The Definition and Application of New or Improved Business Components within the Minnesota Research and Development Tax Credit Framework

A business component is a specific product, process, software, formula, or technique developed for commercial use or internal operations through technical experimentation. Within Minnesota’s R&D tax framework, it serves as the defined unit of project analysis required to validate whether activities qualify for the state’s Credit for Increasing Research Activities. 1

The identification and documentation of a new or improved business component constitute the foundational requirements for claiming the Minnesota Credit for Increasing Research Activities. This tax incentive, established under Minnesota Statutes Section 290.068, is designed to stimulate economic growth by rewarding companies that invest in technological innovation within the state. 3 While the credit is substantially patterned after the federal Research and Development (R&D) credit under Section 41 of the Internal Revenue Code (IRC), the Minnesota Department of Revenue applies specific state-level nuances that necessitate a precise understanding of what constitutes a business component and how its improvement is measured against statutory standards. 6 The business component serves as the “test bed” for the four-part test; every expense claimed must be directly linked to the development or improvement of such a component. 1 In the Minnesota context, the focus is not merely on the act of research but on the tangible or intangible result intended to improve the taxpayer’s trade or business operations or product offerings. 1

Statutory Foundations and the Definition of a Business Component

The legal definition of a business component is critical because it sets the boundaries for what activities can be considered for the credit. Under Minnesota law, which adopts the federal definition found in IRC Section 41(d)(2)(B), a business component is any product, process, computer software, technique, formula, or invention that is to be held for sale, lease, or license, or used by the taxpayer in a trade or business. 7 This definition ensures that the credit is not limited to high-tech laboratories but extends to the manufacturing floor, the software developer’s desk, and the chemical engineer’s formulation lab. 2

Categorization of Business Components

A business component must fall into one of several specific categories to be eligible for analysis. The Minnesota Department of Revenue identifies these categories to help taxpayers organize their R&D studies and substantiate their claims during an audit. 1

The distinction between these categories is important for the “shrink-back rule.” If a taxpayer is developing a large, complex system—such as a new type of aircraft or an integrated manufacturing plant—and the system as a whole fails the qualifying tests, the taxpayer can “shrink back” the analysis to smaller sub-components, such as a specific engine part or a single software module, to determine if those individual elements qualify as business components. 14

The Requirement of New or Improved Functionality

The statute requires that the research activities be directed toward the development of a new business component or the improvement of an existing one. 1 A component is “new” if it represents a novel offering or operational capability for the specific taxpayer; it does not necessarily have to be new to the world or the industry, provided it is new to the claimant. 12 An “improved” business component is one where the taxpayer seeks to enhance an existing product or process in terms of its function, performance, reliability, or quality. 1

The Minnesota Department of Revenue explicitly clarifies that the following activities do not constitute a “new or improved” business component:

• Adaptation: Modifying an existing component to meet a specific customer’s requirement without technical uncertainty. 1
• Duplication: Reproducing an existing component from physical inspection, blueprints, or plans (reverse engineering). 1
• Aesthetic Changes: Improvements related to style, taste, cosmetic design, or seasonal patterns. 1

For an activity to qualify, the improvement must be functional. For instance, a manufacturer of medical devices might seek to improve the reliability of a heart monitor’s battery life. Because battery life is a measure of reliability and performance, the research involved in developing a more efficient power management circuit would qualify as an improvement to a business component. 1 Conversely, changing the color of the monitor’s casing for branding purposes would not qualify, as it does not impact the component’s functional performance. 1

The Four-Part Test: The Qualitative Gateway

To satisfy the requirements for the Minnesota R&D credit, every activity associated with a business component must pass the “four-part test.” This test serves as the qualitative gateway to ensure that only true technical innovation is rewarded. 1

Part 1: Permitted Purpose (The Business Component Test)

The primary objective of the research must be to discover information that will improve the functional aspects of the business component. 1 As defined by the Minnesota Department of Revenue, “permitted purposes” include enhancements to:

• Functionality: What the component does or how it operates. 1
• Performance: The speed, efficiency, or effectiveness of the component. 1
• Reliability: The consistency of operation and resistance to failure. 1
• Quality: The overall excellence or reduction in defects of the final product. 1

If the research is focused on non-functional areas, such as marketing research, social science studies, or management efficiency, it fails this first part of the test and is ineligible for the credit. 1

Part 2: Elimination of Technical Uncertainty

The taxpayer must intend to discover information that would eliminate a technical uncertainty existing at the project’s inception. 1 Technical uncertainty is present if the information available to the taxpayer does not establish the capability or method for developing or improving the component, or the appropriate design of the component. 1

It is important to note that the uncertainty must be technical, not economic. For example, not knowing if a product will sell in the market is an economic uncertainty. Not knowing if a specific alloy can withstand the required pressure in a high-speed turbine is a technical uncertainty. 1 The taxpayer must demonstrate that they did not know the “how” or “if” of the project’s technical success when they began. 1

Part 3: Process of Experimentation

A process of experimentation involves the evaluation of one or more alternatives to achieve the desired result. 1 This must be a systematic, iterative approach rather than a “trial and error” method. 1 According to local guidance, the process of experimentation typically includes:

• Developing and testing hypotheses. 1
• Evaluating alternatives through modeling, simulation, or physical prototyping. 1
• Refining or discarding the hypothesis based on data collected during testing. 1

Documentation is paramount here. The Minnesota Department of Revenue expects to see evidence of the alternatives considered and why certain paths were abandoned in favor of others. 1

Part 4: Technological in Nature

The research must fundamentally rely on the principles of the “hard sciences.” 11 These include:

• Engineering 1
• Computer Science 1
• Physical Sciences (e.g., Chemistry, Physics) 1
• Biological Sciences 1

Activities that rely on “soft sciences,” such as psychology, economics, or sociology, are strictly excluded from the definition of qualified research. 1

State Revenue Office Guidance and Compliance Procedures

The Minnesota Department of Revenue (DOR) provides specific administrative guidance to help taxpayers navigate the Credit for Increasing Research Activities. This guidance emphasizes the geographic restriction: all qualified research activities must be performed within the state of Minnesota. 1

Geographic Limitations and Expense Eligibility

While the definitions of what constitutes research are federal, the eligibility of the expenses is state-specific. To qualify for the Minnesota credit, the wages, supplies, and contractor costs must be linked to work performed in Minnesota. 1

If a Minnesota company employs a remote software engineer living in California, that engineer’s wages do not qualify for the Minnesota credit, even if the work is for a Minnesota-based business component. 1

Documentation Standards and Audit Readiness

The Minnesota DOR has noted in historical evaluations that the credit is complicated and that taxpayers often struggle with substantiation. 5 To mitigate audit risk, the DOR suggests maintaining a “contemporaneous” record-keeping system. This means records should be created at the time the research is performed, not reconstructed years later. 1

Recommended records include:

• Project Lists and Descriptions: Clear identification of each “new or improved” business component and the specific technical goals of the research. 1
• Personnel Records: Names of employees, their locations, and the portion of their time dedicated to qualified activities. 1
• Technical Evidence: Lab reports, testing protocols, experiment results, innovation logs, and records of bug fixes for software. 1
• Supply Tracking: Invoices and a list of physical supplies used, detailing how they were consumed in the R&D process. 1

In audits, the DOR may request a “Certification Statement” or a copy of federal Form 6765 to ensure consistency between state and federal claims. 1

Financial Mechanics: Calculation and Refundability

The Minnesota R&D credit is an incremental credit, meaning it rewards businesses that increase their R&D spending over a “base amount.” 6

The Two-Tiered Rate Structure

For taxable years beginning after December 31, 2016, the credit is calculated using a tiered system. This structure is intended to provide a higher incentive for initial R&D investments while still rewarding larger scale innovation. 1

The “excess QREs” are determined by subtracting the “base amount” from the current year’s total Minnesota qualified research expenses. 1 The base amount is typically a product of the company’s historical R&D intensity and its average gross receipts over the previous four years. 6 Crucially, Minnesota requires the use of Minnesota gross receipts for this calculation, which can often result in a lower base amount and a higher credit for multistate businesses. 6

The 2025 Refundability Pivot

A significant change in Minnesota tax law (H.F. 9, 2025) has introduced partial refundability for the credit. 1 Previously, the credit was non-refundable and could only be carried forward for 15 years if it exceeded tax liability. 1

Starting with tax years beginning after December 31, 2024, taxpayers can elect to receive a cash refund for a portion of their unused credits. 1

This provision is a major boon for startups and research-intensive firms that may have zero tax liability but significant R&D costs. 15 The election must be made on a timely filed original return and is irrevocable for that year. 1

Industry Statistics and Economic Context

The Minnesota R&D credit is heavily utilized by the state’s traditional and emerging industrial sectors. 4

Industry Usage Patterns

According to the Office of the Legislative Auditor, a small number of industries account for the vast majority of R&D credit claims. 4

In 2014, C-corporations claimed approximately $34 million in R&D credits, while shareholders in S-corporations and partners in partnerships claimed $16 million. 4 Wages are the primary driver of these claims, accounting for roughly three-quarters of all Minnesota qualified research expenses. 4

Fiscal Impact and Forecasts

The credit represents a significant portion of the state’s tax expenditure budget. 6 The cost of the credit has grown steadily, reflecting Minnesota’s commitment to remaining a competitive location for corporate R&D. 4

The sharp increase projected for 2024 and 2025 is attributed to broader legislative changes and the new refundability mechanics, which are expected to encourage more businesses to claim the credit. 6

Detailed Example: Developing an Advanced Medical Sensor

To illustrate how these rules apply in a real-world scenario, consider a Minnesota-based medical technology company, “GopherMed,” developing a new wearable sensor to monitor glucose levels in real-time. 9

Step 1: Defining the Business Component

GopherMed identifies the wearable sensor as its primary business component. 1 The goal is to improve upon existing models by increasing the sensor’s accuracy (Quality/Performance) and extending its battery life (Performance/Reliability). 1

Step 2: Encountering Technical Uncertainty

At the beginning of the project, GopherMed’s engineering team faces two major uncertainties:

1. Capability: It is uncertain if a non-invasive infrared light source can achieve the same accuracy as current invasive needle-based sensors. 1
2. Design: The team does not know the optimal arrangement of the optical sensors to minimize interference from skin pigmentation. 2

Step 3: The Process of Experimentation

To resolve these uncertainties, GopherMed conducts the following activities in its Plymouth, Minnesota facility:

• Hypothesis: The team hypothesizes that a specific wavelength of infrared light will yield the highest signal-to-noise ratio. 1
• Alternative Testing: They build five different sensor prototypes, each with varying optical layouts, and test them across a diverse group of volunteers. 1
• Data Analysis: They use mathematical modeling to analyze the data and refine the sensor design over several months. 1

Step 4: Quantifying the Expenses

GopherMed tracks the following Minnesota-based expenses for this project: 1

• Wages: $1,200,000 for the R&D engineers and technicians. 2
• Supplies: $200,000 for prototype components and chemical reagents consumed during testing. 1
• Contractor Research: $100,000 paid to a local software firm to develop the sensor’s data processing algorithm. 1

Total Minnesota QREs = $1,500,000 (calculated as $1.2M + $200k + $65k [65% of $100k]). 15

Step 5: Calculating the Credit

Assuming GopherMed has a calculated base amount of $500,000: 6

• Excess QREs: $1,500,000 – $500,000 = $1,000,000. 6
• Credit Amount: $1,000,000 \times 10% = $100,000. 1

In 2025, if GopherMed has no tax liability, they can elect a refund of $19,200 (19.2% of $100,000) and carry forward the remaining $80,800 to future years. 1

Special Considerations for Computer Software

Software development is a significant driver of R&D in Minnesota, particularly in the finance and social services sectors. 9 However, software business components are subject to additional scrutiny. 12

External vs. Internal Use Software

The Minnesota Department of Revenue distinguishes between software developed for sale (External Use) and software developed for the company’s own internal operations (Internal Use Software or IUS). 12 External Use Software only needs to meet the standard four-part test. 12

However, IUS must meet a “High Threshold of Innovation” (HTI) test, which requires it to be:

1. Innovative: Resulting in a substantial and measurable improvement in the business. 12
2. Significant Economic Risk: Requiring the commitment of substantial resources with uncertainty about success. 12
3. Not Commercially Available: It cannot be purchased or licensed from a third party without major modification. 12

Common software activities that qualify include developing new algorithms for AI, improving data processing speeds, and creating complex firmware. 2 Routine bug fixes, website design, and minor cosmetic changes to a user interface generally do not qualify as new or improved business components. 1

Interaction with Federal Tax Law Changes

Minnesota’s R&D tax credit is influenced by federal changes, most notably the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) and the 2024 modification of Form 6765. 6

Section 174 Amortization

Starting in 2022, the IRC requires R&D expenses (Section 174 costs) to be capitalized and amortized over five years for domestic research, rather than being expensed immediately. 6 While this does not directly change the calculation of the R&D credit, it significantly changes the taxpayer’s overall tax liability and cash flow. 6 Because the Minnesota credit is based on these same qualified research expenses, the federal requirement to track and amortize these costs has made meticulous project-level accounting even more critical. 8

Enhanced Reporting on Form 6765

For tax years 2024 and 2025, the IRS has expanded Form 6765 to require detailed qualitative information. 7 Taxpayers must now identify the number of business components being claimed and provide specific detail on officer wages. 7 The Minnesota Department of Revenue uses these federal forms for audit verification, meaning Minnesota taxpayers must now be prepared to provide component-level cost breakdowns that were previously not required for the state credit. 1

Conclusion

The “new or improved business component” serves as the essential nucleus of any claim for the Minnesota Credit for Increasing Research Activities. By requiring that research be directed toward functional enhancements in performance, reliability, quality, or functionality, the statute ensures that tax incentives are coupled with genuine technical progress. 1 For Minnesota businesses, the shift toward partial refundability in 2025 emphasizes the importance of rigorous documentation and a clear understanding of the four-part test. 1 Companies that can clearly define their business components, demonstrate technical uncertainty, and document a systematic process of experimentation will be best positioned to benefit from this incentive. 1 As the state continues to project higher expenditures for this credit, the focus on compliance and qualitative substantiation will likely remain a top priority for the Minnesota Department of Revenue. 5

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/