Weighted deductions for in-house R&D: Does it benefit small and medium firms more?

Similar documents
Dimensions of India's Innovative Activity Trends in Policies and Outcomes since 1991

Measurement for Generation and Dissemination of Knowledge a case study for India, by Mr. Ashish Kumar, former DG of CSO of Government of India

Changing role of the State in Innovative Activity The Indian Experience. Sunil Mani

OECD Science, Technology and Industry Outlook 2008: Highlights

Media Release October 5 th, 2010

Chapter IV SUMMARY OF MAJOR FEATURES OF SEVERAL FOREIGN APPROACHES TO TECHNOLOGY POLICY

DIRECTION OF SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND INNOVATION POLICY IN THAILAND

Japan Lagging in Scientific Research

OECD Science, Technology and Industry Outlook 2010 Highlights

Key features in innovation policycomparison. Dr Gudrun Rumpf Kyiv, 9 November, 2010

Economic and Social Council

Unit 1: The Economic Fundamentals Weeks How does scarcity impact the decisions individuals and societies must make?

SOME ASPECTS OF RESEARCH FUNDING ON ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY IN BANGLADESH

Sustainable Development Education, Research and Innovation

Government, an Actor in Innovation

Oesterreichische Nationalbank. Eurosystem. Workshops Proceedings of OeNB Workshops. Current Issues of Economic Growth. March 5, No.

Science, technology and engineering for innovation and capacity-building in education and research UNCTAD Wednesday, 28 November 2007

Testing the Progress Out of Poverty Index: Triangulation of the PPI with Key Informant Wealth Ranking Exercises and SILC Financial Diaries Data

SEMICONDUCTOR INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION FACTBOOK

BASED ECONOMIES. Nicholas S. Vonortas

ty of solutions to the societal needs and problems. This perspective links the knowledge-base of the society with its problem-suite and may help

THE U.S. SEMICONDUCTOR INDUSTRY:

101 Sources of Spillover: An Analysis of Unclaimed Savings at the Portfolio Level

Business angels Published on Innovation Policy Platform (

Praj Industries Limited. Q2 and H1 FY17 Results. Praj Industries Ltd

Moving Towards a Territorialisation of European R&D and Innovation Policies

Measuring Eco-innovation Results from the MEI project René Kemp

Concept Note Africa Innovation Summit Satellite Event: South Africa 6 8 June 2018 The Venue, Pretoria

R&D and innovation activities in companies across Global Value Chains

The Growth Game-Changer: How the Industrial Internet of Things can drive progress and prosperity

The State of Innovation. Orlando Saez

GENEVA COMMITTEE ON DEVELOPMENT AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY (CDIP) Fifth Session Geneva, April 26 to 30, 2010

Canada s Support for Research & Development. Suggestions to Improve the Return on Investment (ROI)

Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises in India: The Challenges of Technology Adoption

The Economic Contribution of Canada s R&D Intensive Enterprises Dr. H. Douglas Barber Dr. Jeffrey Crelinsten

Ministry of Industry. Indonesia s 4 th Industrial Revolution. Making Indonesia 4.0. Benchmarking Implementasi Industri 4.0 A.T.

Enhancing Policy and Institutional support for Industrial Technology Development in Thailand

Research Article Research Background:

The Latent Potential of Travel & Tourism in EU Accession Countries

Contents. Acknowledgments

The Internationalization of R&D in India: Opportunities and Challenges. Rajeev Anantaram National Interest Project March 2009

Learning Lessons Abroad on Funding Research and Innovation. 29 April 2016

Country Innovation Brief: Costa Rica

Research on the Impact of R&D Investment on Firm Performance in China's Internet of Things Industry

China's Specialization in Innovative Manufacturing NAS Innovation Policy Forum May 23, 2017 Jonas Nahm, Johns Hopkins SAIS

WIPO REGIONAL SEMINAR ON SUPPORT SERVICES FOR INVENTORS, VALUATION AND COMMERCIALIZATION OF INVENTIONS AND RESEARCH RESULTS

The Challenge for SMEs. Government Policy

FICCI Suggestions for the R & D Policy of Indian Textiles Sector

IGC South Asia Regional Conference. Ijaz Nabi March 18, 2014 Avari Hotel, Lahore

The United Arab Emirates is ranked 38th in the GII 2018, dropping 3 positions from last year.

GUIDE TO SPEAKING POINTS:

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION, RESEARCH & RELIGIOUS AFFAIRS. Dr. Agnes Spilioti Head of R&DI Policy Planning Directorate

2017 R&D Trends Forecast Results from the Industrial Research Institute s Annual Survey

Technology transfer options for low-carbon development

Subsidized and non-subsidized R&D projects: Do they differ?

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING PAPER EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT. Accompanying the

The Design Economy. The value of design to the UK. Executive summary

THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE KNOWLEDGE-BASED ECONOMY FOR FUTURE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICIES

Vietnam s Innovation System: Toward a Product Innovation Ecosystem.

Expanding and positioning Uganda s technical capabilities for the oil and gas industry

MEASURES TO SUPPORT SMEs IN THE EUROPEAN UNION

R&D in WorldScan. Paul Veenendaal

Draft executive summaries to target groups on industrial energy efficiency and material substitution in carbonintensive

The Research Project Portfolio of the Humanistic Management Center

Technology Executive Committee

Digital Transformation Monitor - national initiatives on digitisation of industry

QUARTERLY REVIEW OF ACADEMIC LITERATURE ON THE ECONOMICS OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION

Indigenous Innovation and Economic Development

STATE ADVANCED MANUFACTURING POLICIES AND PROGRAMS. As at February 2018

Science and Society 06/06/08. Lecture 23 1

Missouri Economic Indicator Brief: Manufacturing Industries

INVITATION FOR RESEARCH PROPOSALS

Suzlon Energy - Q2 Results

University of Dundee. Design in Action Knowledge Exchange Process Model Woods, Melanie; Marra, M.; Coulson, S. DOI: 10.

INNOVATION DEVELOPMENT SECTORAL TRAJECTORIES OF THE SOUTH RUSSIAN REGIONS Igor ANTONENKO *

DETERMINANTS OF STATE ECONOMIC GROWTH: COMPLEMENTARY RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN R&D AND HUMAN CAPITAL

Strategic Planning for Arts, Culture, and Entertainment Districts

House of Commons Science and Technology Select Committee Inquiry into the Science Budget and Industrial Strategy

BoardS & directors. Singapore FOCUS. Of Those who Govern and Direct CLARENCE GOH

Science for Policy. Impact of Social Sciences & Humanities. David Mair (chair) Antti Pelkonen Mihiri Seneviratne. Gemyse 1,

MORE POWER TO THE ENERGY AND UTILITIES BUSINESS, FROM AI.

National Innovation System of Mongolia

Security services play a key role in digital transformation for higher education

Social Innovation and new pathways to social changefirst insights from the global mapping

Power player - Wishnu Wardhana

Climate Change Innovation and Technology Framework 2017

Incentive Guidelines. Aid for Research and Development Projects (Tax Credit)

OECD Innovation Strategy: Key Findings

Report 2017 UK GENDER PAY GAP UK GENDER PAY GAP REPORT

National Research and Innovation Dialogue Universities South Africa 7 &8 April 2016 Emperors Palace

Gender Pay Gap Inquiry. The Royal Society of Edinburgh

Innovation in the Canadian Agri- Food Sector

What Would Jefferson Do?

UKRI research and innovation infrastructure roadmap: frequently asked questions

BOOK REVIEWS. Technological Superpower China

Innovation policies to promote more inclusive growth: comments

Macroeconomics: Principles, Applications, and Tools

Policy packaging or policy patching? The development of complex policy mixes

STI Policy, Indicators and Industry- Academia Interaction

MSMEs' Competitiveness and Innovation in the Digital Age

Transcription:

No. WP/16/01 Weighted deductions for in-house R&D: Does it benefit small and medium firms more? Sunil Mani 1, Janak Nabar 2 and Madhav S. Aney 3 1 Visiting Professor, National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies, Tokyo (on leave from CDS, Trivandrum) 2 CEO, Centre for Technology, Innovation and Economic Research, Pune 3 Assistant Professor of Economics (Education), Singapore Management University, Singapore May 2016 CTIER Working Papers describe research in progress by the author(s) and are published to elicit comments and debate. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the views of CTIER, its Board or Advisory Council. Feedback and comments may be directed to the author(s). CTIER Working Papers are available at ctier.org.

Weighted deductions for in-house R&D: Does it benefit small and medium firms more? The importance of R&D by private sector enterprises to achieve the national goal of raising Gross Expenditure on Domestic R&D (GERD) to at least 2 per cent of the country s GDP cannot be emphasized enough. If India is to emerge a major manufacturing hub, a broad based increase in investments in R&D is essential to both absorb imported technologies and indeed in developing local technological capabilities. In India today, industrial R&D spending is heavily concentrated, with around 20 firms accounting for 60% of India s total industrial R&D spending, and 60 firms accounting for around 80% of total spending. To encourage increased and broad based spending on R&D by industry, tailoring policies to firms that respond most to R&D incentives will make these policies most effective. One such incentive is the government s tax incentive for R&D that has seen a reduction in the weighted deduction amount from 200 percent to 150 percent starting April 2017. From fiscal year 2020-21, the weighted deduction on R&D expenditure will be further lowered to 100 percent. Based on our preliminary analysis (Refer to A and B in Appendix), we find that having a weighted deduction policy appears to benefit firms, although the effect is mainly for small and medium sized firms. Going forward, the government could consider applying differential rates for weighted deduction depending on the size of a firm (rather than the planned reductions that applies to all firms). This would tie in appropriately with the Government s focus to provide support to small and medium enterprises.

Importance of tax subsidies for R&D and insights from an empirical exercise Tax subsidies are an important incentive tool for R&D. By its very nature, R&D is partly a public good where the social returns on investment tend to be higher than the private returns. As a result, firms may tend to typically under-invest in R&D, and the market determined R&D level being below the socially desirable level. By simply examining Figure 1 to trace the evolution of R&D spending in India and the total tax foregone as a result of the various incentives the government offers for R&D (the weighted deduction policy is just one of them), it is not possible to discern the true impact of the weighted deduction policy on R&D spending in India. It is also impossible to see whether small and large firms respond differently to these incentives. It would be helpful if policymakers undertook a more sophisticated analysis when thinking about how the current policy should evolve. As a first step towards a more comprehensive evaluation of the impact of the weighted deduction policy, we have analysed the impact of the policy on individual firms. For a firm to be eligible to claim weighted deduction, it must first appear on the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research (DSIR) approved list of firms (under section 35 2(ab) of the IT Act, 1961). We have considered data between FY2008 and FY2014. Our analysis reveals that being on the DSIR list has a significant and positive impact on R&D spending at the firm level.

Figure 1: Evolution of R&D spending and total tax foregone for all R&D incentives Source: Union Budget Documents, Prowess, Sunil Mani, CTIER This finding is robust to accounting for effects of other variables such as firm exports from previous years, sales from previous years as well as growth of R&D spending in previous years in an attempt to capture the drivers of R&D spending. We account for unobservable firm characteristics that stay constant over time that may have impacted R&D spending. Similarly, we also account for possible global and domestic events in a particular year that would have likely impacted the economy. Further analysis reveals an interesting pattern. We find that the effect is especially strong for firms that spend less than Rs. 10 crores on R&D. This suggests that small and medium firms may be responding more to such a policy compared to large firms that spend on R&D regardless of this incentive. We also find that if one restricts the

entire sample of firms to the period FY2011 until FY2014 (after the introduction of the 200 percent weighted deduction), there appears to be a diminished impact on R&D spending of being on the DSIR list. This lends some justification to the government s decision to lower the amount of weighted deduction from 200 percent to 150 percent. For a more complete evaluation of the policy in question, it would also be important to consider data on the amount of weighted deduction that was given to individual firms. This would help inform policy makers as to what proportion of the tax foregone is driven by small or medium versus large firms. One criticism of the above empirical exercise could very well be that certain firms only applied for weighted deduction in those years when they knew they were likely to spend on R&D, leading to a selection bias in the analysis. The authorities should undertake a more comprehensive evaluation of the weighted deduction policy for R&D, and consider tailoring it to small and medium enterprises. Applying differential rates for weighted deduction depending on the size of the firm would tie in appropriately with the government s focus to support small and medium enterprises. It could also help reduce the cost for the government in terms of tax foregone, while encouraging more broad based spending on R&D with the aim of achieving the 2 percent target for GERD as a percent of GDP.

Appendix A. Table 1: Regression Results B. Data used in the analysis We would like to highlight the data used in our preliminary study and the gaps that exist. Table 2. Data gaps need to be addressed 1 2 3 4 5 6 Total R&D Spending Total No: of DSIR firms who have Total R&D Spending by by 472 Total No: of reported R&D Firms on the % of total R&D firms (Rs. firms on the spending in DSIR List (Rs. Spending by Fiscal Year Cr.) DSIR List Prowess Cr.) 472 firms 2008 5485.69 175 120 3280.61 59.8 2009 6352.6 187 118 3426.68 53.9 2010 7618.76 215 130 4336.41 56.9

2011 10175.45 307 172 8028.26 78.9 2012 11784.35 149 65 1026.47 8.7 2013 14495.74 218 73 1643.1 11.3 2014 15260.9 207 62 1743.41 11.4 Source: Authors calculations 1. The sources for the data were DSIR annual reports and the Prowess database (data reported in company annual reports). 2. We identified 894 firms that appeared at least once on the DSIR list between 2008 and 2014. 3. Of these 894 firms, the Prowess database reported data on R&D spending for only 472 firms. 4. In India, the top 100 R&D spenders account for around 85% of India s total industrial R&D spending the data for these top 100 firms are captured by the Prowess database. 5. In the table above, there exists a gap between the number of firms on the DSIR list (column 3) and the number of firms on the list whose R&D spending is captured by Prowess (column 4). The latter is much lower than the former. 6. We can roughly assume that apart from a few large firms, the bulk of the firms on the DSIR list are small firms (even the missing firms in column 4) R&D spending data of large firms is captured by Prowess. Looking at column 6, it appears that in the 2012-2014 period, the large firms may not have been on the DSIR list at all i.e. they may not have availed of the weighted deduction. C. Discussion held with DSIR representative in March 2016: R&D expenditure data reported in the annual report may be from different years (over the past 3 years). Some companies report at group level (in Prowess), but may have separate DSIR recognized labs. Some report as individual R&D centres which have been recognized by DSIR - these appear on the R&D expenditure list of DSIR annual reports.

Once a firm is recognized as an R&D centre by DSIR for a period of 3 years, the R&D centre can seek weighted deduction from tax authorities. Approval of what constitutes as R&D expenditure for weighted deduction has to be sought each year from DSIR. Once approved for weighted deduction, the company name appears on the list of companies approved under section 35 2(ab). Some companies that have dropped off the recognized list may not re-file for recognition immediately. List is therefore dynamic. 900-1000 companies have been approved for weighted deduction till date.