The Blueprint for Growth: A Deep Dive into Kentucky’s Qualified Research Facility Tax Credit (KRS 141.395) and the Meaning of Expanding Existing Facilities

I. Executive Summary: Defining the Kentucky R&D Facility Credit

Expanding Existing Facilities represents costs for tangible, depreciable property—such as new construction or specialized equipment installation—that physically augment a Kentucky-based research location, provided the facility is used for IRC $\S$ 41 qualified research activities. Crucially, these costs must represent new investment and cannot include expenditures for replacing existing assets.

The Unique Role of Kentucky’s Infrastructure-Focused Credit

The Kentucky Qualified Research Facility Tax Credit (KRS 141.395) serves as a potent fiscal instrument designed to promote the growth of long-term research infrastructure within the Commonwealth.1 This incentive operates distinctly from the federal Research and Development (R&D) credit, as the Kentucky statute focuses exclusively on capital infrastructure investment rather than operational costs.1

While the federal credit subsidizes labor, supplies, and contract research, the Kentucky credit targets the physical assets—the facilities themselves, along with the machinery and equipment housed within them.1 This targeted focus on construction, remodeling, expansion, and equipping constitutes a strategic state policy intended to secure large, fixed capital investments within Kentucky’s borders. Since facility construction and expansion generate immovable assets, this incentive is structured to maximize the state’s economic stability and increase the likelihood of continuous, high-value operational R&D employment in the future.

Statutory Credit Rate, Eligibility, and Carryforward

The mechanics of the Kentucky R&D credit are streamlined for business predictability:

• Credit Rate and Calculation: The credit is calculated at a straightforward 5% rate applied directly to all qualified facility costs incurred during the tax year.1 A significant simplification compared to federal rules is the elimination of any historical base period requirement, meaning 100% of eligible costs generate the credit in the year incurred.1 For example, a business incurring $\$1,000,000$ in qualified expansion costs earns a $\$50,000$ credit immediately (5% $\times$ $\$1,000,000$).1
• Application Against Tax Liability: The credit is nonrefundable, meaning it can only offset existing tax obligations. It may be applied against Kentucky Income Taxes, as imposed by KRS 141.020 (individual) or KRS 141.040 (corporation), and against the Limited Liability Entity Tax (LLET, KRS 141.0401).2
• Carryforward: To ensure long-term value for substantial capital projects, any unused portion of the credit may be carried forward for a period of ten (10) years.1

II. The Statutory Context of “Expanding Existing Facilities” (KRS 141.395)

The eligibility criteria for costs associated with “Expanding Existing Facilities” are codified within the broader statutory definition of “Construction of research facilities,” found in KRS 141.395(1)(a). Compliance requires meticulous adherence to the explicit inclusions and exclusions detailed in the law.

Defining “Construction of Research Facilities” (The Four Pillars)

KRS 141.395 identifies four primary categories of qualifying capital investment, provided they occur within Kentucky and are utilized for qualified research 3:

1. Constructing Facilities: This covers expenditures for building new physical structures dedicated to R&D activities.
2. Remodeling Facilities: This addresses substantial renovation or structural modification necessary to adapt existing spaces specifically for technological experimentation and research functions.1
3. Equipping Facilities: This includes the purchase and installation costs of specialized, depreciable equipment, such as lab machinery, testing apparatus, and customized utilities, that are essential for the research process.1
4. Expanding Existing Facilities: This component specifically allows costs incurred to physically enlarge or significantly augment a current research site in Kentucky.3 The standard for qualification here is that the expenditure must result in net new physical capacity for research, such as adding a new laboratory wing, increasing cleanroom space, or extending specialized infrastructure required for R&D.

The Core Criterion: Tangible, Depreciable Property

A universal prerequisite for all facility costs—whether construction, remodeling, equipping, or expansion—is that the expenditure must be for tangible, depreciable property.1

Tangible property means physical assets that can be seen or touched (e.g., steel, concrete, machinery). Depreciable property refers to assets whose cost is recovered over time through federal depreciation deductions. Accordingly, costs related to intangible assets or non-depreciable items are excluded. For instance, the costs associated with acquiring the land itself are explicitly non-qualifying because land is not a depreciable asset.3 Furthermore, general operating expenditures that are not capitalized—such as research wages, supplies consumed, contract research fees, or computer rentals—are explicitly excluded from the scope of the Kentucky credit.1

Statutory Exclusion: The Rule Against Replacement Property

The most crucial statutory provision impacting “Expanding Existing Facilities” is the explicit exclusion of “any amounts paid or incurred for replacement property“.3 This constraint is essential for distinguishing true expansion from maintenance or modernization.

Replacement property refers to investments intended merely to restore, repair, or substitute an existing asset with a new one of similar function or capacity. While an expansion project provides a convenient opportunity for a company to upgrade older infrastructure in the original portion of the building, those costs are non-qualified if they are substitutive rather than additive. For example, replacing an outdated air handling unit with a new unit of similar capacity is a replacement, but installing an entirely new, higher-capacity unit required only for the newly constructed wing would be a qualified cost associated with the expansion.

This exclusion mandates precise cost segmentation. When a capital project involves both adding a new wing (qualified expansion) and replacing old plumbing or wiring in the existing structure (non-qualified replacement/modernization), the taxpayer must isolate the expenditure that represents additive capacity from the expenditure that is merely restorative or substitutive. Rigorous documentation of the intent behind the expenditure—proving it enhances overall capacity rather than simply renewing the existing asset—is necessary to mitigate potential disputes during compliance review.

Table 1: The Scope of “Construction of Research Facilities” (KRS 141.395)

III. Alignment with Federal Qualified Research Standards (IRC $\S$ 41)

Although the Kentucky credit targets infrastructure costs, the underlying activity must be defined and qualified under federal standards. KRS 141.395 mandates that “Qualified research” means qualified research as defined in Section 41 of the Internal Revenue Code.3

The Four-Part Test for R&D Activities

For an expansion project to be deemed a “qualified cost,” the facility must be dedicated to R&D activities that pass the federal qualitative four-part test for qualified research under IRC $\S$ 41 7:

1. Permitted Purpose: The research must aim to develop or improve the function, performance, reliability, or quality of a new or existing business component (product, process, or software).
2. Elimination of Uncertainty: The activity must seek to discover information that resolves technical uncertainties regarding the appropriate design or methodology of development.
3. Process of Experimentation: Substantially all the activities must constitute a systematic process of experimentation, involving the evaluation of alternatives, testing, and refinement.
4. Technological in Nature: The research must fundamentally rely on the principles of the physical or biological sciences (e.g., engineering or chemistry).7

Compliance Risk and the Dual Requirement

The state’s reliance on the federal definition for activity qualification, while maintaining a state-specific definition for cost qualification, creates a highly integrated compliance requirement. The taxpayer faces a potential concentration of risk: if a subsequent audit by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) successfully challenges the designation of the underlying activities as “qualified research” under IRC $\S$ 41, the Kentucky facility credit, regardless of the intrinsic capital nature of the expenditure, automatically fails due to a lack of nexus.1 Therefore, securing the Kentucky credit necessitates robust documentation and analysis that satisfies the rigorous qualitative standards of the federal four-part test for the research conducted in the expanded facility.

The necessity of satisfying two distinct jurisdictional requirements—one for the type of activity (federal) and one for the type of cost (state)—requires businesses to maintain parallel systems of cost tracking. One system tracks traditional Qualified Research Expenditures (QREs, e.g., wages and supplies) for federal claims, and a completely separate system tracks Qualified Facility Costs (QFCs, e.g., construction and equipment) for the Kentucky credit.1

IV. Kentucky Department of Revenue (DOR) Guidance and Compliance Requirements

The Kentucky Department of Revenue (DOR) enforces the Qualified Research Facility Tax Credit through strict documentation mandates, primarily centered around Schedule QR (Qualified Research Facility Tax Credit) and detailed supporting schedules.3

Claiming the Credit: Schedule QR and Annual Filing Obligations

The Schedule QR is the primary form used by taxpayers to calculate the credit and track its utilization.3

• Establishment: The Schedule QR must be filed with the income tax return in the year the facility costs are incurred to establish the total credit allowed for the completed project.3
• Annual Tracking: A copy of the Schedule QR must be attached to the tax return each year the credit is claimed or used, serving as a continuous record until the credit is fully utilized or the 10-year carryforward period expires.3
• Project Specificity: Crucially, the DOR requires a separate Schedule QR to be filed each year that a new project qualifies.3 This administrative rule has significant implications: a company undertaking phased or multi-year expansions must manage separate pools of credit, each with its own starting year and unique 10-year carryforward clock. This complexity requires robust financial tracking to ensure credits are utilized efficiently and not unintentionally forfeited upon expiration.

Detailed Compliance: The Mandatory Supporting Asset Schedule

The DOR relies on highly specific asset-level detail to verify the qualification of expansion costs and police the “replacement property” exclusion. To claim the credit, a supporting schedule must be included with the tax return, listing the tangible, depreciable property associated with the construction or expansion.3

This supporting schedule must itemize four distinct data points for every qualified component of the expansion 3:

1. Date Purchased: Documenting the timing of the expenditure.
2. Date Placed in Service: Verifying the asset is operational and utilized for R&D.
3. Description of the Property: Providing an explicit link between the physical asset and its function in qualified research.
4. Cost of the Property: Establishing the cost basis for the 5% credit calculation.

This rigorous documentation requirement ensures that the state can verify that claimed costs are indeed tangible, depreciable property that is additive to the research facility, rather than non-qualifying maintenance or replacement property.3

Application Against Tax Liability

The nonrefundable credit is applied against tax liabilities according to the statutory credit ordering rules.3 Corporations may apply the credit against both Corporate Income Tax (KRS 141.040) and LLET (KRS 141.0401).3 It is important to note that the credit is limited in its ability to offset the LLET, as it cannot reduce the liability below the minimum $\$175$ threshold.10

Pass-through entities (such as partnerships, S-Corporations, or LLCs) must compute the credit at the entity level and then allocate the pro rata share of the approved credit to their partners, members, or shareholders via Schedule K-1.9 Individuals claiming the credit use Schedule ITC, while corporations and pass-through recipients use Schedule TCS to apply the credit against their respective tax liabilities.9

Table 2: Mandatory Supporting Schedule Requirements for Kentucky Schedule QR

V. Practical Application and Financial Modeling

Detailed Example: A Qualified Expansion Project

To illustrate the compliance requirements and the process of segregating qualified costs, consider the following scenario involving a facility expansion.

Scenario: KyChem Corp., a Kentucky manufacturer, invests in a project to expand its current facility to include a dedicated, larger laboratory space for systematic experimentation on improving polymer processes. The activity meets the IRC $\S$ 41 four-part test. The total project investment is $\$1,800,000$.

Cost Breakdown and Eligibility Assessment:

The tax analysis requires careful examination of the nature of the costs, especially concerning the exclusion of wages, supplies, and replacement property.1

Credit Calculation:

The total qualified costs amount to $\$1,400,000$. Applying the 5% rate, the credit earned is calculated as:

$$\text{Credit Earned} = 5\% \times \$1,400,000 = \$70,000$$

The $\$70,000$ nonrefundable credit is then tracked on Schedule QR and utilized against the company’s Kentucky Income Tax and LLET liabilities over the next decade.1

Audit Mitigation and Documentation

To successfully defend a claim involving expanding existing facilities, robust documentation is paramount. Taxpayers must ensure the integrity of the fixed asset ledger, meticulously tracking the $\$1.4$ million in qualified costs separately from the $\$400,000$ in non-qualifying costs. Furthermore, contracts, invoices, and internal project notes must explicitly differentiate expenses for “new construction and equipping” (qualified) from expenses related to “restoration or replacement of existing assets” (non-qualified). Maintaining engineering records that document the pre-expansion capacity versus the net new capacity demonstrates that the investment was truly an expansion and not merely a capital renewal.

VI. Conclusion and Strategic Recommendations

The Kentucky Qualified Research Facility Tax Credit, codified under KRS 141.395, is a significant state incentive designed to attract and stabilize industrial research capital. The eligibility of costs related to “Expanding Existing Facilities” is determined by a precise definition that demands the investment be for tangible, depreciable property located in Kentucky, dedicated to federally defined qualified research (IRC $\S$ 41), and, critically, must be additive rather than substitutive, adhering strictly to the “no replacement property” rule.

The complexity of the Kentucky credit does not lie in its calculation (a simple 5% rate), but in the rigorous, asset-level documentation required by the DOR and the mandatory compliance linkage to the federal qualitative standards for research activity.

Strategic Checklist for Maximizing the Qualified Expansion Credit

Taxpayers planning facility expansion projects in Kentucky should implement the following strategic steps to ensure maximum credit capture and compliance:

1. Pre-Project Cost Coding: Establish separate internal accounting codes before construction begins to track qualifying expansion costs (additive, depreciable, facility-related) distinctly from non-qualifying costs (labor, supplies, replacement parts, land costs).
2. Verify Research Nexus: Secure engineering and scientific documentation confirming that the activities planned for the expanded space meet the four-part test for qualified research under IRC $\S$ 41.
3. Mandatory Compliance Filing: Prepare the Schedule QR and ensure the required supporting asset schedule is complete, accurately listing the Date Purchased, Date Placed in Service, Detailed Description, and Cost for every claimed item of tangible, depreciable property.3
4. Credit Portfolio Management: For projects spanning multiple years or involving distinct phases, treat each phase as a separate project requiring its own Schedule QR filing. This allows for meticulous tracking of the individual 10-year carryforward clocks, preventing the unintentional expiration of unused credits.

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/