Hong Kong: Hong Kong’s new R&D regime is here

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Hong Kong: Hong Kong’s new R&D regime is here

Sponsored by

sponsored-firms-kpmg.png

On November 2 2018, Hong Kong's new research and development (R&D) regime was enacted and applies to eligible expenditure incurred on or after April 1 2018.

The new rules classify R&D expenditure into two broad categories (Type A and Type B expenditures), which are deductible subject to meeting certain conditions. Type A qualifies for the basic 100% tax deduction. Type B expenditure qualifies for an enhanced two-tiered tax deduction – 300% for the first HK$2 million ($255,000) and 200% for any remaining amount.

Amendments to the original Bill

There was only a minor amendment to the original legislation. This amendment relates to payments made by a taxpayer to another local institution under an R&D subcontract arrangement. It provides retrospective recognition for payments made to local institutions which have been designated by the Commission for Innovation and Technology (CI&T) as 'designated local research institutions'. That is, payments made to a local institution, which at the time of payment was not a designated local research institution, will be eligible for the concession as long as the local institution becomes a designated local research institution within six months from the date of payment.

Complexities in applying the new tax incentive

Some professional bodies and industry organisations have previously raised concerns that the qualifying criteria would make it difficult to assess whether expenditure would constitute Type B expenditure and thus qualify for the enhanced R&D tax deduction. The government's response was that the criteria are a matter of fact to be considered on a case-by-case basis. This is not entirely satisfactory, as experience in other parts of the world has shown that similar R&D definitions can be interpreted very differently by different tax authorities and much will depend on the attitude of the tax authorities in assessing claims.

The Inland Revenue Department (IRD) will release departmental interpretation practice notes (DIPN) shortly to elaborate on and clarify the provisions of the new law and the level of proof required from taxpayers to enable the IRD to assess any enhanced tax deduction claim. It is hoped that the DIPN will set a reasonable degree of flexibility in terms of documentation requirements and will fulfil the government's intention of encouraging R&D activity in Hong Kong.

One area where the Hong Kong legislation appears to be problematic is the limited range of payments qualifying for enhanced deductions – only employment costs, costs of consumables and payments to designated research institutions qualify. To address these concerns, a range of organisations, including those operated for commercial gain, may apply for this designation, and the DIPN will contain guidance on the procedures and criteria for application.

What taxpayers should do to get prepared and things to consider

Many organisations in Hong Kong are already conducting R&D activities, and such costs are usually embedded within their salaries and wages, expenditures or capital assets. Under the new R&D regime, payments to designated local research institutions, direct wages and consumables could qualify for the enhanced tax deduction.

Taxpayers should review and assess which R&D activities they are undertaking, and whether they meet the qualifying criteria for an enhanced tax deduction. Taxpayers conducting R&D should ensure that their internal systems and processes can correctly identify these qualifying activities and quantify the relevant costs. Taxpayers may also want to ensure that their existing business model is consistent with the relief, for example, that R&D employment costs are being borne by the entity benefiting from the IP rights that are being created.

Taxpayers should not overlook the documentary requirements for making an enhanced tax deduction claim. It is important that contemporaneous documentation of processes, risks and results are kept in accordance with the IRD's documentation requirements.

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

Germany has forgotten to think about digital reporting requirements, a WTS partner claimed at ITR’s Indirect Tax Forum 2025
E-invoicing is currently characterised by dynamism, with fragmentation acting as a key catalyst for increasing interoperability, says Aida Cavalera of the International Observatory on eInvoicing
Pillar two and the US tax system ‘could work in harmony’, Scott Levine tells ITR in an exclusive interview to mark his arrival at Baker McKenzie
Peter White, who has a tax debt of A$2 million, has been banned for five years from seeking registration with Australia’s Tax Practitioners Board (TPB)
Wopke Hoekstra’s comments followed US measures aimed against ‘unfair foreign taxes’; in other news, Grant Thornton and Holland & Knight made key tax partner hires
An Administrative Review Tribunal ruling last month in Australia v Alcoa represents a 'concerning trend' for the tax authority, one expert tells ITR
A recent decision underlines that Indian courts are more willing to look beyond just legal compliance and examine whether foreign investment structures have real business substance
Following his Liberal Party’s election victory, one source expects Mark Carney to follow the international consensus on pillar two, as experts assess the new administration
A German economics professor was reportedly ‘irritated’ by how the Finnish ministry of finance used his data
Countries that care about the fair taxation of tech multinationals and equitable global distribution of wealth should back the UN’s tax framework, writes economist Abdelmalek Riad
Gift this article