The Integration of Individual Income Tax and the Minnesota Credit for Increasing Research Activities: A Comprehensive Statutory and Administrative Analysis

The Minnesota Credit for Increasing Research Activities is a tax incentive that allows individual taxpayers, primarily through pass-through business ownership, to reduce their personal income tax liability by a percentage of qualifying in-state innovation expenditures. It operates on an incremental basis, rewarding businesses that expand their investment in technical research and development beyond a calculated historical threshold.

The relationship between individual income tax and the Minnesota Research and Development (R&D) credit represents one of the most significant intersections of state economic policy and private-sector innovation. While tax credits for research are often perceived as the exclusive domain of large, publicly traded corporations, the Minnesota tax code provides a sophisticated framework for these benefits to flow directly to individual taxpayers.1 This pass-through mechanism is essential for the state’s ecosystem of small-to-mid-sized enterprises, startups, and family-owned manufacturing firms that structure themselves as S corporations, partnerships, or limited liability companies (LLCs).3 By allowing individual owners to offset their state income tax obligations using credits generated by their businesses, Minnesota incentivizes local investment and technical job creation.1

As of the 2025 tax year, the administrative landscape governing this credit has undergone a transformative shift. Historically a nonrefundable incentive, the credit now includes a partial refundability provision that allows individuals to monetize unused credits even in years where their tax liability is zero.6 This evolution reflects a broader legislative intent to support pre-revenue startups and R&D-heavy firms that lack the current profitability to utilize traditional tax credits.8 To navigate this complex terrain, taxpayers and their advisors must maintain a nuanced understanding of Minnesota Statute 290.068, federal conformity requirements under Internal Revenue Code (IRC) Section 41, and the specific reporting directives issued by the Minnesota Department of Revenue (MDOR).6

The Statutory Framework: Minnesota Statute 290.068

The legal genesis of the Minnesota research tax credit dates back to the 1981 Legislature, which sought to replicate the federal incentives for innovation at the state level.2 The primary authority for the credit is codified in Minnesota Statute 290.068, entitled “Credit for Increasing Research Activities”.11 This statute serves as the bedrock for both corporate franchise tax and individual income tax claims, explicitly stating that “partners in a partnership” and “shareholders in a corporation treated as an S corporation” are entitled to the credit against their respective tax liabilities.11

The Incremental Nature of the Credit

A fundamental characteristic of the Minnesota credit is its “incremental” structure. Rather than providing a flat percentage of all research spending, the law is designed to reward only the increase in research efforts.1 This is achieved by comparing current-year Minnesota Qualified Research Expenses (QREs) against a “base amount” that represents the taxpayer’s historical or “normal” research intensity.1 This mechanism ensures that state tax expenditures are directed toward stimulating new innovation rather than subsidizing existing activities that would have occurred without the incentive.1

Legislative Intent and Economic Policy

While the statute itself does not always explicitly state a singular purpose, the Minnesota Legislative Auditor and Department of Revenue have identified three primary goals for the credit: creating and retaining high-paying technical jobs, increasing the overall volume of research activity within the state, and attracting or retaining innovative businesses.2 Statistics from 2008 to 2014 indicate that the credit has contributed to earnings growth and job creation, although the net fiscal benefit to the state’s General Fund remains a subject of ongoing policy debate.2 For the individual taxpayer, the credit functions as a critical subsidy for the “technical risk” associated with developing new business components.6

Defining Qualified Research: Revenue Office Directives

For an activity to generate a credit that can be applied to an individual’s tax return, it must meet the federal “Four-Part Test” as adopted and interpreted by the Minnesota Department of Revenue.6 Because Minnesota law largely conforms to IRC Section 41, the state provides guidance that mirrors federal standards while emphasizing the requirement that all research must be performed within the borders of Minnesota.3

The Four-Part Test for Minnesota Purposes

The Minnesota Department of Revenue requires that all activities producing QREs satisfy four criteria. If even one part of the test is not met, the entire project is disqualified from the credit calculation.6

1. The Permitted Purpose Test: The research must be intended to develop a new or improved “business component,” which is defined as a product, process, formula, invention, technique, or software.6 The improvement must specifically relate to function, performance, reliability, or quality.6
2. The Technological in Nature Test: The activity must rely on the principles of “hard” sciences, such as engineering, physics, biology, or computer science.6 Activities relying on social sciences, economics, or humanities are ineligible.
3. The Elimination of Uncertainty Test: At the outset of the research, there must be a technical uncertainty regarding the capability or method for developing the business component, or the appropriate design of that component.6
4. The Process of Experimentation Test: The taxpayer must demonstrate a systematic trial-and-error process used to evaluate alternatives and resolve technical uncertainties.6 This typically involves developing and testing hypotheses, refining designs, and conducting multiple iterations of testing.6

Local Interpretation of Qualifying Activities

MDOR guidance provides specific examples of activities that typically meet these criteria versus those that are routinely excluded. This distinction is vital for individual business owners who must determine which of their internal projects contribute to the credit.6

Qualified Research Expenses (QREs) in the Minnesota Context

The monetary basis of the credit consists of specific expenditures incurred while performing qualified research. For individuals receiving a pass-through credit, these expenses are aggregated at the entity level and reported on Schedule RD.3

Wage Expenses

Wages represent the largest category of QREs in Minnesota, often accounting for approximately three-quarters of the total credit claimed by corporations.4 To be eligible, wages must be paid to employees for “qualified services,” which include the direct performance of research, direct supervision of researchers, or direct support of research activities.4

• Direct Performance: An engineer drafting a prototype or a scientist conducting lab experiments.9
• Direct Supervision: A department manager reviewing technical results and setting research priorities.9
• Direct Support: A laboratory technician cleaning experimental equipment or a machinist building a specialized prototype.9

Wages used in figuring the federal Work Opportunity Credit must be excluded from the Minnesota R&D credit calculation.16

Supply Expenses

Costs incurred for tangible property (other than land or improvements to real property) that is consumed during the research process are qualified.6 Typical supply QREs include chemicals, materials for mockups, and components for testing prototypes.6 However, supplies that are intended for general inventory or used for administrative purposes are strictly excluded.9

Contract Research Expenses

If a business hires a third party to perform research on its behalf, 65% of the amounts paid to that contractor may be included in the QRE total.4 A critical “Minnesota-only” rule applies here: the research performed by the contractor must be conducted physically within the state of Minnesota.6 If a Minnesota company pays a contractor in California to develop software, those expenses are ineligible for the state credit, regardless of where the hiring company is located.6

Computer Rental and Cloud Costs

In the modern digital economy, many businesses no longer own physical servers but instead rely on cloud computing. Minnesota guidance allows for the inclusion of amounts paid or incurred for the right to use computers to conduct research.6 This includes cloud/server costs where the usage is primarily (typically more than 80%) dedicated to qualified research activities such as simulations, testing, or data processing.9

Contributions to Nonprofits

Minnesota law (Statute 290.068, Subd. 2) includes a unique provision allowing for the inclusion of development contributions made to certain nonprofit organizations.3 To qualify, the nonprofit must be established and operated for the purpose of promoting business expansion in Minnesota, and the contributions must be invested in small, technologically innovative enterprises during their early development stages.3 This provision encourages mature companies to support the state’s startup ecosystem while simultaneously generating a tax credit for their owners.3

Computational Mechanics: Determining the Credit Amount

The calculation of the Minnesota R&D credit is notoriously complex, requiring multiple years of historical data and a tiered rate structure. For individual taxpayers, this calculation is typically performed by the business entity on Schedule RD and then shared via schedules KPI, KS, or KPC.3

The Two-Tiered Rate System

Minnesota utilizes a tiered approach to reward initial research increments more heavily. This structure is particularly beneficial for small businesses and individuals who may not have massive research budgets but are significantly increasing their innovative efforts.7

$$Credit = (10\% \times \text{First \$2 million of Excess QREs}) + (4\% \times \text{Excess QREs above \$2 million})$$

Prior to recent statutory updates, the second-tier rate was 2.5%, but it has since been elevated to 4% to remain competitive with other states.3

Determining the “Base Amount”

The “base amount” is the benchmark against which current-year research is measured. Under Minnesota law, the base amount is the greater of two distinct calculations 1:

1. The 50% Minimum Floor: The base amount can never be less than 50% of the current-year QREs.1 This ensures that even high-growth companies cannot claim a credit on more than half of their total research spending.1
2. The Historical Base Method: The average annual Minnesota gross receipts for the four preceding tax years multiplied by the “fixed-base percentage”.4

The Fixed-Base Percentage and Startup Rules

For established companies, the fixed-base percentage is determined by dividing aggregate QREs by aggregate Minnesota gross receipts for the period between 1984 and 1988.1 However, many modern businesses were not in existence during this era.

For “startup companies”—defined as those with fewer than three years of both gross receipts and QREs between 1984 and 1988, or whose first year of both began after 1983—the law provides a “deemed” fixed-base percentage.1

The fixed-base percentage is capped at a maximum of 16% for all taxpayers.1

Non-Conformity: The Rejection of the Federal ASM

A critical area of local state guidance involves the Alternative Simplified Method (ASM) or Alternative Simplified Credit (ASC). While the federal government allows taxpayers to use a simplified calculation based only on the three prior years of research spending, Minnesota does not conform to this method.3 All Minnesota R&D credits must be calculated using the regular incremental method, which necessitates the maintenance of historical records dating back to 1984 or the company’s inception.3

Pass-Through Mechanics: From the Entity to the Individual

For individual income tax purposes, the most critical aspect of the R&D credit is the mechanism of pass-through. Partnerships, S corporations, and LLCs do not generally pay tax at the entity level (unless electing the PTE tax); instead, the tax attributes, including the R&D credit, flow to the owners’ personal returns.1

Allocation of the Credit

The total credit generated by the business is allocated among the owners pro rata, based on their ownership interest in the trade or business.3

• Partnerships: The credit is reported to individual partners on Schedule KPI, Line 26.16
• S Corporations: The credit is reported to shareholders on Schedule KS, Line 26.16
• Partnerships (Corporate/Entity Partners): These partners receive their share on Schedule KPC, Line 28.16

Reporting on the Individual Return (Form M1)

Individual taxpayers receiving a credit must include the relevant KPI or KS schedules with their personal Minnesota Income Tax Return (Form M1).3 The nonrefundable portion of the credit is reported on Schedule M1C, “Other Nonrefundable Credits”.3

The Liability Limitation for Individuals

A vital restriction for individuals is the liability limitation. Credits received from a partnership or S corporation are generally limited to the amount of tax attributable to the individual’s share of the entity’s taxable income.11 This prevents a taxpayer from using R&D credits from a research-intensive business to wipe out tax liability generated by other unrelated sources of income, such as a spouse’s salary or investment gains.11

The 2025 Legislative Transformation: Partial Refundability

One of the most significant changes in Minnesota tax history regarding innovation incentives occurred with the passage of H.F. 9 in June 2025.7 For tax years beginning after December 31, 2024, the R&D credit is no longer strictly nonrefundable.6

The Monetization of Unused Credits

Prior to this change, if an individual’s share of the R&D credit exceeded their tax liability, the unused portion could only be carried forward for up to 15 years.1 Under the new law, taxpayers may instead elect to receive a partial refund of their current-year credit.6

Calculation of the Refundable Amount

The refund is not a dollar-for-dollar payment of the unused credit. Instead, it is calculated by applying a “refundability rate” to the excess credit remaining after the taxpayer’s liability has been reduced to zero.6

$$Refund = (\text{Current Year Credit} – \text{Tax Liability}) \times \text{Refundability Rate}$$

The refundability rates are tiered over several years to manage the state’s fiscal exposure.6

The Commissioner of Revenue will set the rate annually starting in 2028 to target a total statewide refund payout of approximately $25 million.7

The Election Process for Individuals

For pass-through entities, the election to claim the refundable portion is made by the partners, members, or shareholders on their personal returns.6 The election must be made on a timely filed return (including extensions) and is irrevocable for that tax year once chosen.6 If a taxpayer chooses the refund, any portion of the credit that is not refunded and not used to offset tax continues to carry forward for up to 15 years.6

Administrative Compliance and Audit Defense

The Minnesota Department of Revenue provides specific guidance on the documentation required to substantiate R&D credit claims. Because the credit involves high dollar amounts and complex legal interpretations, it is frequently subject to audit.6

Recordkeeping Directives

To satisfy an MDOR examiner, individual business owners must ensure their entities maintain contemporaneous records that link specific costs to specific technical challenges.6

1. Project Descriptions: A narrative for each product or process improvement explaining the functional, performance, or quality goals and the technological information sought.6
2. Labor Allocations: Time sheets or time-tracking software that records hours spent on specific R&D projects.6 If time tracking is not available, MDOR may accept “reliable estimations” if backed by meeting minutes or project schedules.16
3. Experimental Proof: Lab notebooks, procedure manuals, test results, and emails discussing technical failures or hypothesis testing.6
4. In-State Documentation: Records proving that research was performed within Minnesota, such as employee W-2s showing Minnesota withholding and invoices from contractors with Minnesota addresses.6

Common Revenue Office Findings

Audits often focus on “excluded” activities that taxpayers mistakenly include. MDOR guidance warns against claiming credits for the following 6:

• Funded Research: Any research funded by a grant, such as a DEED Innovation Grant, is ineligible.6
• Post-Production Activities: Research conducted after the beginning of commercial production of the business component.6
• Computer Software for Internal Use: Unless the software is developed for use in an R&D activity or provides a unique competitive advantage in a non-administrative way, it may be excluded.6
• Management Studies: Research relating to efficiency surveys, management techniques, or market research.6

Fiscal Statistics and Economic Context

Understanding the scale of the R&D credit provides insight into its importance to the Minnesota economy. The Department of Revenue’s Tax Expenditure Budget details the cost and utilization of the credit across different filer types.1

Distribution of Claims (2020-2027)

This data shows a steady increase in the utilization of the credit by individual taxpayers through pass-through entities, reflecting a growing startup and mid-market innovation culture in the state.1

Industry Specialization

Historically, the manufacturing industry has claimed the largest share (65%) of the research tax credits in Minnesota.4 Within this sector, medical device manufacturing, agriculture-tech, and electronic equipment dominate the claims.4 Software development and biosciences also represent significant growth areas for R&D credit claims among individual taxpayers.8

Interaction with the Pass-Through Entity (PTE) Tax

Since 2021, Minnesota has allowed qualifying entities (partnerships, S corporations, and LLCs) to pay income tax at the entity level.19 This “PTE Tax” election is a crucial strategy for individual business owners to mitigate the federal limitation on state and local tax (SALT) deductions.19

Utilizing the R&D Credit Against PTE Tax

The R&D credit can be used to reduce the PTE tax liability at the entity level.20 When a business owner elects the PTE tax, the entity calculates its income, multiplies it by the highest individual tax rate (currently 9.85%), and then applies credits like the R&D credit to arrive at the net tax due.20

Reporting the Result to Owners

Owners then receive a refundable credit on their personal Form M1 equal to their share of the PTE tax paid by the entity on their behalf.20 This reporting is done on Schedule M1REF, “Refundable Credits”.20

Coordination and Expiration

Taxpayers must be aware that the PTE tax election is currently set to expire for tax years beginning after December 31, 2025, mirroring the expiration of the federal SALT cap.19 If the PTE tax expires, individual business owners will revert to paying tax directly on their personal returns, and the R&D credit will once again flow directly to the individual’s Form M1 via Schedule KPI or KS.21

Comparative Analysis: Minnesota vs. Neighboring States

While the primary focus is Minnesota, understanding the state’s positioning relative to neighbors like Wisconsin provides context for why certain rules (like refundability) were adopted.

Minnesota’s tiered 10% rate on the first $2 million makes it more aggressive in courting small-to-mid-sized innovation projects than Wisconsin’s flat 5.75% rate.9

Practical Example: A Step-by-Step Individual Credit Calculation

To synthesize the guidance and law, consider the case of “North Star Precision Engineering,” a partnership owned by two individuals, Alice and Bob, each holding a 50% interest.

Scenario Background (Tax Year 2025)

• Current-Year MN QREs: $1,500,000 (Wages, supplies, and MN-based lab fees).6
• Average MN Gross Receipts (2021-2024): $5,000,000.3
• Fixed-Base Percentage: 3% (Startup rule).1

Step 1: Calculate the Base Amount

The base amount is the greater of two calculations:

1. Historical Base: $5,000,000 \times 3\% = \$150,000$.4
2. 50% Minimum Floor: $1,500,000 \times 50\% = \$750,000$.1

The base amount is $750,000.1

Step 2: Determine Excess QREs

$$\text{Excess QREs} = \$1,500,000 – \$750,000 = \$750,000$$

Step 3: Compute the Partnership-Level Credit

Since the excess is below the $2,000,000 first-tier cap, the rate is a flat 10%.6

$$\text{Total Credit} = \$750,000 \times 10\% = \$75,000$$

Step 4: Allocation to Partners

The partnership issues Schedule KPI to Alice and Bob.16

• Alice (50%): $37,500 credit.
• Bob (50%): $37,500 credit.

Step 5: Application on Alice’s Individual Form M1

Alice has a Minnesota tax liability of $10,000 before applying the R&D credit.

1. Alice applies the credit to her $10,000 liability, reducing it to $0.6
2. Unused Credit: $37,500 – 10,000 = \$27,500$.
3. Alice elects the partial refund for 2025.6

• Refundable Amount: $27,500 \times 19.2\% = \$5,280$.
• Carryforward Amount: $27,500 – 5,280 = \$22,220$ (available for 15 years).3

Conclusion: Strategic Implications for the Individual Taxpayer

The Minnesota Research and Development tax credit remains a cornerstone of the state’s fiscal policy, bridging the gap between high-level technical innovation and individual-level tax relief. For the individual business owner, the credit is not merely a mathematical exercise but a critical capital injection that can be leveraged to sustain growth and mitigate technical risk.

The introduction of partial refundability in 2025 marks a paradigm shift, effectively transforming the credit from a tax-offset tool into a liquidity-generation mechanism for pre-revenue and high-growth firms. However, this benefit comes with increased administrative responsibility. The rejection of the federal Alternative Simplified Method means that Minnesota taxpayers must be more diligent than their peers in other states, maintaining historical records that span decades.

Furthermore, the requirement that all qualifying activities and contract costs remain strictly within state lines underscores the “Minnesota-first” intent of the legislation. For taxpayers, this means that every hire, every contractor agreement, and every technical project must be vetted not only for technical merit but for geographic compliance. By adhering to the directives of the Department of Revenue and strategically coordinating credit claims with elections like the PTE tax, individual taxpayers can maximize the value of their innovation while ensuring a robust defense against state-level audits. As the state moves toward a capped refundability model in 2028, the importance of timely filing and proactive tax planning will only intensify, making the R&D credit a permanent fixture of the sophisticated individual’s tax strategy in Minnesota.

R&D Tax Credit Preparation Services

Swanson Reed is one of the only companies in the United States to exclusively focus on R&D tax credit preparation. Swanson Reed provides state and federal R&D tax credit preparation and audit services to all 50 states.

If you have any questions or need further assistance, please call or email our CEO, Damian Smyth on (800) 986-4725.
Feel free to book a quick teleconference with one of our national R&D tax credit specialists at a time that is convenient for you.

R&D Tax Credit Audit Advisory Services

creditARMOR is a sophisticated R&D tax credit insurance and AI-driven risk management platform. It mitigates audit exposure by covering defense expenses, including CPA, tax attorney, and specialist consultant fees—delivering robust, compliant support for R&D credit claims. Click here for more information about R&D tax credit management and implementation.

Our Fees

Swanson Reed offers R&D tax credit preparation and audit services at our hourly rates of between $195 – $395 per hour. We are also able offer fixed fees and success fees in special circumstances. Learn more at https://www.swansonreed.com/about-us/research-tax-credit-consulting/our-fees/