IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ctf/journl/v65y2017i1p61-72.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Policy Forum: The Uneasy Case for a Canadian Patent Box

Author

Listed:
  • Robin Boadway

    (Queen's University, Kingston)

  • Jean-François Tremblay

    (University of Ottawa)

Abstract

Several countries, mainly European, have introduced patent boxes, which reduce the corporate tax rate applicable on income generated from successful research and development (R & D) expenditures. Quebec has implemented a form of patent box for manufacturing firms that generate income from patents developed in the province, and the Saskatchewan government has announced that it will follow suit. There have been calls for the federal government to introduce a patent box for Canada. The intent is to encourage firms to engage in R & D activity that leads to intellectual property and to exploit the innovations in Canada. In this article, the authors draw on the literature and experience with patent boxes elsewhere to review the case for a patent box as an element of R & D policy in Canada. They conclude that a dual approach to R & D incentives involving some combination of ex ante tax incentives and patent boxes is reasonable, especially if patent box support encompasses a variety of forms of intellectual property. At the same time, if patent boxes are introduced, they should conform to the guidelines set out by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, in the base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS) action plan, which restrict eligibility by conditions ensuring domestic development of patents.

Suggested Citation

  • Robin Boadway & Jean-François Tremblay, 2017. "Policy Forum: The Uneasy Case for a Canadian Patent Box," Canadian Tax Journal, Canadian Tax Foundation, vol. 65(1), pages 61-72.
  • Handle: RePEc:ctf:journl:v:65:y:2017:i:1:p:61-72
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ctf.ca/EN/Publications/CTJ_Contents/2017CTJ1.aspx
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ctf:journl:v:65:y:2017:i:1:p:61-72. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Jim Lyons (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.ctf.ca/EN .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.