Economic Diversification and the Frontier Innovation Gap: A Strategic Evaluation of the Alaska Research and Development Tax Credit and the Federal Qualification Bottleneck

Executive Summary

The State of Alaska currently stands at a decisive economic crossroads, necessitating a fundamental shift from its historical dependence on volatile petroleum revenues toward a more resilient, innovation-led economy. While the existing Alaska Research and Development (R&D) tax credit framework, established under Alaska Statute (AS) 43.20.021, intends to incentivize technological advancement, its structural reliance on mandatory federal qualification under Internal Revenue Code (IRC) §41 creates an unintended bottleneck for small and medium businesses (SMBs). This “Mandatory Federal Qualification Requirement” forces local enterprises to navigate the high administrative costs and rigorous audit standards of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) simply to access a state-level credit that is often too small to justify the compliance burden.

This report provides a comprehensive analysis of the current Alaska R&D tax credit framework, articulating the specific barriers faced by the state’s burgeoning technology, aerospace, and energy sectors. By examining the disparate impact of the federal tie-in on pre-revenue startups and established SMBs, the analysis identifies a critical “Innovation Gap” between Alaska and its lower-48 peers. To remediate these issues, the report proposes two primary legislative solutions: the decoupling of the state credit from federal claim requirements through a state-level certification process, and the implementation of targeted refundability for SMBs. Furthermore, the report details an implementation strategy focused on rigorous anti-fraud measures and a cost-benefit analysis that frames the initial tax expenditure as a necessary investment in the state’s future tax base and workforce retention.

The Alaska R&D Tax Credit in Context: A Structural Overview

Alaska’s current corporate tax environment is characterized by a “piggyback” relationship with the federal Internal Revenue Code. Under AS 43.20.021, the state adopts federal tax provisions by reference, which includes the definitions and mechanics of the R&D tax credit. For corporations operating in Alaska, the state credit is calculated as 18% of the apportioned federal R&D credit. This structure assumes that a business is large enough and has sufficient administrative capacity to successfully claim the federal credit before it can even begin to apply for state-level relief.

Mathematical Mechanics of the 18% Rule

The calculation for the Alaska R&D credit is inherently tied to a company’s federal performance and its Alaska apportionment factor. The apportionment factor is generally determined by a three-factor formula involving property, payroll, and sales within Alaska relative to the company’s total U.S. operations.

Table 1: Alaska R&D Credit Calculation Mechanics

For a purely domestic Alaska business, the apportionment factor is 100%, meaning they are eligible for 18% of their federal credit. However, if that business fails to meet the federal “four-part test” or chooses not to file for the federal credit due to audit fears or administrative costs, their Alaska R&D tax credit eligibility is automatically zero.

The Role of the Federal Four-Part Test

Eligibility for the Alaska credit mirrors the federal standards, requiring research activities to meet four specific criteria. First, the research must have a “Permitted Purpose,” meaning it aims to create a new or improved business component in terms of functionality, performance, reliability, or quality. Second, the activity must fundamentally rely on “Technological Principles” of engineering, physics, biology, or computer science. Third, the research must involve the “Elimination of Uncertainty,” where the developer faces technical questions about the design, methodology, or capability of the component. Finally, the business must engage in a “Process of Experimentation,” which involves evaluating alternatives through modeling, simulation, or systematic trial and error.

While these standards are designed to ensure the credit supports genuine innovation, they create a significant documentation burden. Businesses must maintain contemporaneous records, including project notes, lab results, and detailed payroll logs linking specific employee hours to qualified research activities. For many small firms in Anchorage’s tech cluster or the Mat-Su Borough’s engineering firms, this documentation requirement is a secondary hurdle that follows the primary challenge of actual innovation.

The Policy Issue: Mandatory Federal Qualification and the SMB Bottleneck

The requirement that a business must “first qualify for and successfully claim” the federal R&D tax credit before accessing Alaska’s 18% credit constitutes a significant barrier for small to medium-sized enterprises. This bottleneck arises from several intersecting factors, including high compliance costs, the “Gatekeeper” effect of the IRS, and recent federal changes to the treatment of R&D expenditures.

The Administrative Compliance Burden

The federal R&D tax credit is widely considered one of the most complex areas of the U.S. tax code. To successfully claim the credit, a firm must typically engage specialized tax consultants to perform an “R&D Study,” which can cost anywhere from $10,000 to $50,000 or more, depending on the scale of the projects. For a large corporation spending millions on research, this cost is easily absorbed. However, for an Alaskan SMB with $100,000 in research expenditures, the potential federal credit (typically around 10%, or $10,000) might be entirely offset by the cost of the study required to document it.

Since the Alaska credit is only 18% of the federal amount, that same SMB would only be eligible for an additional $1,800 in state tax relief. The decision for many Alaskan SMBs is simple: the cost to claim the federal credit exceeds the combined value of the federal and state incentives. This leaves Alaska’s R&D credit as a benefit primarily for large, out-of-state corporations that are already conducting R&D studies for their national operations, while local startups are left without support.

The Non-Refundability and Liquidity Crisis

Unlike several other states, the Alaska R&D credit is strictly non-refundable. It can only be used to offset a taxpayer’s corporate income tax liability. While the credit offers a 20-year carryforward period, this does not address the immediate cash flow needs of pre-revenue or early-stage startups. These firms are often in the most research-intensive phase of their lifecycle—developing prototypes for Arctic microgrids, testing new aerospace components, or engineering subarctic agricultural systems—yet they cannot monetize their R&D credits because they do not yet have taxable income.

This liquidity issue is compounded by the fact that Alaska imposes no individual income tax, meaning the R&D credit is only available to C-corporations and other entities subject to corporate net income tax. Pass-through entities like LLCs or S-corps, which are common structures for startups, face uniquely complex rules and often find that the R&D credit cannot be effectively utilized by their owners in the absence of a state personal income tax.

The Impact of IRC Section 174 Amortization

Beginning in the 2022 tax year, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) implemented a significant change to IRC Section 174. Businesses are no longer allowed to immediately deduct R&D expenses in the year they are incurred; instead, they must capitalize and amortize domestic R&D costs over five years (and 15 years for foreign R&D). This federal policy shift effectively increases a company’s taxable income in the short term, creating a “phantom tax” burden on innovative firms.

Because Alaska’s tax code mirrors these federal definitions, Alaskan companies are facing a higher state tax liability during their most critical years of innovation. While federal legislation like the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) has periodically sought to restore immediate expensing, the uncertainty and the lag in state conformity mean that Alaskan SMBs are currently operating under a tax regime that punishes rather than rewards current-year research spending.

Table 2: Comparison of Federal and Alaska R&D Standards and SMB Impacts

Solution 1: Decoupling and the Implementation of a State-Level Certification Process

To resolve the federal qualification bottleneck, the Alaska Legislature should decouple the state R&D tax credit from the requirement of a successful federal claim. This would allow Alaskan businesses to apply for the state credit based on qualified research expenses incurred within the state, using a state-administered certification process.

The Maryland Model: A Dedicated Innovation Agency

Maryland provides a high-functioning precedent for this approach. The Maryland Department of Commerce administers a state R&D tax credit that follows federal definitions for qualified activities but requires its own application and certification process. Businesses must apply by November 15th of the year following the tax year in which expenses were incurred. The state then certifies the credit amount by February 15th, allowing the company to claim the credit on their state return regardless of their federal status.

Alaska could implement a similar system through the Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development (DCCED) or the Department of Revenue (DOR). By creating an Alaska-specific application, the state could:

• Reduce Complexity: The state application could use simplified documentation standards for SMBs with research expenditures under a certain threshold (e.g., $250,000).
• Verify In-State Activity: The current federal apportionment method allows companies to claim credits for research done anywhere in the U.S. if they have an Alaska apportionment factor. A state certification process could prioritize or restrict credits to research actually performed in Alaska, thereby ensuring state tax dollars support the local economy.
• Provide Certainty: A state certification letter provides the business with a “pre-approved” tax position, reducing the fear of a state audit that mirrors the intensity of an IRS examination.

Transitioning to an Independent Credit Rate

If Alaska decouples from the federal claim requirement, the legislature should transition from the “18% of federal” rule to a volume-based credit rate on in-state QREs. For example, the state could adopt a flat rate of 10% on research expenses exceeding a base amount, similar to the rates in Florida, Georgia, or Maryland. This would make the state credit more significant and easier to calculate for Alaskan business owners who may not have the resources to perform a full federal tax study.

Solution 2: Targeted Refundability and Strategic Tax Offsets for SMBs

To address the liquidity crisis for early-stage startups, Alaska should introduce a refundable component for its R&D tax credit, specifically targeted at small businesses.

The Connecticut Refundable Voucher Program

Connecticut recently expanded its R&D credits by creating a “tax credit voucher” program for businesses with less than $70 million in gross income. If a company’s tax liability is less than the credit they are eligible for, they can claim a refund for a substantial portion of the leftover credit—up to 65% for regular SMBs and up to 90% for biotechnology and high-tech firms.

Alaska could implement a similar “Innovation Refund” for companies with:

• Gross receipts of less than $5 million in the credit year.
• A physical presence and research operations located within the state.
• Fewer than 150 full-time employees, mirroring the Arizona “Qualified Small Business” threshold.

Payroll Tax Offsets for Pre-Revenue Firms

Another practical solution is to allow R&D credits to offset other state-mandated obligations if the firm has no corporate income tax liability. At the federal level, Qualified Small Businesses (QSBs) can elect to use up to $500,000 of their R&D credit to offset the employer portion of Social Security and Medicare taxes.

While Alaska does not have a state payroll tax, it does have other business-related fees and taxes, such as unemployment insurance contributions or industry-specific levies. Allowing R&D credits to offset these costs would provide immediate relief to startups like those in Anchorage’s burgeoning “Frozen Silicon Valley,” where 25% year-over-year increases in investment are currently being driven by local innovation in AI and renewable energy.

Safeguarding the Public Purse: Implementation and Fraud Prevention

While expanding the R&D credit is vital for economic growth, the state must ensure that the program does not become a vehicle for fraud or wasteful spending. Implementing a state-level certification process provides Alaska with several layers of protection that are currently unavailable under the passive federal tie-in system.

Rigorous Application and Audit Standards

The Alaska government can adopt the audit techniques used by the Arizona Commerce Authority (ACA) to maintain the integrity of their refundable R&D credit.

• Affidavits and Perjury Penalties: Every application must include a sworn affidavit signed by a company officer, attesting under penalty of perjury that the research activities and financial expenditures are accurate and comply with state law.
• Substantial Completion Review: The administering agency would conduct an initial review to ensure the application is “substantially complete” before it enters the processing queue. If the technical description of the research is vague or the financial documentation is missing, the application is rejected.
• Site Visits and Technical Audits: The state should reserve the statutory right to perform site visits and formal audits of any claimant. This is particularly important for high-value claims in remote sectors like mining or North Slope energy, where verifying the presence of specialized equipment and personnel is a key fraud deterrent.

Implementing an Annual Statewide Cap

To manage the fiscal impact on the General Fund, the state should place a hard annual cap on the total amount of credits issued through the state certification program.

Table 3: State Innovation Cap Precedents

By using a “First-Come, First-Served” system, the state can control its exposure while providing a clear signal to the business community about the level of support available each year.

Cost Analysis: Initial Outlay vs. Future Economic Resilience

Critics often view tax credits solely as a loss of current revenue. However, for a state like Alaska, which faces a long-term decline in oil production and a persistent “brain drain” of young professionals, the R&D tax credit must be viewed as an infrastructure investment.

The Multiplier Effect of Innovation Jobs

State-level economic development incentives have been shown to have a significant “multiplier” effect. In California, every dollar spent on the California Competes Tax Credit (CCTC) is estimated to generate as much as $5.66 in total economic benefits, as the earnings from the jobs created far exceed the cost of the credit. Furthermore, each incentivized job in a high-tech sector has been found to create nearly three additional local jobs in service and logistics industries.

In Alaska, where high operating costs for energy and labor act as a natural deterrent to business, the R&D credit serves as a necessary “de-risking” tool. By lowering the cost of research, the state encourages private investment that would otherwise flow to the lower-48.

Long-Term Revenue Stabilization

The “cost” of the R&D credit—initially projected at $5 million to $10 million annually under the proposed cap—will be recovered over time through several mechanisms:

• Expansion of the Corporate Tax Base: As startups mature into profitable C-corporations, their contribution to Alaska’s corporate income tax will grow. Currently, corporate income taxes are a relatively small part of state revenue ($389 million in 2024), but they are far more stable than petroleum taxes.
• Reduced Rural Subsidies: Innovation in “polar problems,” such as microgrid efficiency and Arctic housing, directly reduces the state’s long-term costs for subsidizing rural energy and maintaining remote infrastructure.
• Attraction of Federal Matching Funds: State R&D credits often make Alaskan firms more competitive for federal Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) grants and Department of Energy (DOE) funding, bringing additional outside capital into the state.

Table 4: Long-Term ROI Projection Matrix

The Strategic Importance of Reform: Alaska’s Competitive Future

The consequences of maintaining the status quo are not merely financial; they are existential for Alaska’s role as a technological frontier. As other states aggressively modernize their innovation incentives, Alaska risks falling into a permanent “Innovation Gap”.

Reversing the Brain Drain

Alaska has lost over 17,000 working-age residents in the past decade, a decline of 8.5%. This loss is particularly acute among STEM graduates and tech-savvy entrepreneurs who find better support systems in the lower-48. By implementing a refundable, SMB-friendly R&D credit, Alaska sends a clear message that it is a “proving ground” for the future, encouraging young Alaskans to stay and build their businesses at home.

Capitalizing on the “Arctic Opening”

Climate change and shifting global logistics are increasing interest in the Arctic. Research activity in areas like Bering Strait shipping, marine ecosystem monitoring, and defense capabilities is growing rapidly. However, much of this research is currently performed by federal agencies or out-of-state universities. A robust, accessible state R&D credit would empower Alaska’s private sector to lead these efforts, ensuring that the economic value of Arctic research remains within the state.

Supporting Established “Anchor” Industries

Innovation is not only for tech startups; it is essential for the survival of Alaska’s core industries.

• Mining: Developing new extractive technologies that are safer and more efficient in remote, hard-rock environments.
• Fisheries: Engineering gear modifications and electronic monitoring to reduce bycatch and improve sustainability.
• Aerospace: Building a supply chain of high-tech manufacturers around the Pacific Spaceport Complex to reduce reliance on outside supplies.

Without a state-level credit that is decoupled from the federal bottleneck, these industries will continue to struggle with high operational costs, missing opportunities to implement the iterative improvements necessary for long-term competitiveness.

Conclusion: Recommendations for the Alaska Legislature

The mandatory federal qualification requirement for the Alaska R&D tax credit serves as an unintended barrier that disproportionately affects the very small and medium businesses that Alaska needs to diversify its economy. To fix this “Frontier Innovation Gap,” the Alaska Legislature should consider the following actions:

• Decouple AS 43.20.021 from Federal Claim Requirements: Amend state law to allow a state-level R&D credit based on in-state expenditures, certified by a state agency, regardless of the taxpayer’s federal claim status.
• Establish a State Certification Process: Task the Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development (DCCED) with administering an annual application process, providing SMBs with a streamlined path to innovation relief.
• Implement Targeted Refundability for SMBs: Create a refundable “Innovation Voucher” for startups and small businesses with less than $5 million in gross receipts, providing the liquidity needed to sustain research through pre-revenue phases.
• Protect the General Fund with Caps and Audits: Implement a statewide annual cap (e.g., $10 million) and rigorous audit procedures to prevent fraud and ensure that every dollar of state support is tied to genuine Alaskan innovation.

By taking these steps, Alaska can transform its R&D tax credit from a dormant provision used only by large corporations into a vibrant tool for economic growth, job creation, and the technological mastery of the Arctic frontier.

Works Cited

1. The Alaska Science and Technology Plan, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://www.alaska.edu/research/scor/AK%20Science%20and%20Technology%20Plan%202022%20DRAFT%20updated%208.12.2022.pdf
2. Capitol Report April 2025 – Alaska Senate Majority, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://alaskasenate.org/senator/stevens/042425_capitol_report.htm
3. Alaska R&D Tax Credits – Strike Tax Advisory, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://www.striketax.com/state-rd-credits/alaska-r-d-tax-credits
4. Alaska R&D Tax Credit Explained for Businesses – Swanson Reed, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://www.swansonreed.com/research-tax-credit/alaska/
5. Alaska R&D Tax Credits in 2023, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://bowersrd.com/alaska-rd-tax-credits-in-2023/
6. Small Business R&D Tax Credit: Eligibility, Expenses & How It Works – Ramp, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://ramp.com/blog/small-business-r-d-tax-credits
7. R&D Tax Credit FAQs For Large and Small Businesses – BDO, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://www.bdo.com/insights/tax/r-d-tax-credit-faqs-for-large-and-small-businesses
8. Appendix E: Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats – commerce.Alaska.gov, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://www.commerce.alaska.gov/web/Portals/0/pub/CEDS/Appendix%20E%20SWOT%20Analysis.pdf?ver=2022-11-14-101456-237
9. Alaska Aerospace Corporation’s 2024 Annual Report, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://akaerospace.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/Alaska-Aerospace-Corporation-2024-Annual-Report-1.pdf
10. Anchorage’s Top 10 Startups That Tech Professionals Should Watch Out For in 2024, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://www.nucamp.co/blog/coding-bootcamp-anchorage-ak-anchorages-top-10-startups-that-tech-professionals-should-watch-out-for-in-2024
11. Innovation Ecosystems Map – Technical.ly, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://technical.ly/ecosystems/
12. Most & Least Innovative States in 2026 – WalletHub, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://wallethub.com/edu/most-innovative-states/31890
13. Research and Development Tax Credit (R&D) – Maryland Commerce, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://commerce.maryland.gov/fund/programs-for-businesses/research-and-development-tax-credit
14. Arizona Commerce Authority REFUNDABLE RESEARCH AND …, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://www.azcommerce.com/media/32116/RD-Guidelines-1-2-13.pdf
15. CT small businesses hope their latest R&D tax credit push pays off, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://ctmirror.org/2026/03/05/research-development-tax-credit-small-business-biotech-ct/
16. A Hiring Incentive that Works: The California Competes Tax Credit – PPIC, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://www.ppic.org/publication/a-hiring-incentive-that-works-the-california-competes-tax-credit/
17. 2024 Economic Forecast – AEDC, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://aedcweb.com/report/2024-economic-forecast/
18. Alaska Statutes Title 43. Revenue and Taxation § 43.20.021 – Codes – FindLaw, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://codes.findlaw.com/ak/title-43-revenue-and-taxation/ak-st-sect-43-20-021/
19. Alaska R&D Tax Credit | AndreTaxCo, PLLC, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://www.andretaxco.com/alaska-rdcredits
20. Are R&D Tax Credits Available in Alaska? | See if You Qualify – KBKG, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://www.kbkg.com/research-tax-credit/alaska-rd-tax-credit
21. Alaska – ICS Tax, LLC, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://ics-tax.com/research-and-development-tax-credits/research-tax-credit-alaska/
22. Alaska Research and Development Tax Credit – Endeavor Advisors, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://www.endeavoradvisors.com/alaska-rd-tax-credit/
23. US R&D Tax Credits: How to Document and Claim Costs for Automation | Outbooks, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://outbooks.com/blog/us-rd-tax-credits-claim-automation-process-costs/
24. Navigating Regulatory Challenges in R&D Tax Credit Claims – MGO CPA, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://www.mgocpa.com/perspective/research-and-development-tax-credit-claims-regulatory-challenges/
25. Wasilla R&D Tax Credit for Local Companies Explained – Swanson Reed, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://www.swansonreed.com/research-tax-credit/alaska/case-studies/wasilla/
26. The R&D Tax Credit & Deduction: Watch for Major Tax, Filing Changes: CLA, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://www.claconnect.com/en/resources/articles/24/the-r-and-d-tax-credit-and-deduction-watch-for-major-tax-filing-changes
27. Appendix D: Emerging Sectors – commerce.Alaska.gov, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://www.commerce.alaska.gov/web/Portals/0/pub/CEDS/Appendix%20D%20Emerging%20Sectors.pdf?ver=2022-11-14-101456-463
28. Alaska Tax Rates & Rankings | Alaska State Taxes – Tax Foundation, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://taxfoundation.org/location/alaska/
29. Alaska: Who Pays? 7th Edition – ITEP, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://itep.org/alaska-who-pays-7th-edition/
30. State Tax Watch 2026 – ITEP, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://itep.org/state-tax-watch/
31. SALT Alert! 2026-02: Significant State and Local Tax Changes Affecting the 2025 Filing and Payment Obligations of Entities Taxed – KPMG International, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://kpmg.com/kpmg-us/content/dam/kpmg/taxnewsflash/pdf/2026/02/salt-alert-2026-02.pdf
32. SB 7048 – BILL ANALYSIS AND FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2026/7048/Analyses/2026s07048.pre.ap.PDF
33. Some States Are Splitting from the OBBB – Is Yours? – Aprio, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://www.aprio.com/insights-events/some-states-are-splitting-from-the-obbb-is-yours-ins-article-tax/
34. Maryland R&D Tax Credits, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://www.striketax.com/state-rd-credits/maryland-r-d-tax-credits
35. Maryland Research and Development Tax Credit – Endeavor Advisors, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://www.endeavoradvisors.com/maryland-rd-tax-credit/
36. Are R&D Tax Credits Available in Maryland? | See if You Qualify – KBKG, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://www.kbkg.com/research-tax-credit/maryland-rd-tax-credit
37. State-level R&D tax credits vs. Federal R&D credits – Swanson Reed, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://www.swansonreed.com/research-tax-credit/federal/faqs/state-level-rd-tax-credits-vs-federal-rd-credits/
38. R&D Tax Credits: A Comprehensive Guide to the Tax Savings Opportunity All Businesses Should Know About – Warren Averett CPAs & Advisors, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://warrenaverett.com/insights/guides/comprehensive-guide-rd-tax-credits/
39. R&D Refundable Tax Credit – Arizona Commerce Authority, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://www.azcommerce.com/incentives/research-development-tax-credit/rd-refundable-tax-credit/
40. 2024, Annual State Government Tax Collections: Alaska | FRED | St. Louis Fed, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://fred.stlouisfed.org/release/tables?eid=151977&rid=143
41. Chapter 0114 – 511R – S Ver of SB1313 – Arizona Legislature, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://www.azleg.gov/legtext/51leg/1r/laws/0114.htm
42. Arizona Commerce Authority REFUNDABLE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT TAX CREDIT – Program Rules & Guidelines0F, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://www.azcommerce.com/media/ipolf0kc/aca-ruling-24-04-rd-website.pdf
43. Inside Alaska’s Economy: Key Industries Leading the Way, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://www.alaskaaircargo.com/alaska/inside-alaskas-economy-key-industries-leading-the-way/
44. Spring 2024 – Revenue Forecast, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://dor.alaska.gov/docs/default-source/homepage-documents/revenue-spring-2024-forecast.pdf?sfvrsn=1efbef65_1
45. UA reports record research and development expenditures in FY24, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://www.alaska.edu/news/system/2026-ua-reports-record-research-development-expenditures-f24.php
46. 2018 archived news | Office of Intellectual Property and Commercialization, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://www.uaf.edu/oipc/news/2018/
47. 2019 archived news | Office of Intellectual Property and Commercialization, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://www.uaf.edu/oipc/news/2019/
48. 2021 ANNUAL REPORT – Alaska Aerospace, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://akaerospace.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/2021-AAC-Annual-Report-final-web.pdf
49. Archives of Dean Reports | College of Fisheries and Ocean Sciences, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://www.uaf.edu/cfos/about-us/deans-office/communications/archive-deans-reports/index.php
50. Global Sustainability Tax Policy Developments – EY, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://globaltaxnews.ey.com/Login/ViewNewsAttachment.aspx?AlertID=175318&AttachmentName=JC%2BqYs3tZKwMWGCtdoBooUwlbM%2BgLFAO%2BLFtweZMKUSKolIPjjbsqRVTG6zZuYa4&ualertID=null
51. NSF – NCSES Academic Institution Profiles – U. Alaska, Anchorage : Total R&D expenditures, by source of funds and R&D field: 2024, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://ncsesdata.nsf.gov/profiles/site?print=true&method=report&tin=U3251001&id=h2
52. Alaska Bycatch Review Task Force Recommendations Progress Report – Spring 2024, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://www.akleg.gov/basis/get_documents.asp?session=33&docid=44873
53. Drilling for Superhot Geothermal Energy: A Technology Gap Analysis, accessed on March 16, 2026, https://pangea.stanford.edu/ERE/pdf/IGAstandard/SGW/2025/Pearce.pdf