Quick answer: The R&D Tax Incentive is concerned with technical uncertainty — whether the outcome of an experimental technical or scientific activity could be determined in advance by a competent professional from existing knowledge. It is not concerned with business risk — whether customers will buy it, whether you can afford it, or whether you'll deliver on time. Commercial uncertainty alone does not satisfy the core R&D activity test. A project can carry both kinds of risk; the activities directed at resolving the relevant technical or scientific unknown may warrant assessment as core R&D activities, while the surrounding commercial risks do not become eligible merely because they form part of the same project. Separating the two is the first thing you should do.
Projects can fail to qualify for the R&D Tax Incentive even where the work was hard, risky or genuinely novel to the business. This may occur because the uncertainty that made the project risky was commercial rather than technical, and commercial uncertainty alone does not satisfy the core R&D activity test. Understanding that distinction changes how you scope a claim, what you document and whether the relevant activities warrant assessment.
This article draws the line clearly, gives contrasting examples from the same project, and shows how to separate the two before you self-assess. It is general information from a Registered Research Service Provider, not tax advice — eligibility depends on your circumstances and you should self-assess and seek your own advice.
The Distinction in One Sentence
Business risk is doubt about whether a venture will succeed commercially. Technical uncertainty is doubt about whether a technical or scientific outcome can be achieved at all, given current knowledge.
Business risk asks: Will people buy it? Can we afford to build it? Will the market still be there? Can we ship on time? Will the client sign? Each of those questions may involve genuine commercial uncertainty, but none of them, by itself, establishes an eligible core R&D activity.
Technical uncertainty asks a narrower question: Can this specific technical outcome be produced, and is the answer knowable in advance by a competent professional in the field from existing knowledge, methods, prior art or expertise? If a skilled professional would already know the answer, or could find it out through routine investigation, there is no technical uncertainty — regardless of how commercially bold the venture is.
Why Commercial Uncertainty Isn't Enough
This isn't an Ignition Research preference; it's how the law defines a core R&D activity. Under the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (s 355-25), a core activity is an experimental activity whose outcome could not have been known or determined in advance on the basis of current knowledge, information or experience — and which can only be determined by applying a systematic progression of work to generate new knowledge.Official guidance applies the unknown-outcome test from the perspective of a competent professional with access to relevant knowledge and resources anywhere in the world at the time the activity began.
Read that "unknown outcome" test carefully and the exclusion of commercial uncertainty follows. "We didn't know if customers would pay for it" is an unknown about the market, not about a technical or scientific outcome. "We didn't know if we could deliver within budget" is an unknown about resources. These questions concern commercial performance rather than whether the outcome of an experimental technical or scientific activity could be determined in advance. Market research is also specifically excluded from being a core R&D activity. Commercial uncertainty may also be investigated or tested, but it does not concern the unknown technical or scientific outcome required by the core R&D activity test.
The Line, Side by Side
The same risk can feel identical in the boardroom yet fall on opposite sides of the legislation. The comparison below applies three questions to each kind of uncertainty:
The question being asked
Can an experiment based on established science resolve it?
Relevance to the core R&D test
Will customers buy this product?
No — it is a market question rather than a technical or scientific question.
Not relevant; excluded as commercial or market research.
Can we deliver within budget and on time?
No — it's a resource and scheduling question.
Not relevant; commercial risk.
Will this client's procurement approve us?
No — it's a sales and negotiation question.
Not relevant; commercial risk.
Can this outcome be produced when no known method predicts it?
Potentially yes — via a systematic progression of experimental work.
Potentially a core R&D activity, if the outcome was genuinely unknown in advance.
Would a competent professional already know the answer?
If yes, no experiment is needed.
If the answer was knowable in advance, it fails the core test.
The pattern is consistent: if the uncertainty concerns the market, timing or the client, it is business risk rather than technical uncertainty. If the outcome of a specific technical or scientific activity can only be determined through a systematic progression of experimental work conducted for the purpose of generating new knowledge, it may be a core R&D activity.
Same Project, Two Kinds of Uncertainty
The clearest way to see the line is to take one real-world project and split it.
A logistics platform. The business risk was whether carriers would adopt a new tracking product and whether it would win enough customers to be viable — real risk, but commercial. The technical uncertainty sat elsewhere: whether carrier location feeds with inconsistent, intermittent update frequencies could be fused into a single position estimate accurate to within a required tolerance, where a review of publicly available or reasonably accessible knowledge did not identify an established method capable of determining the outcome under those reliability characteristics. Only the second question may warrant assessment as a core activity.
A food product. The business risk was whether a health-conscious segment would pay a premium and whether the launch would hit a seasonal window. The technical uncertainty was whether a particular formulation could achieve a target shelf life without a preservative class, when existing preservation science didn't predict the outcome for that ingredient combination. The marketing risk isn't R&D; the formulation experiment might be.
A fintech feature. The business risk was whether a compliance product would clear procurement at large clients. The technical uncertainty was whether a chosen technique could maintain sub-threshold latency at a concurrency level where the standard approach was known to degrade. Winning the client is commercial; the latency question is potentially experimental.
In each case the same project contains both. The mistake is claiming the whole project because it felt uncertain overall. The discipline is isolating the technical unknown and scoping only around it.
How to Separate Them Before You Self-Assess
Once you suspect there's a genuine technical unknown inside a project, three moves keep your self-assessment honest:
Restate each risk as a question. If the question is about buyers, budget, timing, or competitors, park it — it's business risk. If it's about whether a technical outcome can be achieved, keep it.
Apply the competent-professional test. Would a skilled professional in your field already know the answer, or find it through routine methods? If yes, it's not technical uncertainty. If genuinely no, you may have a core activity.
Frame the survivor as a testable hypothesis. If the technical question cannot be expressed as a hypothesis that can be tested through experiment, the activity may not satisfy the hypothesis and experimentation requirements for a core R&D activity.
This is an important translation step in the self-assessment process, and it is the substance of our research framing work: taking a project described in commercial terms and separating out the testable research questions from the business risk around them — before the work begins, while the framing can still guide what you record.
Where an RSP Fits
The recurring pattern we see does not necessarily reflect dishonesty — a founder may have experienced the risk of the whole project and reasonably assumed that all of it “counts.” A Registered Research Service Provider may assist with drawing the activity boundary: identifying where the potentially assessable technical question ends and the surrounding commercial risk begins, so the self-assessment is scoped to the relevant activities.
We help identify where the technical uncertainty sits, frame it as a research question and structure a pathway to test it, while keeping the surrounding commercial risks separate. As a Registered Research Service Provider (RSP000047), Ignition Research provides R&D services within its registered research fields. RSP registration confirms that the provider has met the applicable registration requirements for those research fields. It is not a government endorsement of any individual claim.
Not sure where the boundary sits? Separate commercial risk from the technical question — we'll help you isolate the technical unknown from the business risk around it.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: What is the difference between business risk and technical uncertainty?
A: Business risk is doubt about commercial success — whether customers will buy, whether you can afford it, whether you'll deliver on time. Technical uncertainty is doubt about whether a technical or scientific outcome can be achieved at all, when a competent professional couldn't determine the answer in advance from existing knowledge. Only technical uncertainty is relevant to the core R&D activity test.
Q: Does business or commercial risk count as R&D?
A: No. However genuine and severe, market, funding, timing and delivery risk are commercial uncertainties, not technical ones. Commercial uncertainty alone does not satisfy the core R&D activity test in s 355-25, which requires an unknown technical or scientific outcome tested through a systematic progression of work. Market research is specifically excluded from being a core R&D activity.
Q: How do I know if my project has technical uncertainty?
A: Restate each risk as a question and apply the competent-professional test: would a skilled professional in your field already know the answer, or reach it through routine methods? If yes, there's no technical uncertainty. If genuinely not — and you can frame it as a testable hypothesis — you may have a core R&D activity to self-assess.
Q: Our whole project was risky and novel — can we claim all of it?
A: Generally no. A project can carry real business risk end to end while the technical uncertainty sits in only one part. The activities directed at resolving the technical unknown may warrant assessment as core R&D activities; the surrounding commercial risks don't become eligible merely because they form part of the same project. You isolate and self-assess the technically uncertain activities rather than claiming the project because it felt uncertain overall.
Sources & Further Reading
Check if you are eligible for the R&DTI (business.gov.au) — the "outcome unknown in advance" and systematic-progression tests
Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 s 355-25 — core R&D activities (Federal Register of Legislation)
Research and development tax incentive (ato.gov.au)
Related: Self-assessment · Research framing · R&D Tax Incentive overview
Note: The Australian Government announced reforms to the R&D Tax Incentive in the 2026–27 Budget, intended to apply to income years starting on or after 1 July 2028. Until those changes take effect, the program continues to operate under the current legislation. Readers should check the latest official guidance before relying on the future measures.
This article provides general information only and does not constitute tax, legal or financial advice. Eligibility for the R&D Tax Incentive depends on the specific entity, activities, expenditure and circumstances involved. Businesses should assess their circumstances against the legislation and current official guidance and obtain independent professional advice where appropriate.
Working on a project like this?
Tell us what you're building and the part you're not sure will work. A researcher from our Adelaide team (registered Research Service Provider RSP000047) reads every enquiry and replies within two business days. No documents needed.
