UK Hands Out Tax Breaks For 'Using' Patents
from the the-wrong-incentives dept
The UK Government has unveiled a new tax break scheme, Patent Box, for corporations that use patents -- either through owning the patent or being the exclusive licensee.You can only benefit from the Patent Box if your company is liable to Corporation Tax and makes a profit from exploiting patented inventions.
Your company must also own or exclusively license-in the patents and must have undertaken qualifying development on them. You can read more about exclusively licensing-in patents later in this guide.
If your company is a member of a group, it may qualify if another company in the group has undertaken the qualifying development.
The Register reports that there has been some controversy over this with potential beneficiaries ecstatic over the prospect of a windfall from the tax man because Corporate Tax drops from 28% to 23% and revenue from patents will be taxed at only 10% starting in April 2013. Others are, quite reasonably, concerned that this could lead to a wave of trivial patents being filed, favor big businesses over small businesses, and distort research priorities.
Given the cost of filing a patent and the increasing frequency of litigation over patents, they've got a point.
The dangers are obvious: patents are being increasingly broadly written and the consequences of trolling costs upwards of $29 billion a year in the USA. The epic fights over software between big-name companies like Apple, Google, Microsoft, and Oracle may be amusing to read about but people can and do get put out of business by bad patents. Britain is a member of the European Union, where there is a push to introduce the Unitary Patent alongside a new patent court. This would possibly open the floodgates for the kind of patent insanity we've been seeing in America -- and perhaps make things even worse.The idea behind Patent Box is that businesses will put the tax money they save into R&D, fueling further innovation and further patents, but we all know what actually happens in these cases: they end up litigating over patents and stifling actual innovation because the patent itself is the product. And since there's very little economic evidence that patents lead to greater innovation, this is just creating massive incentives for patents, not for innovation. It's a stupid idea to create a tax dodge for big players without doing anything to actually encourage innovation.
Follow me on Twitter, Facebook or Google+
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: patents, tax breaks, uk
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You should try to use realistic numbers, not things that are easily debunked. If this was an MPAA report Mike would be calling it out like mad.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Because there is evidence that the MPAA copyright infringement studies are bogus, which Mike as pointed to in his articles. What evidence can you point us to that the stats used bogus as well.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
We both know you would, if you could.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: 'Tard
"Be sure to read instructions before doing assignment."
Really? Couldn't find the link, eh?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: 'Tard
I take the numbers the same way you guys would take a pro-patent person saying patents put trillions into the economy. It's all bullshit, plain and simple. Hinging an entire piece of numbers that are bullshit is just more bullshit.
Perhaps before grading my posts in the future, you might actually want to learn how to think for yourself.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's all about giving tax cuts to the rich people running big businesses who supported the current Prime Minister in the last election, as a way to pay them back for their support and money.
Tax cuts that the UK can't afford when you consider how the same prime minister has implemented other big austerity measures, that have only stagnated the UK's economy rather then causing it to recover from the great recession. Such as tripling tuition at colleges & universities owned by the state, because you know, what better way to encourage more innovation in the future then by tripling the cost of going to college to get educated enough to make new innovations in engineering, medicine, and such?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Little by little the Bricks on the Wall of Western World are crumbling.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It also positively encourages the destruction of any start-up that infringes on any patent to preserve the exclusive use needed for the tax breaks.
It does nothing to encourage start ups as they rarely if ever have to pay corporation tax. If anything it discourages start ups as it reduces the chances of gaining a license for patents.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Will Theorisation!
How to reach full employment:
It's all about matching percentages. If you have 10% unemployment, then take 10% of the wealth away from the 10% of wealthiest individuals in the country and disperse the funds directly to the unemployed. Repeat every month until there are no wealthy or there are no unemployed.
(For our experiment, "unemployed" means "does not have a job", not "looking for a job"--because lots of gov statistics are bullshit.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
When that is said, this seems like an insufficiently refined proposal. On one hand it encourages using patents instead of commercial secrets and on the other it encourages patenting of far more than before.
Problem is that patenting is already the standard and commercial secrets are rare enough and the british companies are specialized enough for this to not really boosting competitiveness and research.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
riiigghhhttt
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
about as stupid as the idea of UK workers signing away their rights in return for shares in a company that could be out of business in a year or be worth less. the worker could also be sacked and if extremely lucky, win a case of unfair dismissal, getting even less than is averaged out now (�9000). strange how payments of several �100,000 have been made for being sexually discriminated against and more for racial discrimination. one day companies everywhere will realise that without workers at the bottom, doing the lesser jobs, there is no need for those at the top because there is no company. the coalition government in the UK is doing it's best to do away totally with Unions as well as worker rights, so as to put the UK back to the Victorian times and before. if it succeeds, be prepared for it to spread!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]