Massachusetts Research and Development Tax Policy: A Comprehensive Analysis of M.G.L. c. 63, § 38M, Sectoral Refundability, and Small Business Payroll Offset Initiatives

1. Executive Summary

The fiscal landscape of Massachusetts has long been defined by its commitment to a high-growth innovation economy, primarily through a sophisticated architecture of tax incentives designed to attract and retain scientific and technological enterprises. At the core of this strategy lies the Research and Development (R&D) tax credit, codified under Massachusetts General Laws (M.G.L.) chapter 63, section 38M. This statutory provision serves as a critical mechanism for corporations to offset the substantial costs associated with technical experimentation. However, as the global and national tax environments evolve—marked by significant federal overhauls such as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) and the more recent One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) of 2025—the Commonwealth’s R&D policies have undergone rigorous scrutiny and adjustment. Central to current debates are the limitations of credit refundability, the lack of a general payroll tax offset for early-stage startups, and the complex interaction between state-level “rolling” and “static” conformity to the Internal Revenue Code (IRC).

2. Legislative Foundation and Core Components of M.G.L. c. 63, § 38M

The primary vehicle for research-based tax relief in Massachusetts is the corporate excise credit allowed under M.G.L. c. 63, § 38M. This credit is available to domestic and foreign business corporations subject to the corporate excise under section 39.^{1, 2, 3} The Massachusetts research credit is fundamentally rooted in the federal research credit as defined by IRC section 41, specifically conforming to the federal code as it existed on August 12, 1991, for its core definitions.^{1, 4} This state-level incentive allows for a credit against the excise due, calculated as 10 percent of the excess of qualified research expenses (QREs) over a historical base amount, plus 15 percent of basic research payments made to qualified organizations.^{1, 4, 5}

To satisfy the requirements for these credits, a business must demonstrate that its expenditures are “qualified” under the federal “Four-Part Test.” This test mandates that the research must be intended to develop or improve a business component (product, process, or software), be technological in nature, involve the elimination of technical uncertainty, and utilize a process of experimentation.^{6, 7} A defining characteristic of the Massachusetts credit is its geographic restriction: unlike the federal credit, which applies to research conducted across the United States, the section 38M credit is strictly limited to expenses incurred for research activity conducted within the borders of the Commonwealth.^{5, 8}

Table 1: Core Components of M.G.L. c. 63, § 38M

The expenses eligible for inclusion in the credit calculation include wages paid to employees directly involved in or supporting research, a portion of payments made to outside contractors (typically 65 percent), and the cost of supplies and prototypes consumed during the research process.^{5, 9} Computer rental costs and cloud computing expenses related to research are also potentially includable, provided they are tied to Massachusetts-based projects.^{5, 6, 10}

3. Methodologies for Credit Calculation: Regular vs. Alternative Simplified Credit

Massachusetts provides two primary paths for determining the credit amount: the “Regular Method” and the “Alternative Simplified Credit” (ASC), also known as the Alternative Simplified Method (ASM). The choice between these methods is a strategic decision for taxpayers, as each carries different documentation requirements and potential benefit levels depending on the company’s historical R&D spend and revenue trajectory.

The Regular Method and the Incremental Base

Under the Regular Method, the credit is 10 percent of the amount by which current-year QREs exceed a calculated “base amount.” The base amount is generally the product of the taxpayer’s average annual gross receipts for the four taxable years preceding the credit year and a “fixed-base ratio”.^{1, 5} For established companies, the fixed-base ratio is determined by the relationship between aggregate QREs and aggregate gross receipts during the 1984-1988 period, capped at 16 percent.^{1, 11}

A critical component of the Regular Method is the “minimum base amount” rule. This rule stipulates that the base amount used in the calculation cannot be less than 50 percent of the current year’s qualified research expenses.^{1, 4, 11} This ensures that even for companies with very low historical spending or high recent revenue growth, the credit is effectively limited to 5 percent of total current-year QREs (10 percent of the 50 percent excess).^{5, 8}

The Alternative Simplified Credit (ASC) Transition

For many newer companies or those lacking robust historical data from the 1980s, the ASC offers a more accessible calculation. Since 2021, the ASC allows a credit of 10 percent on the current year’s QREs that exceed 50 percent of the taxpayer’s average QREs for the three preceding taxable years.^{1, 3, 4} If a company has no research expenses in any of the three preceding years, the credit defaults to 5 percent of current-year QREs.^{1, 4}

Table 2: Historical ASC Credit Rates

The ASC method is often preferred by startups and volatile technology firms because it eliminates the need for gross receipts data and focuses solely on the recent history of research spending.⁵ However, a significant limitation of the ASC is that it does not permit the 15 percent basic research payment add-on available under the Regular Method.⁵ Taxpayers must elect to use the ASC, and this election is generally intended to be a long-term choice that should not be changed without a strong justification and consultation with tax advisors.⁵

4. Statutory Limitations, Carryovers, and the 75 Percent Rule

While a corporation may generate a significant research credit, the amount it can actually use to reduce its excise in any single year is subject to strict statutory ceilings. These limits are designed to ensure that every corporation pays at least a minimum amount of tax to the Commonwealth.

The 75 Percent Utilization Cap

Under M.G.L. c. 63, § 38M(d), the research credit is limited to offsetting 100 percent of a corporation’s first $25,000 of excise, plus only 75 percent of any excise liability exceeding $25,000.^{1, 2, 9} This $25,000 threshold must be shared among members of a controlled group filing a combined return.^{1, 5} Furthermore, the credit cannot be used to reduce the excise below the statutory minimum, which is currently set at $456.^{5, 9}

Carryover Periods: 15-Year vs. Infinite

Unused credits are not lost but are subject to different carryover rules based on the reason they were disallowed. Credits that exceed the total excise for the year (but are not specifically blocked by the 75 percent rule) may be carried forward for 15 taxable years.^{1, 3, 9} Conversely, any portion of the credit that was specifically disallowed because of the 75 percent limitation—meaning it was part of the 25 percent of excise above $25,000 that cannot be offset—may be carried forward indefinitely.^{3, 5, 9} This infinite carryforward provides long-term value for profitable companies with sustained R&D investments that consistently hit the utilization cap.⁵

Table 3: Utilization Limitations and Carryovers

5. The Refundability Paradox: Life Sciences and Climatetech Exceptions

For most Massachusetts corporations, the section 38M credit is strictly nonrefundable. This creates a significant barrier for early-stage startups that incur high research costs but have yet to generate taxable income.^{5, 8} To address this “refundability paradox,” the Commonwealth has established specific sectoral programs that allow certain companies to monetize their credits for cash.

The Massachusetts Life Sciences Center (MLSC) Program

The most prominent exception is the MLSC Tax Incentive Program. Certified life sciences companies can apply to the MLSC for an annual award that includes the ability to receive a refund of excess research credits generated under section 38M.^{12, 13} If a company is certified and granted an allocation, it can receive a refund equal to 90 percent of its excess research credits that would otherwise have been carried forward.^{12, 13, 14} The remaining 10 percent of the credit is effectively forfeited in exchange for immediate liquidity.¹³

The program is highly competitive, with a $40 million annual cap on all life sciences tax incentives.^{14, 15} Eligibility requires a commitment to specific job creation and retention targets in Massachusetts. For the 2026 cycle, companies generally must employ at least 10 permanent full-time employees and commit to creating additional “net new” positions.^{12, 13}

Table 4: MLSC Tax Incentive Treatments

The New Climatetech Incentive Program

Modeling after the success of the life sciences framework, the 2024 “Economic Development Act” established the Climatetech Tax Incentive Program, administered by the Massachusetts Clean Energy Technology Center (MassCEC).^{16, 17} Effective for tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2024, this program provides similar refundable credits for certified climatetech companies.^{17, 18, 19}

One of the centerpieces of this program is the Climatetech Incentive Jobs Credit, which is 90 percent refundable for companies that create at least five net new permanent full-time jobs in the climatetech sector.^{17, 18} Additionally, a specific Climatetech Qualified Research Expenses Credit has been established, mirroring the 38M calculation (10 percent of excess QREs plus 15 percent of basic research) but subject to the discretionary award process and the program’s $30 million annual aggregate cap.^{18, 19, 20}

6. Small Business Payroll Tax Offset: Federal Precedent and State Proposals

One of the most significant gaps between federal and Massachusetts research credit policy is the treatment of payroll tax offsets. Under federal law, the Protecting Americans from Tax Hikes (PATH) Act of 2015 and subsequent amendments under the Inflation Reduction Act allow “qualified small businesses” to elect to use their R&D credits to offset the employer portion of Social Security and Medicare taxes.^{6, 21, 22}

The Federal Payroll Offset Model

Federal law allows startups with less than $5 million in gross receipts and no gross receipts prior to the preceding five-year period to offset up to $500,000 annually in payroll taxes.^{6, 21, 22} This is a dollar-for-dollar offset that provides immediate cash flow relief to pre-revenue companies that have employees but no income tax liability.^{6, 21}

The Massachusetts Advocacy Landscape

Currently, Massachusetts does not offer a general payroll tax offset for its research credit.⁸ A Massachusetts startup without income must either carry its credits forward for 15 years or attempt to qualify for the highly specific sectoral programs like MLSC or MassCEC.⁵

Industry groups such as the Massachusetts High Technology Council and Associated Industries of Massachusetts (AIM) have historically advocated for policies that improve the competitiveness of the state’s tax code for small businesses.^{23, 24, 25} Proposals have surfaced in the 2025-2026 legislative session, such as House Bill 3073 and Senate Bill 1957, which aim to expand refundable tax credits and address the affordability crisis for small businesses.²⁶ However, these proposals often face headwinds from budget-conscious legislators who view broad refundability as a significant revenue drain, given that tax credits typically do not require cash outlays unless they are refundable or transferable.²⁷

7. Conformity Challenges: Section 174 Amortization and the OBBBA

The relationship between the Massachusetts research credit and federal tax law was further complicated by the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), which mandated that research and experimental (R&E) expenditures under IRC section 174 be capitalized and amortized over five years (domestic) or 15 years (foreign), rather than being immediately expensed.^{6, 7, 28}

The One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) of 2025

The federal One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), signed into law on July 4, 2025, largely rolled back these capitalization requirements.^{10, 29} It restored immediate expensing for domestic R&E costs for tax years beginning after December 31, 2024, and allowed small businesses (gross receipts under $31 million) to elect full deductibility retroactively for 2022-2024.^{7, 10}

Massachusetts House Bill 4975 and Phased-In Adoption

Because Massachusetts corporations follow “rolling” conformity to the IRC for most income and deduction purposes, the state would automatically adopt the OBBBA’s immediate expensing rules unless the legislature intervened.^{20, 29, 30} To avoid a sudden $288 million revenue loss in Fiscal Year 2026, the Healey administration proposed House Bill 4975.²⁹

HB 4975 proposes a “phased-in” approach to OBBBA conformity. Under this plan, the state would delay the adoption of full domestic R&E expensing until January 1, 2026.^{29, 30} For the 2025 tax year, this creates a situation where businesses may be able to expense R&D costs for federal tax purposes but must still capitalize and amortize them for Massachusetts state purposes.³⁰ This divergence requires businesses to maintain separate federal and state depreciation and amortization schedules.^{7, 30}

Table 5: Federal vs. Proposed State Tax Treatment (2025/2026)

8. Impact on Pass-Through Entities and the 4 Percent Surtax

The tax treatment of R&D credits for pass-through entities (PTEs) such as S corporations, partnerships, and LLCs is a nuanced area of Massachusetts law. S corporations are subject to the corporate excise and can apply the research credit at the entity level against their excise liability (either the income or non-income measure).^{3, 4} However, an S corporation cannot share any excess research credit with its shareholders.^{3, 5}

For partnerships and LLCs, the credit is attributed on a pro rata basis to the owners, who then claim it against their personal income tax under M.G.L. c. 62.⁵ This distinction is critical for high-income filers subject to the 4 percent surtax on income over $1 million (inflation-adjusted to $1,083,150 for 2025).¹⁸ The state’s elective Pass-Through Entity Excise, created in 2021 to circumvent the federal SALT cap, is currently being reviewed for expansion to include the surtax, which would allow owners to use R&D credits more effectively against their total state tax burden.^{29, 30}

9. Administrative Compliance and Audit Preparedness

Claiming the research credit in Massachusetts involves substantial administrative rigor. Taxpayers must complete and submit Schedule RC (Research Credit) alongside their corporate or personal income tax returns.^{3, 8} Additionally, all credits—both generated and used—must be reported on the Credit Manager Schedule (Schedule CMS).³²

Documentation Requirements

The Department of Revenue (DOR) and the courts have emphasized the importance of maintaining contemporaneous records to substantiate research claims. Because the research credit is one of the most closely scrutinized incentives, businesses should preserve:

• Project-level descriptions mapping activities to the Four-Part Test.^{6, 7}
• Detailed payroll data linking employee time to specific qualified tasks.^{5, 10}
• Documentation of the location where research was performed to satisfy the “in-state” requirement.^{5, 8}
• Substantiation for the base amount, which may require records spanning decades if the Regular Method is used.⁵

Failure to provide these records can lead to the disallowance of the credit and potential penalties. With the upcoming 2026 changes to federal Form 6765, which will require more granular reporting of QREs by business component (Section G), Massachusetts practitioners anticipate that the DOR may eventually align its auditing procedures with these more detailed federal disclosures.^{6, 10}

10. Apportionment and Sales Factor Changes

Effective for tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2025, Massachusetts is transitioning all industries to a single sales factor apportionment formula.^{18, 19} For R&D-heavy firms with significant property and payroll in the state but customers located elsewhere, this change is generally favorable. It eliminates the property and payroll factors that historically penalized companies for centering their operations in the Commonwealth.¹⁹ However, the law includes a “throwback” provision: if a corporation’s sales factor is zero (meaning no sales both in and out of the state), its income will be apportioned based on property and payroll, ensuring that companies cannot entirely escape the corporate excise.¹⁹

11. Future Policy Directions: 2026 and Beyond

The 2025-2026 period is shaping up to be a transformative era for Massachusetts business law. Beyond tax conformity, businesses must prepare for increased Paid Family and Medical Leave (PFML) benefits (maximum weekly benefit of $1,230.39 as of January 1, 2026) and the full enforcement of pay transparency requirements for employers with more than 25 employees.³³

Legislative leaders have signaled a desire to safeguard future revenue through mechanisms like the “Maryland model,” which automatically delays the implementation of federal tax changes that have a state revenue impact exceeding $20 million.²⁹ This suggests that “temporary misalignment” between federal and state research incentives could become a recurring feature of the Massachusetts tax landscape.

12. Strategic Conclusions

The Massachusetts research and development tax credit framework, centered on M.G.L. c. 63, § 38M, provides a powerful set of tools for innovation-driven enterprises, but it is characterized by significant complexity and sectoral selectivity. While large, profitable corporations benefit from high incremental rates and indefinite carryforwards, the “refundability gap” for general startups remains a strategic challenge. The Commonwealth’s focus on targeted sectoral refundability—initially in life sciences and now in climatetech—suggests a preference for “discretionary” over “entitlement” credits for small businesses.

For small businesses seeking a payroll tax offset similar to the federal model, the current state landscape requires a more localized approach, focusing on certification through the MLSC or MassCEC programs. Furthermore, the divergence between federal expensing under the OBBBA and the proposed state-level capitalization requirements in 2025 necessitates sophisticated modeling and separate tax accounting. As the state moves toward single sales factor apportionment and a more restrictive conformity regime, businesses must prioritize contemporaneous documentation and project-level tracking to defend their credit claims and ensure they can leverage the full value of the Commonwealth’s innovation incentives.

Works Cited

1. Mass. General Laws c.63 § 38M, fecha de acceso: marzo 19, 2026, https://www.mass.gov/info-details/mass-general-laws-c63-ss-38m
2. Massachusetts R&D Tax Credit Benefits for Corporations, fecha de acceso: marzo 19, 2026, https://www.swansonreed.com/research-tax-credit/massachusetts/
3. Massachusetts Research Tax Credit | Mass.gov, fecha de acceso: marzo 19, 2026, https://www.mass.gov/info-details/massachusetts-research-tax-credit
4. The Massachusetts R&D tax credit: How can your business benefit? – Remote, fecha de acceso: marzo 19, 2026, https://remote.com/blog/taxes/research-development-tax-credit-massachusetts
5. Massachusetts R&D Tax Credits – Strike Tax Advisory, fecha de acceso: marzo 19, 2026, https://www.striketax.com/state-rd-credits/massachusetts-r-d-tax-credits
6. What is the R&D Tax Credit? | Who Qualifies? – KBKG, fecha de acceso: marzo 19, 2026, https://www.kbkg.com/research-tax-credits
7. IRS Scrutiny on R&D Tax Credits: How to Protect Your Claim in 2025, fecha de acceso: marzo 19, 2026, https://massietaxcredits.com/resources/articles/irs-scrutiny-rd-tax-credits-2025/
8. Massachusetts R&D Tax Credit Case Study – KBKG, fecha de acceso: marzo 19, 2026, https://www.kbkg.com/rd-tax-credit-case-study/massachusetts
9. fecha de acceso: marzo 19, 2026, https://www.striketax.com/state-rd-credits/massachusetts-r-d-tax-credits#:~:text=The%20Massachusetts%20R%26D%20Tax%20Credit,QREs)%20conducted%20in%20the%20state.
10. R&D tax credits got simpler at federal level. Not in the states | Our Insights – Plante Moran, fecha de acceso: marzo 19, 2026, https://www.plantemoran.com/explore-our-thinking/insight/2026/01/rd-tax-credits-got-simpler-at-federal-level
11. Comparing R&D Tax Credits and Incentives in Select States – C G A, fecha de acceso: marzo 19, 2026, https://www.cga.ct.gov/2024/rpt/pdf/2024-R-0032.pdf
12. MLSC Tax Incentives Program: Eligibility, Calculation & More | Cherry Bekaert, fecha de acceso: marzo 19, 2026, https://www.cbh.com/insights/articles/2025-mlsc-tax-incentives-eligibility-calculation-more/
13. A Guide to the Massachusetts Life Sciences Tax Incentive Program – LGA CPA, fecha de acceso: marzo 19, 2026, https://www.lga.cpa/insights/blog/a-guide-to-the-massachusetts-life-sciences-tax-incentive-program/
14. Massachusetts Life Sciences Companies Tax Incentives Application Due March 31, 2026 – Moss Adams, fecha de acceso: marzo 19, 2026, https://www.mossadams.com/articles/2026/02/apply-for-life-sciences-tax-incentives-in-ma
15. Life Sciences Tax Incentive Program – Massachusetts Life Sciences …, fecha de acceso: marzo 19, 2026, https://www.masslifesciences.com/wp-content/uploads/MLSC-2025-Tax-Incentive-Solicitation.pdf
16. General Law – Part I, Title IX, Chapter 63, Section 38Q – Massachusetts Legislature, fecha de acceso: marzo 19, 2026, https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleIX/Chapter63/Section38Q
17. State R&D Tax Credits: Recent Updates and Impacts – Aprio, fecha de acceso: marzo 19, 2026, https://www.aprio.com/insights-events/state-rd-tax-credits-recent-updates-and-impacts-ins-article-tax/
18. 2025 Legislative Update – Davis, Agnor, Rapaport, & Skalny, fecha de acceso: marzo 19, 2026, https://www.darslaw.com/business-planning-transactions/2025-legislative-update/
19. Massachusetts Tax Changes Affecting the 2025 Tax Year – Edelstein, fecha de acceso: marzo 19, 2026, https://www.edelsteincpa.com/massachusetts-tax-changes-affecting-the-2025-tax-year/
20. Corporate Excise Tax Updates Affecting the 2024 Tax Year | Mass.gov, fecha de acceso: marzo 19, 2026, https://www.mass.gov/info-details/corporate-excise-tax-updates-affecting-the-2024-tax-year
21. Do you qualify for the R&D credit payroll tax offset? – Wipfli, fecha de acceso: marzo 19, 2026, https://www.wipfli.com/insights/articles/tax-eligibility-for-the-research-and-development-credit-payroll-tax-offset
22. Qualified Small Business (QSB) Payroll Tax Credit | United States – Leyton, fecha de acceso: marzo 19, 2026, https://leyton.com/us/insights/articles/qualified-small-business-qsb-payroll-tax-credit/
23. The High Tech Agenda: August 2025 – Massachusetts High Technology Council, fecha de acceso: marzo 19, 2026, https://www.mhtc.org/high-tech-agenda-august-2025/
24. State Tax Competitiveness Matters To The Innovation Economy, fecha de acceso: marzo 19, 2026, https://www.mhtc.org/state-tax-competitiveness-matters-to-the-innovation-economy/
25. Testimony before the Joint Committee on Revenue, fecha de acceso: marzo 19, 2026, https://aimnet.org/app/uploads/2024/02/06132023-revenue-various-bills.pdf
26. An Act addressing affordability for small businesses (S.1957) – TrackBill, fecha de acceso: marzo 19, 2026, https://trackbill.com/bill/massachusetts-senate-bill-1957-an-act-addressing-affordability-for-small-businesses/2361661/
27. The Fiscal Case Against Broad Business Tax Credits – ITEP, fecha de acceso: marzo 19, 2026, https://itep.org/the-fiscal-case-against-broad-business-tax-credits/
28. R&D Deductions Restored: A New Era for Innovation and Tax Relief, fecha de acceso: marzo 19, 2026, https://strategictaxplanning.net/resources/r-d-deductions-restored-a-new-era-for-innovation-and-tax-relief
29. Understanding Proposed Changes to Massachusetts Tax Conformity for Businesses Under H.4975 – LGA CPA, fecha de acceso: marzo 19, 2026, https://www.lga.cpa/insights/blog/understanding-proposed-changes-to-massachusetts-tax-conformity-for-businesses-under-h-4975/
30. Healey-Driscoll Administration Files Legislation to Modernize …, fecha de acceso: marzo 19, 2026, https://www.mass.gov/news/healey-driscoll-administration-files-legislation-to-modernize-massachusetts-tax-code
31. New Law Restores 100% Bonus Depreciation and R&D Expensing – Marks Paneth, fecha de acceso: marzo 19, 2026, https://www.markspaneth.com/insights/industry/manufacturing-distribution/new-law-restores-100-bonus-depreciation-and-rd-expensing
32. Credit Manager Schedule Instructions | Mass.gov, fecha de acceso: marzo 19, 2026, https://www.mass.gov/info-details/credit-manager-schedule-instructions
33. Top 10 Employment Law Changes To Watch for in 2026 – Mirick O’Connell, fecha de acceso: marzo 19, 2026, https://www.mirickoconnell.com/top-10-employment-law-changes-to-watch-for-in-2026