Accelerating R&D Tax Credit Benefits for Maryland Small Businesses

Executive Summary

Maryland’s R&D tax credit offers a 10% credit on eligible research expenditures (in excess of the state base amount) and is especially valuable for small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in the state’s innovation economy.¹ However, by statute, businesses cannot claim any credit until after a lengthy review and certification process. In practice, a firm incurs R&D costs in Year 0, applies by 15 November of Year 1, and only receives a certificate by 15 February of Year 2.² Only after that can the company amend its return or offset future tax liabilities.^3,4 This multi-year delay (“delayed benefit realization”) ties up working capital and undercuts the incentive for fast-moving SMEs. Moreover, the current program is fully subscribed at its $12 million annual cap,⁵ so any improvements must be carefully managed to avoid overspending or abuse.

This whitepaper examines Maryland’s R&D credit process and explains the delayed-benefit issue in context. It then proposes practical solutions—both legislative and administrative—to accelerate benefit realization for SMEs, while preserving anti-fraud safeguards. Options include shortening the certification timeline, allowing provisional claims (or immediate claims with later audit), and even credit transferability. We outline how each solution could be implemented, with built-in audit and compliance controls. A brief cost–benefit analysis suggests that modest upfront investment (e.g. staffing) is outweighed by long-term growth in jobs and tax revenue from increased innovation. Finally, we emphasise that without reform, Maryland risks undercutting its R&D policy goals and losing ground to more nimble competitor states.

Background: Maryland’s R&D Tax Credit Program

Maryland provides a state R&D tax credit to encourage in‐state research investment. The credit equals 10% of incremental qualified R&D expenses (QDREs) exceeding a base amount tied to prior-year R&D, following the federal §41 definition.¹ A single firm can receive up to $250,000, and annual awards are capped at $12 million in total credits.⁵ Of this cap, $3.5 million is set aside for “small businesses” (firms with net assets under $5 million).⁵ Crucially, any credit beyond a small business’s tax liability is refundable to that small firm,^5,6 providing a cash refund. (Non-small firms can carry forward unused credit for up to 7 years.⁷)

To claim the credit, a business must first apply to the Maryland Department of Commerce. The application is due by 15 November of the year following the tax year in which the R&D expenses were incurred.^8,2 Commerce then reviews and certifies approved credits. By law, Commerce “shall certify to the [taxpayer] the amount of the research and development tax credits approved” by 15 February of the calendar year following the year the application was submitted.⁹ In practice, for example, R&D incurred in 2023 would be applied for by 15 Nov 2024 and (under current law) certified by 15 Feb 2025.^8,9

Only after this certification can a business actually claim the credit on its tax return. In fact, statute requires the business to attach a copy of the Commerce certificate to its return. It may do so either by amending the return for the year of the expense or by applying the credit against tax in any of the next seven years.⁴ This process is summarized in industry guides: “Certification letter issued by February 15. Attach to amended return or claim over 7 years.”²

In other words, the credit benefit is delayed by roughly 15–27 months after the R&D investment. During that waiting period the credit cannot be used for cash or tax relief. This delay is the core policy issue: Maryland firms – especially smaller ones – must carry out and finance the R&D upfront, and only see any offset years later. For capital-starved startups and SMEs, this postponement can significantly dampen the credit’s intended stimulus effect.

The Problem: Delayed Benefit Realization for SMEs

The mandatory waiting period has concrete downsides for Maryland businesses. An SME that spends on R&D in tax year 202X cannot claim that benefit until its credit is finally certified in early 202X+2. Even though application is relatively prompt, the credit is effectively locked up during the entire year after the expense and into the next. This harms cash flow and certainty: small firms cannot count on the tax relief when budgeting next-year spending. In practice, many firms choose not to claim small credits at all because of the burden and wait. A 2018 Legislative Services evaluation found that among companies awarded a Maryland R&D credit, “less than one-half” ever filed the amended return needed to claim it.¹⁰ That suggests a large share of eligible benefits go unused – often due to the delay and complexity.

By contrast, if the credit could be applied sooner, firms could invest R&D funds with confidence that tax relief is just around the corner. The current system’s inertia undercuts one of the policy’s goals. It is telling that Maryland’s program is heavily used and routinely oversubscribed.⁵ Demand for the credit is strong (companies typically claim the full $12M yearly cap ⁵), yet the delay may still suppress its impact. Moreover, the DLS evaluation noted that the credit’s influence on business R&D decisions appears modest overall,¹¹ and that a majority of firms with R&D expenditures do not even claim the credit. While the reasons are complex, the multi-year lag undoubtedly contributes.

The state’s own guidance stresses that only with the Commerce certificate can the credit be “attached” to a return.² In practical terms, this means firms that want to use the credit must amend a closed year’s return after certification or wait until next year’s return. For many entrepreneurs, planning without certainty is a gamble. In policy terms, the “delayed benefit realization” – waiting more than a year to realize the reward for R&D – weakens the incentive effect and misses an opportunity to bolster Maryland’s innovation economy.

Proposed Solutions

To address the delayed realization issue, Maryland’s Legislature and agencies have several options. We focus on two main approaches: accelerating certification and allowing earlier claiming. Each approach can be implemented in ways that protect against fraud and waste. A third idea, credit transferability, is also presented as an optional tool to improve liquidity for SMEs. Table 1 below summarizes these policy options; each is then discussed in turn.

Table 1: Proposed Policy Options

Option 1: Accelerate Certification

The simplest fix is to shorten the statutory timeline for Commerce’s review. For instance, the law could be amended to require certification by 31 December of the year after the R&D year (instead of 15 Feb), or even by 31 January. If applications remain due Nov 15, this would give Commerce more time or simply tighten performance metrics. Alternatively, the application deadline could move up (e.g. to Oct 15) so reviews are spread over more months.

Accelerating certification means companies receive the Dept’s letter of credit sooner. They could then amend their prior year return or apply the credit on the upcoming return without waiting as long. Even a few weeks’ earlier access can matter for budgeting. To implement this, the General Assembly could revise §10-721(b)(7) of the Tax-General Article (which now says certification is by Feb 15) to a new date.⁹ Administratively, Commerce would allocate staff to meet the new deadline. Phased implementation (e.g. first pilot with Jan 31 deadline, then move to Dec 31) could help manage workload peaks around tax season.

Safeguards: Moving the date alone preserves the existing two-step certificate/claim framework, so the primary compliance check (Commerce’s certification) remains. Commerce would still conduct its full review of documentation before issuing the final certificate. To guard against rushing, the Legislature could allot Commerce a modest budget increase or require targeted hiring (e.g. seasonal reviewers in Dec-Jan). Setting a hard deadline also provides predictability. These steps would accelerate benefits to firms while keeping the certification safety net intact.

Option 2: Allow Early Claim or Provisional Credit

A more transformative change is to let businesses claim the credit on a timely tax return without waiting for the certificate (often called a provisional or tentative credit). This could work by allowing a taxpayer to report an estimated credit on its original return (for example, the return filed April 2025 for 2024), then later “true up” once Commerce’s certificate is final. In effect, the credit would be refundable on an interim basis, subject to adjustment.

Legally, this would require amending §10-721 so that an attach-to-certificates requirement either no longer bars initial claims, or that attachment to a later return is not the sole option. For example, statute could permit filing a self-certified claim up to a capped amount (say 50% of projected credit) pending final certification. Maryland is not alone in such approaches: many states (and the federal IRS) allow preliminary R&D credit claims with reconciliation later. For instance, Ohio’s R&D credit needs no pre-approval – taxpayers simply claim it on their return, subject to audit.¹² Under this model, an SME could claim credits in the same year, improving cash flow by 12–18 months.

Safeguards: To prevent abuse, this option must include strong oversight. Proposed safeguards include: (a) Documentation Requirements: Taxpayers claiming provisional R&D credits would be required to submit detailed project records and calculations with their return, per Commerce guidelines (as under current audit policies).¹³ (b) Random and Targeted Audits: The Comptroller or Commerce could select early-claiming taxpayers for prompt audit, verifying that claimed QREs meet §41 criteria. (c) Penalties for Over-claim: Any taxpayer that claims more credit than ultimately certified would have to repay the excess plus interest/penalties. The statute could explicitly allow recapture of overpaid credits. (d) Limits on Small Unreviewed Claims: Initially, provisional claiming might be capped (e.g. only for credits under $50K) to limit fiscal risk. (e) Certification Still Required: Ultimately Commerce would still issue a certificate confirming the final eligible amount;⁹ any discrepancy would be resolved via amended return or amendment of the original return.

By coupling provisional claims with audits and penalties, Maryland could significantly speed benefits without inviting rampant fraud. Similar models in other tax areas (e.g. refundable credits, tax deferrals with audit) demonstrate this tradeoff is manageable if enforced carefully.

Option 3: Enable Credit Transferability (Optional)

A complementary approach is to let firms monetize their credit. Some states allow R&D tax credit certificates to be sold or transferred to unrelated taxpayers (often called “tax credit trading”). For example, New Jersey and Delaware permit transfer/sale of R&D credits, subject to state approval. If Maryland were to adopt a transfer mechanism, a small firm needing cash could sell its certificate to a larger corporation (or a specialty investor) in exchange for immediate funding, at a negotiated discount.

Safeguards: To prevent market abuses, any transfer policy must include rules: only Commerce-certified credits could be transferred; the sale price might be capped; and all transfers would require Commerce’s pre-approval or reporting. Unused transfer capacity for SMB credits could be managed by auction or registry. While implementing a trading scheme is complex, it offers a way to decouple timing: even if certification still takes time, a firm could turn the certificate into cash when it arrives.

Although not strictly fixing the timing of receipt, transferability improves liquidity. Its potential efficacy is illustrated by one study: “Some states… allow taxpayers to sell or transfer their credits to other taxpayers”,¹⁴ which helps businesses capture value earlier. Maryland could explore this as a longer-term reform, with appropriate rules to avoid creation of “paper traders” and ensure transfers reflect genuine R&D work.

Implementation and Safeguards

Each proposed reform must balance swifter benefits with fraud prevention. Under Option 1 (faster certification), existing safeguards remain largely unchanged: Commerce would continue to vet all applications before issuing the certificate. To bolster this, Commerce could update its guidelines to ensure thorough documentation – for example by requiring technology reports or cost breakdowns. The agency’s “audit guidelines” already mandate firms retain four years of project records.¹³ The state could enhance compliance by publicizing audit results (without naming companies) to deter bogus claims.

Under Option 2 (early claiming), stronger oversight is essential. The state could require an initial review step (an informal Commerce “pre-certification” letter) before accepting any provisional claims. Tax forms could be adjusted so that claiming the R&D credit without certificate triggers an automatic review flag. The Comptroller’s office, possibly in partnership with Commerce, would then audit selected claims. Any firm that fails to substantiate its R&D work or is found to have mis-stated expenses would have to repay the claimed credit with interest – a standard tax-penalty measure. In cases of severe fraud, criminal penalties under state tax law could apply.

To aid enforcement, Maryland could require periodic reporting. For instance, companies claiming R&D credits might have to file a simplified “R&D summary schedule” with key metrics (similar to how some states handle film tax credits). This would allow Commerce to spot anomalies and target audits. The existing annual reporting requirement by Commerce to the Governor and General Assembly could incorporate stats on processing times and audit outcomes, ensuring legislative oversight.

In all cases, transparency and incremental roll-out can help. For example, the Legislature could authorize a temporary pilot allowing early claims or a phased earlier deadline, then review its impact after one or two cycles. The public and businesses should be informed of the changes well in advance so they can plan. Finally, because the program currently has a statutory expiration (June 30, 2027),¹⁵ any expansion should be paired with a legislative renewal or extension of the credit. Combining timing reforms with a renewal vote can ensure a full legislative vetting of costs and benefits.

Cost–Benefit Considerations

Implementing these reforms would entail some initial costs but can pay off over time. The most direct cost is administrative: hiring additional Commerce staff or upgrading its processing system to meet faster deadlines (Option 1), or beefing up audit capacity at Commerce/Comptroller (Option 2). These might require on the order of a few hundred thousand to a million dollars in annual budgets for human resources and IT. For example, if Maryland adds two tax auditors at $80K salary plus benefits each, that’s under $200K/year. Such investments would quickly pay for themselves by unlocking the R&D credit’s intended economic stimulus.

On the revenue side, accelerating the credit might shift some state revenue timing. In a pure sense, issuing credits earlier means the state grants refunds or offsets sooner; however, the total cost of the credit program is capped by law. If the cap is never exceeded, timing has no effect on total outlays. If early claims cause the cap to be reached faster, proration rules would still apportion credits. In theory, improving accessibility could slightly increase total claims (if more businesses participate), which in the short run means larger refunds. But this cost is an investment: every dollar of credit is a public stimulus for R&D, ideally yielding multiple dollars of economic activity.

Long-term benefits likely outweigh near-term costs. Faster realization of R&D credits could prompt firms to do more R&D in Maryland. Economic studies generally find that R&D tax incentives raise private R&D spending, especially in small firms.¹⁶ More in-state innovation means new products, higher productivity, and typically more high-tech jobs. Those jobs generate payroll taxes and higher consumer spending. Over time the state gains income tax revenue on new wages and possibly even corporate tax from profitable innovations. For example, a small company that uses an earlier credit to develop a product might hire several engineers; those salaries produce income tax receipts that, over a few years, exceed the initial credit cost.

A simple illustration: suppose a start-up is on the cusp of hiring one additional R&D staffer at $60,000/year. Without the credit, it balks due to cash limits; with immediate credit relief, it goes ahead. The $60K salary yields roughly $3K in Maryland income tax per year (at typical rates) plus sales and property taxes from the employee’s spending. In 3–4 years, those taxes recoup the cost of a $60K (10%) credit advance. In addition, the company itself will be larger (and pay more corporate or franchise tax) than if it had skimped on R&D. While precise multipliers are state-specific, it is well understood that innovation activities have strong economic multipliers. The General Assembly’s own fiscal calculations can incorporate these downstream benefits when evaluating budget needs for Commerce.

We can frame the outlay as a short-term “program loan” against growth. For example, assume accelerating certification increases small business credit payments by $2 million in the first year (simply due to timing). That $2M is matched by eligible R&D that businesses have already performed. If even a fraction of that leads to growth – say an extra 20 jobs with $60K salaries – Maryland gains roughly $150K/year in income tax (6% average rate) plus additional payroll and sales taxes. Within a few years the state’s revenue from these workers alone roughly covers the initial $2M, not to mention the economic value created. And that $2M was already budgeted credit (just claimed earlier).

Ultimately, by promoting faster innovation investment Maryland can strengthen its tech and life-science clusters. In today’s competitive economy, incentives must deliver perceived value quickly. The cost of doing nothing, on the other hand, is continued limp growth in these sectors while other states move faster.

Importance of Reform and Risks of Inaction

Modernizing the R&D credit process is not just a technical tweak – it’s central to Maryland’s innovation strategy. The state already allocates significant resources (up to $12M annually) to subsidize R&D. If SMEs see little return from the credit due to delays, they may forego future projects or even relocate R&D to more entrepreneur-friendly states. Over time, that would erode Maryland’s tax base and job market.

Failure to reform carries risks. Small businesses might divert funds from R&D to other expenses simply because the “promise” of credit is out of reach. Critics have noted that many Maryland companies do not claim the credit (as low as 40% do ¹⁰), meaning the subsidy fails as an incentive. Without change, the program could shrink in relevance, undermining decades of intent to spur innovation. Meanwhile, peer states may gain ground: a growing number of states now allow immediate claiming or refundable credits that benefit start-ups and small firms. Maryland must adapt or risk appearing less hospitable to cutting-edge investment.

On the other hand, successful reform would signal that Maryland’s Legislature and agencies are responsive to business needs. By cutting red tape and speeding up tax relief, Maryland would stand out as innovation-friendly – potentially attracting new ventures and retaining local high-tech firms. In a budget-minded narrative, legislators can view the credit program as an investment: we “pay” the credit not for its own sake but to generate future tax revenue through growth. Ensuring that payment comes sooner simply frontloads the investment.

In sum, fixing the delayed-benefit issue aligns with the original policy goal of the R&D tax credit: to encourage more Maryland R&D. Each year of delay dilutes that encouragement. Reforms like faster certification or early claims directly remove the barriers that inhibit small businesses. Without them, the state risks stagnation in a critical sector and misses opportunities for job creation. With them, Maryland can leverage its tax incentives more fully and fairly for the firms that need them most.

Conclusion

Maryland’s R&D tax credit is well-designed in scope and size, but its current timing bottleneck blunts its impact on small businesses. This whitepaper outlines actionable policy changes – from legislative amendments to administrative enhancements – to ensure credits are realized promptly. By speeding up the benefit, Maryland will make its innovation incentives more effective, bolster its economy, and still maintain strong anti-fraud controls. The relatively modest short-term costs of implementation can be offset by far larger long-term gains in revenue and growth. We urge the General Assembly and Commerce to consider these reforms in the next legislative session, so that Maryland’s R&D tax credit truly accelerates the pace of innovation in the state.

Works Cited

1. Maryland R&D Tax Credits – Get Info and Calculate R&D Tax Credits, accessed July 31, 2026, https://www.striketax.com/state-rd-credits/maryland-r-d-tax-credits
2. Maryland R&D Tax Credits – Get Info and Calculate R&D Tax Credits, accessed July 31, 2026, https://www.striketax.com/state-rd-credits/maryland-r-d-tax-credits
3. Business Tax Credits | Research and Development | Maryland Department of Commerce, accessed July 31, 2026, https://commerce.maryland.gov/fund/programs-for-businesses/research-and-development-tax-credit
4. Maryland Department of Commerce, commerce.maryland.gov, accessed July 31, 2026, https://commerce.maryland.gov/Documents/Tax%20General%2010%20721.pdf
5. Maryland R&D Tax Credits – Get Info and Calculate R&D Tax Credits, accessed July 31, 2026, https://www.striketax.com/state-rd-credits/maryland-r-d-tax-credits
6. Maryland R&D Tax Credits – Get Info and Calculate R&D Tax Credits, accessed July 31, 2026, https://www.striketax.com/state-rd-credits/maryland-r-d-tax-credits
7. Maryland R&D Tax Credits – Get Info and Calculate R&D Tax Credits, accessed July 31, 2026, https://www.striketax.com/state-rd-credits/maryland-r-d-tax-credits
8. Business Tax Credits | Research and Development | Maryland Department of Commerce, accessed July 31, 2026, https://commerce.maryland.gov/fund/programs-for-businesses/research-and-development-tax-credit
9. Maryland Department of Commerce, commerce.maryland.gov, accessed July 31, 2026, https://commerce.maryland.gov/Documents/Tax%20General%2010%20721.pdf
10. Evaluation of the Research and Development Tax Credit, accessed July 31, 2026, https://dls.maryland.gov/pubs/prod/TaxFiscalPlan/Evaluation-of-the-Research-and-Development-Tax-Credit.pdf
11. Evaluation of the Research and Development Tax Credit, accessed July 31, 2026, https://dls.maryland.gov/pubs/prod/TaxFiscalPlan/Evaluation-of-the-Research-and-Development-Tax-Credit.pdf
12. Ohio R&D Tax Credit Qualifications, accessed July 31, 2026, https://taxpointadvisors.com/blog/view/ohio-rd-tax-credit-qualifications
13. Maryland R&D Tax Credits – Get Info and Calculate R&D Tax Credits, accessed July 31, 2026, https://www.striketax.com/state-rd-credits/maryland-r-d-tax-credits
14. R&D Tax Credit Rates and Terms by State | BDO Insights | BDO, accessed July 31, 2026, https://www.bdo.com/insights/tax/state-r-d-tax-credits
15. Business Tax Credits | Research and Development | Maryland Department of Commerce, accessed July 31, 2026, https://commerce.maryland.gov/fund/programs-for-businesses/research-and-development-tax-credit
16. Unlocking Innovation: The Economic Impact of R&D Tax Credit, accessed July 31, 2026, https://ideas.repec.org/a/aiy/jnljtr/v11y2025i2p341-357.html