The Exclusion of Replacement Property in the Kentucky Qualified Research Facility Tax Credit (KRS 141.395): Statutory Analysis and Compliance Guidance

The Kentucky Qualified Research Facility Tax Credit provides a nonrefundable income tax credit equal to five percent (5%) of the qualified costs associated with the “construction of research facilities”.1 The Exclusion: Replacement Property dictates that costs incurred for merely swapping out old or routine equipment are ineligible for the Kentucky R&D facility credit (KRS 141.395). This policy ensures the 5% credit incentivizes genuine capital investment, expansion, and construction of new research facilities within the Commonwealth.3

I. Executive Summary: The Kentucky Qualified Research Facility Tax Credit (KRS 141.395)

The Kentucky Qualified Research Facility Tax Credit, governed by Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS) 141.395, is a powerful incentive designed to encourage businesses to invest heavily in in-state research infrastructure. Unlike the federal R&D tax credit, which focuses on operational expenditures like wages and supplies, Kentucky’s credit targets capital expenditures related solely to the physical facilities where qualified research activities occur.3 This nonrefundable credit is applied against both the individual/corporate income tax and the Limited Liability Entity Tax (LLET).2

A. Key Compliance Takeaways

Navigating the Qualified Research Facility Tax Credit necessitates a meticulous understanding of what constitutes a qualified cost, particularly concerning the exclusion of replacement property.

1. Statutory Mandate: The exclusion is not an administrative guideline but is explicitly embedded within the definition of “Construction of research facilities” as detailed in KRS 141.395(1)(a).4 This fundamental legal constraint prevents taxpayers from claiming the credit for routine maintenance or modernization that does not result in a net increase in research capability or physical space.
2. Focus on Incremental Investment: The legislative intent behind the credit is to reward “net new or expansive investments”.3 This means qualifying expenditures must lead to constructing new facilities, expanding existing facilities, remodeling for increased functionality, or equipping facilities with new depreciable property, distinguishing them from expenditures that merely maintain existing operational capacity.3
3. Documentation Burden: The Kentucky Department of Revenue (DOR) enforces this exclusion by requiring a detailed supporting schedule alongside Schedule QR, which must itemize the tangible, depreciable property claimed, including the date purchased, date placed in service, description, and cost of every asset.2 This level of detail is necessary for DOR analysts to verify that the property represents an addition or expansion, and not a simple asset swap.2

B. The Functional Definition of “Replacement Property”

The statutory language of KRS 141.395(1)(a) clearly prohibits including “any amounts paid or incurred for replacement property”.4 However, the statute does not offer an explicit, numerical definition of what constitutes a “replacement.” A careful interpretation of the law, considering the eligible activities—constructing, remodeling, expanding, or equipping 1—reveals a functional definition focused on the intent and result of the expenditure.

The eligible activities are inherently forward-looking and growth-oriented. Therefore, an expenditure is classified as a “replacement” and subsequently excluded if its primary function is to restore the status quo, extend the useful life of an existing asset, or recover lost capacity. In contrast, an expenditure qualifies if it introduces a new technological capability, significantly increases research throughput, or expands the physical footprint beyond prior capacity.3

This distinction is fundamental for compliance. An expenditure that might otherwise be capitalized and depreciated under federal tax law, such as replacing a worn-out component, will be excluded from Kentucky’s R&D facility credit if it is deemed a routine asset swap.3 The focus remains steadfastly on rewarding the commitment of capital for the creation of new research capacity within the Commonwealth.

II. Statutory Framework: The Kentucky Qualified Research Facility Tax Credit

A. Legislative Basis and Credit Mechanics

The Kentucky Qualified Research Facility Tax Credit is codified under KRS 141.395, with provisions effective for tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2007.7 The credit is highly specific, aiming to foster in-state research infrastructure.

The mechanics of the credit are straightforward:

• Credit Rate: The credit is nonrefundable and is calculated at five percent (5%) of the qualified costs of construction of research facilities.1
• Tax Application: The credit can be applied against the tax imposed by KRS 141.020 (individual income tax), KRS 141.040 (corporation income tax), and the limited liability entity tax (LLET) imposed by KRS 141.0401.2
• Carryforward Provision: Should a business generate a credit that exceeds its tax liability in a given year, the unused portion may be carried forward for a period of ten (10) years.1

B. Defining “Construction of Research Facilities” (The Qualified Cost Pool)

The definition of “Construction of research facilities” determines the eligible cost pool for the 5% credit. This term includes constructing, remodeling, and equipping facilities in Kentucky or expanding existing facilities in the state for qualified research.1

Crucially, the costs must meet two criteria:

1. Tangible, Depreciable Property: The credit applies only to expenditures for tangible, depreciable property.1 This limits the scope to assets that support the research activities but excludes non-depreciable costs, such as land acquisition, and non-tangible costs, such as facility engineering services, which may be eligible for other Kentucky economic development incentives.9
2. Qualified Research Alignment: The facilities and equipment must be used for “qualified research” as defined in Section 41 of the Internal Revenue Code (IRC § 41).2 This means the property must support activities intended to eliminate uncertainty concerning the development or improvement of a business component, relying fundamentally on principles of physical or biological sciences, engineering, or computer science.10

Costs explicitly excluded from the Kentucky facility credit, beyond replacement property, are routine operational expenditures typically eligible for the federal R&D credit, such as wages, supplies, and contract research.3

C. The Statutory Language Governing the Exclusion

The mandatory exclusion of replacement property is codified directly in KRS 141.395(1)(a):

“‘Construction of research facilities’… includes only tangible, depreciable property, and does not include any amounts paid or incurred for replacement property”.4

This language is clear and absolute. Taxpayers must demonstrate that their capital investment represents a new or expanded asset base, thereby providing the state with justification for the tax subsidy. Expenditures that fall into the excluded category are deemed routine business costs that do not warrant special tax incentives.3

III. Nuanced Interpretation of the Replacement Property Exclusion

A. Policy Rationale: Discouraging Maintenance Expenditures

The primary objective of the Replacement Property Exclusion is to ensure the credit serves its purpose as an incentive for incremental economic activity. State tax credits are often designed as a policy mechanism to drive capital investment that would not have occurred otherwise. If the credit were allowed for routine asset turnover—expenditures a company would make regardless of the tax incentive—it would subsidize the normal course of business without yielding net new benefits to the state.3

For this reason, the exclusion specifically targets “routine asset swaps”.3 Even if a company replaces an old piece of research equipment (e.g., an obsolete server or a worn-out reactor) with a newer model that features modest technological advances, if the expenditure primarily serves to restore the facility’s existing functional capacity, it is excluded. The litmus test for qualification is whether the expenditure is necessary to sustain existing qualified research activities (excluded) or if it is required to commence new qualified research activities or expand the scope of existing activities (included).3

B. Distinguishing Replacement from Remodeling or Equipping

For tax compliance professionals, differentiating a non-qualifying replacement from a qualifying expansion or remodel is critical. The following table provides a conceptual guide to classifying capital costs under KRS 141.395:

C. The Placed-in-Service Date as a Control Point

Although not explicitly stated in regulatory guidance, the requirement for reporting the “Date Placed in Service” on the Schedule QR supporting documents 6 establishes a powerful compliance control point that directly relates to the definition of replacement property.

The credit is fundamentally available once the tangible, depreciable property is “placed in service”.7 This timeline requirement implicitly influences how the Department of Revenue views the nature of the expenditure. If a business purchases and places a new asset in service while the asset it allegedly replaces is still on the balance sheet and actively generating depreciation, the new asset is more likely to be classified as an addition or expansion.

Conversely, if the asset is placed in service concurrently with the disposal or retirement of an equivalent predecessor asset, it strongly suggests the new property merely restored existing capacity. The DOR’s request for the precise date placed in service allows auditors to cross-reference this information with the taxpayer’s internal asset records (such as the Fixed Asset Ledger), helping them determine whether the expenditure truly delivered incremental research capacity or simply sustained the prior level of operation. This procedural mandate elevates the importance of timely and accurate asset tracking for Kentucky R&D tax credit compliance.

IV. Kentucky Department of Revenue Guidance and Compliance Protocol

The Kentucky Department of Revenue (DOR) ensures compliance with the replacement property exclusion through its required filing schedules and detailed documentation rules.

A. Filing Requirements: Schedule QR

Taxpayers claiming the Qualified Research Facility Tax Credit must utilize and file Schedule QR (Qualified Research Facility Tax Credit) with their income tax return.2

• Filing Frequency: A separate Schedule QR must be filed each year that a new project or qualifying expenditure occurs.2 Furthermore, a copy of the schedule must be attached to the tax return annually until the full credit amount is utilized or the 10-year carryforward period has expired.2
• Liability Segregation: The credit calculation must be performed separately for the income tax liability and the Limited Liability Entity Tax (LLET) liability. Any balance of credit available against the income tax cannot be used against the LLET, and vice versa.7 The credit is applied in the statutory order among other business incentive credits, as stipulated by KRS 141.0205.2
• Pass-Through Entities: The credit may be passed through to the partners, members, or shareholders of a pass-through entity, reported via the Kentucky Schedule K-1, where they can claim the credit against their individual or corporate tax liabilities.2

B. Enforcing the Exclusion through Documentation

The Kentucky DOR utilizes highly specific documentation requirements to enforce the tangible, depreciable property rule and the exclusion of replacement property. This approach places a substantial burden of proof on the taxpayer to demonstrate the qualified nature of the capital expenditure.

The DOR mandates that a supporting schedule listing the tangible, depreciable property included in the claimed costs for construction and equipment must be attached to Schedule QR.2 This schedule must clearly identify four specific data elements for every item claimed:

1. Date Purchased
2. Date Placed in Service
3. Description
4. Cost 2

C. The Audit Strategy of the DOR

The detailed information required on the supporting schedule serves as the primary gateway for the DOR to verify the non-replacement status of the costs claimed. This detailed itemization allows the DOR to perform a direct comparison between the assets claimed for the credit and the taxpayer’s overall capital expenditure and retirement records.

By requiring the precise description, date purchased, and date placed in service, the DOR equips its auditors to cross-reference these entries against the company’s internal fixed asset records. For example, if an auditor identifies a claim for a new, high-value piece of testing equipment, the accompanying documentation permits the auditor to efficiently investigate whether a functionally similar asset was retired or disposed of in the same tax period. If the evidence suggests the new asset merely substitutes for an older, retired piece of equipment, the expenditure is strongly presumed to be excluded replacement property, subjecting the credit claim to adjustment.3 The documentation requirements therefore function as an inherent mechanism for enforcing the policy goal of incentivizing only net new investments in Kentucky’s research infrastructure.

V. Practical Application and Financial Modeling Example

To illustrate the critical financial impact of the Replacement Property Exclusion, an analysis of a hypothetical capital expenditure project is necessary.

A. Illustrative Scenario: Advanced Materials Testing Lab (TechCorp KY)

TechCorp KY, a company specializing in advanced manufacturing and R&D, conducts qualified research in Kentucky. In the current tax year, the company undertakes a $1,550,000 capital expenditure program for its facility.

B. Quantitative Impact of the Exclusion on Credit Calculation

In this scenario, $150,000 of the total capital investment is correctly classified as non-qualifying replacement property. This amount must be excluded when determining the basis for the Kentucky Qualified Research Facility Tax Credit. The credit is calculated by applying the 5% rate to the remaining qualified costs.2

Quantitative Impact of the Replacement Property Exclusion

C. Example Conclusion

By correctly segregating costs according to the statutory definition of qualified expenditures, TechCorp KY generates a Qualified Research Facility Tax Credit of $70,000 on $1.4 million in net new investment. This methodology demonstrates the practical necessity of excluding routine asset swaps.3 Failure to apply the exclusion to the $150,000 in replacement property would have resulted in an overstatement of the credit by $7,500 and exposed the company to significant audit risk due to non-compliance with KRS 141.395.

VI. Conclusion and Strategic Compliance Recommendations

The Exclusion of Replacement Property is a definitive and critical requirement for taxpayers seeking the Kentucky Qualified Research Facility Tax Credit. The provision confirms the state’s intent to incentivize incremental investments—those that fundamentally create new or expanded research capabilities within the Commonwealth—rather than subsidizing the typical lifecycle maintenance of existing assets.3 Compliance requires more than just summarizing total capital expenditures; it demands a proactive, surgical classification of costs.

A. Strategic Planning for Capital Expenditures

Companies should integrate tax credit eligibility into the capital budgeting process, focusing on the principle of net new investment.

1. Proactive Cost Segregation: Tax and fixed asset accounting teams must collaborate with R&D and engineering departments early in the project lifecycle to segregate capital costs. Expenditures that construct new labs, expand facility footprints, or purchase specialized equipment introducing new research capabilities are prioritized.3
2. Documentation of Functional Change: When claiming costs related to facility upgrades that might appear to replace existing assets (e.g., remodeling), the taxpayer must document the functional or technological superiority and the critical necessity of the change for advancing qualified research, proving the expenditure is beyond mere maintenance. This documentation serves as crucial evidence during any DOR review to substantiate the non-replacement nature of the cost.
3. Maximizing Credit Utilization: The fact that the credit can be applied against both corporate income tax and the LLET (Kentucky’s minimum tax) makes accurate classification of non-replacement facility costs exceptionally valuable, particularly for companies in high-growth, early-stage phases that may generate sufficient credits to offset their LLET liability.7

B. Final Compliance Mandate

The most essential compliance measure is the rigorous adherence to the DOR’s detailed reporting requirements on Schedule QR. The supporting schedule that lists the asset’s date purchased, date placed in service, description, and cost is the non-negotiable audit trail.2 Taxpayers must ensure this documentation is robust enough to conclusively demonstrate that every dollar claimed under the “equipping” and “construction” categories is distinct from routine replacement property and represents a genuine, incremental investment in Kentucky’s research infrastructure.

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/