We had an interesting enquiry today that was refreshing and thought provoking. It went along the lines of 'can I still qualify as an ESIC, even though I'd fail the principals test?
Its was food for though, firstly as we wondered if anyone else was thinking the same thing, and secondly if the policy or applied regulations would consider this a problem area.
The legislation and guide (ED) emphasise the innovation aspects that are central to the assessment, yet the objective test is designed as a pass fail, so surely it wouldn't be considered part 4A tax avoidance to advance via objective measures, or would it?
Lets assume that your pretty innovative, though not confident or well read enough to pass the principals tests, could you scrape up the 100 points you require?
|
Accelerating Commercialisation Grant |
75 |
Unlikely |
|
At least 50% eligible R&D |
75 |
Unlikely |
|
Eligible accelerator programme |
50 |
Possible |
|
15% to 50% eligible R&D |
50 |
Possible |
|
$50,000 Investment |
50 |
Possible |
|
Standard patent /plant breeder’s right |
50 |
Unlikely |
|
Innovation patent or design right |
25 |
Unlikely |
|
Co-develop research organization or a university |
25 |
Possible |
As the table indicates,this type of company may have fewer options, though could perhaps pass through the objective tests, but for practical issues and any ATO intervention.
We couldn't comment directly, however one might assume that policy makers would not be concerned with this outcome given the potential for job creation etc.
Perhaps its a little left of field for this early stage company (ESC), though we are curious as to the implications, particularly given regularity or pitches that begin with 'its like Air B&N' or 'Uber & Shopwings combined', not offence intended, though I'm sure you'd agree that innovate enterprises rarely need a 'its like' tacked on the tagline.
Its safe to assume nothing, so we highly recommend you seek professional advice before promoting yourself as an ESIC.
For now,
Tom