The discussion paper for the Strategic Review of Research and Development mentions the R&D Tax Incentive just twice and is silent on how it should be distributed.
But not to worry; research lobby submissions let the learned reviewers know where the money should go.
Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering: improve incentives for industry R&D investments to align with science and technology priorities, foster collaboration with government departments or agencies and academic institutions.
Australian Council of Deans of Science: has ideas where businesses collecting the Tax Incentive should spend it, notably on funding internships, interdisciplinary training and industry placements for university researchers, linking funding to National Research Mission(s), supporting a science R&D communication hub and – of course – “link a proportion of R&D tax incentive funding to evidence of the industry recipient supporting university-led discovery research.”
Australian Council of Learned Academies: does not appear interested in anything as vulgar as money beyond observing, “the need for a robust, well-coordinated and adequately funded R&D system has never been more pressing.” But it is not above pitching for business, proposing it, “undertake a disciplinary and multidisciplinary opportunity audit” on “Australia’s research needs and untapped potential.”
Academy of Social Sciences in Australia: wants the TI gone, to be replaced with a programme “that is more accountable, outcomes-focused, and rigorous.” The Australian Research Council gets a mention.
Australian Society for Medical Research: wants it expanded to cover “high-risk, high-reward projects” in sectors like biotechnology, renewable energy, and advanced manufacturing. Warns the $150m cap may discourage investment.
Innovative Research Universities: does not mention the Tax Incentive, but it does suggest an R&D agency could direct public investment “towards strategic priorities.”
Research Australia (despite the universal brand it is a medicine lobby): offer increased tax incentives for health-tech/medtech angels.
University of Queensland: suggests the National Reconstruction Fund could provide equity/debt financing for businesses claiming the R&D TI.
Universities Australia: makes a considered case for the way existing conditions of the Tax Incentive affect small and medium enterprise, but overall floats more of the TI pie for its members, recommending, “a premium rate to the R&D TI for businesses that collaborate with universities and publicly funded research agencies.”
