector as defined by the IDR guidance (e.g., manufacturing, life sciences). Development efforts in excluded sectors must be strictly segregated to prevent disqualification of otherwise eligible expenditures.
2. Implement Enhanced Time Tracking for Experimentation: Adopt detailed, real-time tracking systems to ensure that personnel wages claimed as QREs for BC development are allocated only to activities demonstrably constituting the process of experimentation. This addresses the significant compliance risk posed by Iowa’s apparent 100% experimentation threshold.
3. Ensure Contemporaneous Documentation and Filing: Given the severe six-month limitation on amended returns for increased claims, businesses must ensure that QRE documentation for all BC projects is complete, accurate, and fully substantiated at the time of the original tax return filing. Reliance on subsequent “look-back” analysis for maximizing the credit is no longer a viable strategy in Iowa.
4. Forecast and Plan for Refund Reduction: Proactively calculate the impact of the phased-down refundability schedule on cash flow, especially for capital-intensive R&D projects. Strategic financial planning must account for the decreasing refundable percentage through 2027 and the necessity of electing to credit excess amounts to the following year’s liability, as carryforwards are generally unavailable for the refundable portion.

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/