This study provides a comprehensive analysis of the United States federal and Kentucky state Research and Development tax credit frameworks as applied to the industrial landscape of Owensboro, Kentucky. It examines five unique local industries, detailing their historical economic development, specific innovative activities, and eligibility under relevant statutory guidelines and administrative case law.

The Economic Foundation and Industrial Evolution of Owensboro, Kentucky

To properly analyze the application of localized tax incentives, one must first understand the macroeconomic and geographic factors that catalyzed industrial development in the target region. Owensboro, the administrative seat of Daviess County and the principal city of a metropolitan statistical area encompassing Daviess, Hancock, and McLean counties, possesses an economic history deeply intertwined with its natural topography. Originally settled in 1797 by William Smeathers and initially known as “Yellow Banks” due to the color of the soil along the banks of the Ohio River, the region’s early economic foundation was dictated almost entirely by waterway access. Before the advent of extensive national rail networks, the Ohio River facilitated the transit of raw materials and finished agricultural goods, establishing Owensboro as a primary trading and transport hub during the heyday of steam navigation.

Simultaneously, the region’s placement within the Western Coal Fields provided abundant, highly accessible energy resources. The southern part of Daviess County along the rolling hills of Panther Creek was rich in coal, which was mined extensively for generations to fuel early industrial boilers and power stations. Furthermore, the region’s fertile soil and high-capacity underground aquifers supported massive agricultural output, primarily focused on corn, soybeans, and tobacco. The convergence of fresh water, cheap energy, and river transport created an ecosystem ripe for heavy industry, metallurgy, and agricultural processing. Following World War II, the city diversified away from a purely agrarian dependence, leveraging its low-cost industrial electricity and riverfront infrastructure to attract major manufacturing corporations, effectively transitioning Owensboro into a powerful, diversified manufacturing hub. Today, the manufacturing sector accounts for approximately 16 percent of the county’s workforce, generating over $1.4 billion in regional GDP and supporting a highly skilled labor pool.

Industry Case Studies: R&D Tax Credit Eligibility in Owensboro

The structural divergence between the operational focus of the United States federal R&D tax credit and the infrastructural, capital-expenditure focus of the Kentucky state credit allows dynamic manufacturers in Owensboro to pursue highly lucrative, dual-track tax mitigation strategies. The following five case studies analyze unique industries deeply rooted in the region, explaining their historical development and outlining their specific eligibility under both tax regimes.

Primary Aluminum Smelting and Metallurgy: Century Aluminum

Historical Development and Regional Origin The primary aluminum smelting industry is fundamentally dependent on massive, uninterrupted, and cost-effective supplies of electricity. The Greater Owensboro region evolved into the largest producer of aluminum in the United States primarily due to the proximity of the Western Coal Fields, which historically fueled local power stations, yielding some of the lowest industrial electric rates in the country. Facilities such as Century Aluminum’s smelters in Hawesville (Hancock County) and Sebree were constructed along the Green and Ohio rivers to capitalize on the bulk barge transport of raw bauxite and alumina, as well as the cheap baseload power required for the highly energy-intensive Hall-Héroult electrolysis process. The Hawesville plant historically stood as the only facility in the United States capable of producing the high-purity aluminum required for critical military defense aerospace applications, such as the structural components of the F-35 fighter jet, cementing its importance to the national defense industrial base.

Federal and State R&D Tax Credit Application

Aluminum smelting is an inherently volatile thermo-chemical process that requires continuous technological optimization to maintain global competitiveness and environmental compliance.

Under the United States federal R&D tax credit framework (Internal Revenue Code Section 41), Century Aluminum’s engineering efforts to optimize potline efficiency and reduce perfluorocarbon (PFC) greenhouse gas emissions represent classic qualified research. The wages paid to metallurgists, process engineers, and environmental technicians attempting to resolve chemical imbalances in the aluminum pots satisfy the Section 174 elimination of uncertainty test. Furthermore, testing new metal matrix composites (MMCs) or designing lightweight, corrosion-resistant aluminum formulations for the automotive sector directly aligns with the discovering technological information test. However, applying the precedent established in Union Carbide Corp. v. Commissioner, the company must ensure that supply expenses claimed as Qualified Research Expenses (QREs) during experimental potline runs are meticulously separated from ordinary raw material costs used to produce commercial inventory, as supplies that would have been used in ordinary production regardless of the research are strictly disallowed.

Under the Kentucky Qualified Research Facility Tax Credit (KRS 141.395), the capital-intensive nature of the aluminum industry provides massive tax offset opportunities. If the Owensboro-area facility invests in new inert-gas melting furnaces, advanced continuous casting machinery, or constructs a completely new laboratory facility for advanced metallurgy testing, these expenditures represent tangible, depreciable property. So long as these capital expenditures are not merely replacing old, identical equipment (thereby navigating the strict replacement property exclusion detailed by the Kentucky Department of Revenue), the entire cost basis of the facility expansion and equipment installation qualifies for the 5 percent state tax credit.

Bourbon Distillation and Spirits Production: Green River Distilling Co.

Historical Development and Regional Origin Bourbon production is inextricably linked to Owensboro’s early agricultural output and geologic features. In 1885, visionary distiller J.W. McCulloch founded the Green River Distilling Company (officially designated as DSP-KY-10, the tenth registered distillery in Kentucky), leveraging the region’s vast corn harvests, access to limestone-filtered aquifers, and the Ohio River for global export. Prior to the devastating impacts of a 1918 facility fire and the enactment of Prohibition in 1920, Green River was among the most heavily awarded and globally recognized whiskey brands in the world, winning gold medals at the 1900 Paris Exposition and the 1905 Liege Exposition. During this golden era, Daviess County was a massive distillation hub, home to at least 18 commercial distilleries. Revived in 2014 and subsequently acquired by Bardstown Bourbon Company, the historic Green River facility now produces over 90,000 barrels annually, functioning both as a heritage consumer brand and a massive contract distilling operation for third-party labels.

Federal and State R&D Tax Credit Application

While distillation is traditionally viewed as an ancient craft, modern commercial spirits production involves highly sophisticated biochemistry, microbiology, and mechanical engineering.

Under IRC Section 41, Green River Distilling engages in the development of new product formulations, such as high-rye mashbills, experimental wheated bourbons, and innovative aging techniques like “Branch Aging,” which involves incorporating fire-toasted oak staves into the barrels to manipulate the liquid’s complexity. The wages of master distillers, analytical chemists, and quality control laboratory technicians conducting microbiological testing on proprietary yeast strains or experimenting with temperature fluctuations during the fermentation process qualify as federal QREs. However, as demonstrated by the landmark Tax Court decision in Siemer Milling Company v. Commissioner, the distillery must maintain rigid, contemporaneous scientific documentation proving that sensory testing or mashbill adjustments follow a systematic “process of experimentation.” The Siemer Milling case established a stringent precedent for the food and beverage industry, ruling that mere “recipe tasting” lacking a methodological plan to test, analyze, and refine a scientific hypothesis will result in the total disallowance of the federal credit.

Under KRS 141.395, to support its rapidly expanding custom and contract distilling operations, the facility requires state-of-the-art physical infrastructure. The capital construction costs of new, climate-controlled test rickhouses designed to manipulate atmospheric variables, the installation of highly specialized custom copper column stills used for experimental runs, or the equipping of new analytical chemistry laboratories for advanced product development constitute eligible depreciable property. These capital outlays yield a direct 5 percent reduction against the corporate income tax and the Limited Liability Entity Tax (LLET).

Automotive Frame and Component Manufacturing: Metalsa

Historical Development and Regional Origin Owensboro’s transition into advanced automotive manufacturing was driven by its geographic positioning and logistical advantages. Located within a single day’s heavy-freight drive of major Midwestern and Southern vehicle assembly plants—most notably the massive Toyota manufacturing facility in nearby Princeton, Indiana—Owensboro became an optimal location for tier-one automotive suppliers. The Daviess County region offered a highly skilled mechanical workforce, a favorable pro-business regulatory climate, and low operational costs. Metalsa Structural Products, a subsidiary of a Mexico-based conglomerate, established its Owensboro facility in 1997. The plant quickly became an anchor of the local economy, responsible for producing heavy-duty steel pickup truck frames, including 100 percent of the frames utilized for the Jeep Gladiator, demonstrating the region’s capability to support complex, high-tolerance heavy manufacturing.

Federal and State R&D Tax Credit Application

Automotive frame manufacturing sits at the cutting edge of materials science, structural engineering, and industrial automation.

Under the federal R&D tax credit, as original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) aggressively shift toward Electric Vehicles (EVs), suppliers like Metalsa face immense technological uncertainty regarding fundamental vehicle architecture. Modifying traditional heavy truck frames to safely accommodate the immense weight and thermal volatility of EV battery packs requires the rigorous testing and integration of Advanced High-Strength Steels (AHSS), Ultra High-Strength Steels (UHSS), and lightweight aluminum alloys (such as Aluminum 6008). The engineering labor hours spent on computer-aided design (CAD), finite element analysis, stress testing, and the development of new hydroforming or cold-forming manufacturing processes perfectly align with the Section 41 requirements. Furthermore, following the judicial precedent established in Suder v. Commissioner, the time spent by Metalsa’s senior engineering management directing these strategic initiatives and evaluating high-level structural designs is fully eligible for the credit, provided reasonable allocation estimates are maintained.

Under the Kentucky R&D framework, Metalsa’s continuous facility upgrades generate substantial state tax relief. In 2017, Metalsa initiated a $36.5 million expansion in Owensboro specifically to accommodate a new line of stamped and welded components. The massive capital costs associated with expanding the physical footprint of the factory and purchasing depreciable robotic welding cells, automated assembly line robots, and advanced stamping presses dedicated to implementing these newly researched manufacturing processes directly qualify for the Kentucky facility credit under KRS 141.395.

Advanced Food Processing and Packaging: Mizkan America (Ragu)

Historical Development and Regional Origin Owensboro’s modern identity as a food processing hub is anchored by its rich agricultural history and access to high-volume water sources required for large-scale food manufacturing. In 1975, a major sauce manufacturing facility was established in the city, which was eventually acquired by the Japanese food conglomerate Mizkan Group in 2014. Today, the Mizkan facility in Owensboro is a critical node in the national food supply chain, uniquely producing 100 percent of the Ragu brand pasta sauce consumed in the United States, an output amounting to approximately one million jars per day.

Federal and State R&D Tax Credit Application

The massive scale of Mizkan’s operations requires constant innovation in food science, shelf-stability chemistry, and industrial engineering.

Under IRC Section 41, the food and beverage sector faces distinct scientific challenges regarding preservation, viscosity, and the integration of organic ingredients. Experimenting with new sauce formulations to remove artificial preservatives while maintaining long-term shelf stability without refrigeration involves complex chemical and biological science. Furthermore, developing custom software algorithms and logic controllers to automate high-speed filling lines and safely increase the throughput of fragile glass and plastic jars resolves significant industrial engineering uncertainties. The wages of food scientists, process engineers, and IT specialists engaged in these systematic trials qualify for the federal credit. The taxpayer must be careful to exclude routine quality control testing—such as standard batch sampling for pH levels—which is explicitly excluded from the definition of qualified research under Section 41(d)(4)(D).

Under KRS 141.395, Mizkan’s infrastructure investments are highly lucrative. In 2024, Mizkan announced a transformational $156 million project to expand its Owensboro facility by 320,000 square feet, bringing the total operational space to nearly one million square feet. The construction costs for new warehousing spaces specifically designed to house experimental manufacturing lines, as well as the purchase of depreciable, next-generation processing machinery required to manufacture new product lines (such as Holland House cooking wine and Nakano rice vinegar) at the Owensboro plant for the first time, present a massive opportunity for capturing the 5 percent Kentucky facility credit.

Smokeless Tobacco and Nicotine Innovation: Swedish Match

Historical Development and Regional Origin Historically, Daviess County and the surrounding regions were a global epicenter for the cultivation of dark, fire-cured tobacco, a heavier leaf utilized primarily for chewing and smokeless products rather than combustible cigarettes. Capitalizing on this local agricultural supply chain and deeply entrenched farming expertise, Pinkerton Tobacco Company established an Owensboro manufacturing operation in 1973. The facility was later acquired by the international conglomerate Swedish Match. As global consumer health trends shifted and regulatory environments tightened, Swedish Match pivoted its corporate strategy toward a vision of a “world without cigarettes,” necessitating immense R&D investments to develop reduced-risk, non-combustible alternatives.

Federal and State R&D Tax Credit Application

The transition from traditional combustible tobacco products to pharmaceutical-grade oral nicotine delivery systems is highly research-intensive, governed by strict regulatory compliance.

Under the federal R&D tax credit, Swedish Match’s development of the ZYN nicotine pouch—a spitless, tobacco-leaf-free product utilizing tobacco-derived nicotine salts—requires rigorous laboratory science. R&D efforts include advanced microbiology, fermentation optimization, and complex chemical engineering aimed at eliminating potentially harmful constituents, such as tobacco-specific nitrosamines (TSNAs) and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), to undetectable levels. This rigorous scientific testing is mandatory to satisfy the stringent standards of the FDA’s Premarket Tobacco Application (PMTA) and Modified Risk Tobacco Product (MRTP) pathways. The wages of organic chemists, clinical researchers, and production engineers developing these extraction and purification methods are prime federal QREs.

Under the Kentucky R&D credit, the physical manufacturing environment required for these products is essentially a massive, clean-room laboratory. Because the FDA regulatory framework demands strict environmental, atmospheric, and quality controls, the facilities must be continuously upgraded. In 2024, Swedish Match (now an affiliate of Philip Morris International) announced a $232 million investment in Owensboro to dramatically expand ZYN production capacity and shift to a 24/7 operational schedule. The massive capital construction costs of building new, sterile production zones, the structural outfitting of advanced microbiology laboratories, and the installation of specialized, depreciable pharmaceutical-grade blending and pouching equipment perfectly qualify under the statutory parameters of KRS 141.395.

Detailed Analysis of United States Federal R&D Tax Credit Requirements

The federal Research and Development Tax Credit, originally enacted in 1981, is one of the most valuable statutory incentives available to domestic businesses. Designed to prevent the offshoring of highly technical jobs and to stimulate continuous technological advancement, the credit provides a dollar-for-dollar reduction in federal income tax liability.

The Statutory Framework of IRC Section 41 and 174

The operative rules for the federal credit are codified in IRC Section 41, which defines the parameters of the credit calculation, while IRC Section 174 governs the deductibility and capitalization of the underlying research and experimental expenditures. The credit is strictly incremental; it is designed to reward companies that increase their research spending over time. Taxpayers generally calculate their credit using either the Regular Research Credit (RRC) method, which typically yields a 20 percent credit on QREs exceeding a historically established base amount, or the Alternative Simplified Credit (ASC) method, which yields a 14 percent credit on QREs exceeding 50 percent of the average QREs for the three preceding taxable years.

The Four-Part Test for Qualified Research

To prevent the abuse of the tax code, the Internal Revenue Service mandates that every discrete research activity claimed must independently satisfy a rigorous four-part test, applied at the “business component” level (defined as any product, process, computer software, technique, formula, or invention).

• The Section 174 Test (Permitted Purpose): The expenditures must be incurred in connection with the taxpayer’s trade or business and represent research and development costs in the experimental or laboratory sense. The primary intent of the research must be to develop a new or improved business component regarding its functionality, performance, reliability, or quality. Activities pursued for non-functional purposes, such as aesthetic, cosmetic, or seasonal design changes, are explicitly disqualified.
• The Elimination of Uncertainty Test: At the outset of the project, the taxpayer must face technological uncertainty. Uncertainty exists if the information available to the taxpayer’s engineers or scientists does not establish the fundamental capability of developing the component, the methodology for developing it, or the appropriate final design of the component.
• The Process of Experimentation Test: Substantially all (legally defined as 80 percent or more) of the activities must constitute elements of a systematic process of experimentation. This requires the taxpayer to identify the uncertainty, formulate one or more hypotheses, and systematically design and conduct tests—through modeling, simulation, or trial and error—to evaluate alternatives.
• The Discovering Technological Information Test: The process of experimentation utilized to eliminate the uncertainty must fundamentally rely on the principles of the hard sciences: physical sciences, biological sciences, engineering, or computer science. Research based on the social sciences, economics, or psychology is strictly excluded.

Qualified Research Expenses (QREs)

If a project satisfies the four-part test, the taxpayer may aggregate the specific expenses associated with that project into their QRE pool. Section 41(b) limits QREs to three primary categories:

• Wages: The taxable wages (typically Box 1 of Form W-2) paid to employees for performing “qualified services.” This includes the scientists actually conducting the research, the technicians providing direct support (e.g., machining a prototype part or cleaning lab equipment), and the supervisors providing direct, first-line management of the research.
• Supplies: The cost of tangible property consumed, destroyed, or heavily degraded during the process of experimentation. Crucially, this excludes land, improvements to land, and any depreciable property. General administrative supplies and overhead are also excluded.
• Contract Research: If a taxpayer lacks internal expertise and hires a third-party engineering firm or testing laboratory, 65 percent of the invoice cost qualifies as a QRE, provided the taxpayer retains substantial economic rights to the research results and bears the financial risk of failure. This percentage increases to 75 percent if the research is conducted by a qualified non-profit scientific research consortium.

Federal Case Law Precedents and Audit Defense

The IRS aggressively audits R&D tax credit claims, relying heavily on judicial precedents that strictly interpret the statutory language. Taxpayers in Owensboro must structure their claims to withstand scrutiny based on these foundational Tax Court rulings:

• The Burden of Documentation (Siemer Milling Company v. Commissioner, 2019): In this case, an industrial flour milling company claimed credits for developing new product lines. The United States Tax Court disallowed 100 percent of the claimed credits due to an egregious lack of contemporaneous documentation. The court ruled that the taxpayer failed the Process of Experimentation test because there was no written evidence that the company systematically formulated hypotheses, modeled alternatives, or recorded trial-and-error data. This ruling mandates that companies (especially in the food, beverage, and agricultural sectors) must maintain lab notebooks, testing logs, and iteration reports, rather than relying on post-hoc estimates or anecdotal employee testimonies.
• The Separation of Experimental Supplies from Production Costs (Union Carbide Corp. v. Commissioner, 2009): Union Carbide claimed massive supply QREs for materials used during process improvement research conducted on active, commercial manufacturing lines. The Tax Court, affirmed by the appellate courts, ruled that “indirect research expenses”—supplies that would have been used to produce commercial inventory regardless of the experimental activities—cannot be claimed as QREs. For heavy manufacturers like Century Aluminum and Metalsa, this dictates that supply costs must be strictly apportioned; only the raw materials explicitly wasted or degraded by the experimental parameters can be claimed.
• The Eligibility of C-Suite Management Time (Suder v. Commissioner, 2014): In a victory for taxpayers, the court affirmed that the wages of senior executives and high-level management can be included in the QRE pool if those individuals spend time brainstorming technical strategies, conceptualizing product designs, and directly reviewing the results of engineering tests. The court also validated the use of the Cohan rule, allowing taxpayers to use reasonable estimates for time allocation when perfect time-tracking software is unavailable, provided the estimates are backed by credible technical leadership.

Detailed Analysis of the Kentucky State Qualified Research Facility Tax Credit

While the federal R&D tax credit is an operational subsidy designed to lower the cost of payroll and consumable materials, the Commonwealth of Kentucky has deployed a structurally distinct incentive aimed at capital retention. The Kentucky Qualified Research Facility Tax Credit, governed by Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS) 141.395, is an economic development tool designed to anchor permanent physical infrastructure, heavy machinery, and high-value laboratories within the state’s borders.

The Statutory Framework of KRS 141.395

KRS 141.395 provides a nonrefundable tax credit equal to a flat 5 percent of the “qualified costs of construction of research facilities”. This credit is highly versatile, as it can be applied against the Individual Income Tax (KRS 141.020), the Corporation Income Tax (KRS 141.040), and the Limited Liability Entity Tax (LLET) (KRS 141.0401).

A distinct advantage of the Kentucky credit is its mathematical simplicity. Unlike the federal credit, which requires complex, heavily audited historical base-period calculations to determine the “incremental” increase in spending, the Kentucky facility credit imposes no base amount requirement. The 5 percent rate is applied directly to the gross eligible capital outlays incurred and placed in service during the current tax year. To ensure the taxpayer can fully realize the benefit of massive capital expenditures, any unused portion of the credit may be carried forward for up to 10 consecutive years.

The Tangible, Depreciable Property Requirement

The statutory definition of “construction of research facilities” explicitly limits eligible expenditures to constructing, remodeling, expanding, or equipping facilities located geographically within Kentucky that are dedicated to “qualified research” (as defined by federal IRC Section 41).

Crucially, the statute dictates that eligible costs must consist only of “tangible, depreciable property”. This creates a perfect mirror-image of the federal credit. Routine operational costs that form the bedrock of the federal claim—such as employee wages, consumable raw materials, contract research fees, and general computer rentals—are strictly ineligible at the state level. Eligible property includes brick-and-mortar laboratory expansions, HVAC systems installed specifically for clean-rooms, robotic manufacturing cells used for experimental testing, and specialized analytical testing equipment.

The Critical Replacement Property Exclusion

The most significant compliance constraint within KRS 141.395 is the explicit statutory exclusion of “replacement property”. The Kentucky Department of Revenue (DOR) strictly enforces this provision to ensure the tax credit incentivizes genuine capital expansion and modernization. The legislative intent is to reward net-new investments that increase the state’s technological capacity.

Therefore, simply swapping out an old, fully depreciated piece of laboratory equipment for a newer model of similar capability does not qualify for the 5 percent credit. To survive a DOR audit, the taxpayer must prove that the newly purchased depreciable asset represents a fundamental technological upgrade, an expansion of testing capacity, or is required to conduct a completely new type of qualified research that the facility could not previously perform.

Administrative Rulings, Filing Mechanics, and Pass-Through Allocation

The administrative burden for claiming the facility credit requires strict adherence to DOR filing procedures.

• Schedule QR: Taxpayers must formally claim the credit by filing Schedule QR (Qualified Research Facility Tax Credit) with their Kentucky income tax return in the year the construction is completed or the property is placed in service. A detailed supporting schedule must be attached, itemizing the tangible, depreciable property, the exact date purchased, the date placed in service, a thorough description of the asset, and its capitalized cost.
• Annual Tracking: A copy of Schedule QR must be submitted every subsequent year until the credit is fully utilized or the 10-year carryforward period expires.
• Pass-Through Entity (PTE) Mechanics: For businesses structured as pass-through entities (e.g., S-Corporations, Partnerships, LLCs), the credit application is bifurcated. The PTE must first apply the calculated credit against its entity-level Limited Liability Entity Tax (LLET) liability. However, statutory ordering rules dictate that the credit cannot reduce the LLET below the absolute statutory minimum of $175. Once the LLET is offset, the residual credit flows through to the individual partners, members, or shareholders proportionally based on their ownership stake. These individuals then claim the credit against their personal Kentucky income tax liabilities using Schedule K-1 and Schedule ITC (Individual Tax Credit).

Final Thoughts: Strategic Tax Compliance and Dual-Track Optimization

Owensboro, Kentucky, possesses a unique industrial ecosystem forged by its geographic access to the Ohio River, historic agricultural wealth, and abundant energy resources. Today, this legacy underpins a highly advanced, diversified manufacturing sector spanning primary metals, automotive components, food science, and distillation.

Because the federal IRC Section 41 credit focuses exclusively on operational expenses (wages, supplies) and the state KRS 141.395 credit targets capital expenditures (facilities, equipment), taxpayers in Owensboro can legally “stack” these benefits on the same overarching R&D project without violating rules against double-dipping. For example, when an Owensboro facility engineers a new automated manufacturing line, the salaries of the engineers designing the system are captured federally, while the physical robots and the building expansion housing them are capitalized and claimed on the Kentucky Schedule QR.

However, executing this dual-track strategy requires meticulous corporate accounting. To survive IRS and Kentucky DOR scrutiny, the corporate fixed asset ledger must remain distinctly segregated from the operational payroll and supply expense accounts. Furthermore, robust, contemporaneous documentation—ranging from scientific testing logs to architectural blueprints and equipment manifests—must be maintained to prove that the activities resolved technological uncertainty and that the physical assets expanded the state’s research infrastructure. By strategically navigating these nuanced requirements, companies in Owensboro can aggressively subsidize both the intellectual capital and the physical infrastructure required to sustain long-term technological leadership.

The information in this study is current as of the date of publication, and is provided for information purposes only. Although we do our absolute best in our attempts to avoid errors, we cannot guarantee that errors are not present in this study. Please contact a Swanson Reed member of staff, or seek independent legal advice to further understand how this information applies to your circumstances.

Swanson Reed is one of the only companies in the United States to exclusively focus on R&D tax credit preparation. Swanson Reed’s office location at 312 South Fourth Street, Louisville, Kentucky is less than 110 miles away from Owensboro and provides R&D tax credit consulting and advisory services to Owensboro and the surrounding areas such as: Bowling Green, Henderson, Madisonville, Central City and Elizabethtown.

If you have any questions or need further assistance, please call or email our local Kentucky Partner on (502) 237-5088.
Feel free to book a quick teleconference with one of our Kentucky R&D tax credit specialists at a time that is convenient for you. Click here for more information about R&D tax credit management and implementation.