Malta: Patent box regime launched

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

Malta: Patent box regime launched

Sponsored by

sponsored-firms-fenech.png
li-malta-as248335701.jpg

Rebecca Diacono of Fenech and Fenech Advocates outlines conditions and benefits as Malta introduces new rules to create incentives for qualifying taxpayers.

The much-anticipated Patent Box Regime (Deduction) Rules (the patent box regime) were published on August 13 2019. The rules have been modelled to be compliant with the OECD's modified nexus approach and came into force on January 1 2019.

It caters for a tax deduction with respect to qualifying intellectual property (qualifying IP), which includes:

  • A patent or patents, whether issued or applied for (where an application for a patent is rejected, it would no longer fall within scope); or

  • Assets in respect of which protection rights are granted in terms of national, EU or international legislation, including protection rights in relation to plants and genetic material, utility models and software protected by copyright; or

  • With respect to small entities, as defined, intellectual property which is non-obvious, useful, novel and having features similar to patents may qualify subject to a determination by Malta Enterprise. The patent box regime refers to guidance provided by Malta Enterprise, which is yet to be published.

In all cases, the qualifying IP concerned must be granted legal protection in a jurisdiction. In addition, it should be noted that certain IP falls outside the scope of the new rules e.g. marketing related intellectual property, such as brands and trademarks are excluded.

Entitlement to a deduction in terms of the patent box begime is subject to the satisfaction of an exhaustive list of conditions which include:

i) the research, planning, processing, experimenting, testing, devising, designing, development or similar activity leading to the creation, development, improvement or protection of the qualifying IP must be carried out by the beneficiary – solely or together with any other persons – or in terms of cost sharing arrangements;

ii) the beneficiary must be the owner or holder of an exclusive licence in respect of the qualifying IP;

iii) an adequate level of substance must be put in place in the relevant jurisdiction – which includes physical presence, personnel and assets. The level of substance must be commensurate with the activities carried out by the beneficiary with respect to the qualifying IP;

Subject to satisfying all requirements, a beneficiary may then claim a deduction against income and capital gains derived from qualifying IP, which deduction is calculated according to the following formula:

malta

The deduction may be claimed against income or capital gains which fall within scope of the Income Tax Act. The income includes income derived from the use, enjoyment and employment of the qualifying IP, royalties or similar income received from the sale of goods or services and any sum paid for the granting of a licence or similar empowerment with respect to the qualifying IP, amongst others.

In applying the available deduction, the patent box regime provides guidance as to what constitutes qualifying IP expenditure, which includes inter alia expenditure – whether incurred directly by the beneficiary or through an unrelated subcontractor – in the creation, development, improvement or protection of the qualifying IP.

Fenech and Fenech Advocates
E: rebecca.diacono@fenlex.com
W: fenechlaw.com

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

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
The cuts disproportionately affected staff in certain positions, the report also found; in other news, MHA announced the €24m acquisition of Baker Tilly South East Europe
Gift this article