Quick answer: It depends on the structure. In a tax-consolidated group, the head company is the R&D entity and registers for the group — subsidiary members are not separate claimants. Where every partner in a partnership is an R&D entity, it is an R&D partnership: the partnership itself cannot register, and each partner wishing to claim registers separately and claims its proportion, based on the proportion agreed between the partners or, if there is no such agreement, its interest in the net income or partnership loss. An unincorporated joint venture is characterised on its facts. You self-assess.
28 July 2026 — this article describes the current rules. The 2026-27 Federal Budget announced R&DTI changes scheduled to start 1 July 2028; those are not yet law, and we cover them separately in the proposed $50,000 Budget measure.
Collaborations are where R&DTI claims quietly go wrong, and they go wrong at the least interesting possible point: nobody decided which legal entity was the claimant until after the work was done. By then the answer is fixed by facts — who contracted, who paid, who holds the results — and the answer may be that the intended claimant does not satisfy the relevant requirements, or that the appropriate entity was not registered.
This article is about the claiming entity. Three related questions live elsewhere and are worth separating out now, because conflating them is the usual source of confusion:
Is your trading entity eligible at all? A trust or a partnership of individuals is generally not an R&D entity, and that is a structural problem before any collaboration question arises. See our article on trusts and partnerships.
Who was the activity conducted for? A supplier-customer relationship raises s 355-210 and the "conducted for" factors — a different test from the entity question. Covered in our Insights.
Whose expenditure was at risk? Where one party funds the other, s 355-405 may bite. Also covered separately.
Consolidated Groups: The Head Company Claims
Where a group is consolidated for income tax purposes, the single-entity rule does the work: subsidiary members are treated as parts of the head company, so the head company is the R&D entity for the R&DTI. It registers the activities and claims the offset for the group, and the fact that the research is physically performed inside a subsidiary does not make that subsidiary a claimant (ATO).
Three practical consequences follow, and each of them regularly catches groups out:
Register in the right name
Registration is made by the R&D entity. A registration lodged in a subsidiary's name, for a consolidated group, is a problem you will discover at the worst possible time — and the registration deadline is not generally a soft one. See registration deadline.
Intra-group charges do not create claimable expenditure by themselves
Under the single-entity rule, transactions between members of the same consolidated group are generally not recognised for income tax purposes. A management fee from ResearchCo to HoldCo is not the thing that gets claimed; the underlying expenditure the group actually incurred is.
Thresholds are tested at the group level, not the entity level
Aggregated turnover determines whether the offset is refundable, and grouping rules pull in connected entities and affiliates. A small research subsidiary inside a large group does not get access to the refundable offset by being small. That mechanic has its own article — see refundable vs non-refundable offset and our piece on the aggregated-turnover threshold in Insights.
Where a group is not consolidated, the analysis reverts to each company on its own: whichever company incurred the expenditure on activities conducted for it registers and claims, and intra-group dealings are real transactions — which brings the associate rules into play, since expenditure incurred to an associate is generally only notionally deductible in the year it is actually paid, not merely accrued. That trap has its own article too.
R&D Partnerships: The Partnership Cannot Register — The Partners Do
This is the structure most people have never heard of and some are already in.
Where you are in a partnership and each of the partners is an R&D entity, the partnership is an R&D partnership. The rules are set out in Subdivision 355-J of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997, and the ATO's guidance is direct about the consequence: an R&D partnership cannot register for the R&D tax incentive. Instead, each partner wishing to claim must register separately, before claiming (ATO).
What each partner claims is its proportion of the partnership's notional R&D deductions. The ATO describes that proportion as based on the partner's interest as a partner in the net income or loss of the R&D partnership — unless the partners have agreed that they should bear, or be entitled to, a different proportion.
Read that second limb carefully, because it is the planning point. The default is the profit-sharing interest, but an agreement between the partners can allocate a different proportion of R&D amounts. Where the partners agree to a different proportion, that agreement should be clearly documented. The legal and tax effect of the agreed allocation should be confirmed with your adviser.
Each partner registers: Two partners means two registrations, each within 10 months after the end of the relevant income year. One partner's registration does not cover the other.
A partner that is not an R&D entity changes the analysis: The R&D-partnership rules turn on all partners being R&D entities. A partnership including an individual, a trust or an exempt entity is a different animal, and the corporate partners cannot simply assume the Subdivision 355-J mechanics apply.
Unincorporated Joint Ventures: Characterisation First
"Joint venture" is a commercial description, not a tax category. Australian collaborations described as JVs are, on their facts, usually one of:
What it actually is
Who claims, in shape
A separate incorporated JV company
The JV company is potentially the R&D entity, if the activities were conducted for it and it incurred the expenditure
A partnership in substance (joint business, shared profits)
If every partner is an R&D entity, the R&D-partnership rules apply: partners register separately and claim proportions
A contractual collaboration with no common business — each party doing its own work at its own cost
Each party assesses its own activities and expenditure on ordinary principles
One party funding the other to do the work
May also raise the s 355-210 “conducted for” and s 355-405 “at risk” rules
A collaboration agreement under which one party pays the other to develop something is a customer-supplier arrangement wearing a JV badge, and the two provisions that decide it are the ones covered in our other articles, not the entity rules here.
The rule underneath all of this, with one important exception: Section 355-210 requires an R&D entity to consider whether the relevant activities were conducted for it, rather than for another entity in circumstances that prevent it from claiming those activities. The rule can prevent duplication of claims in some circumstances, but it is not a blanket rule that only one entity can ever have expenditure connected with the same R&D activity. In an R&D partnership, Subdivision 355-J provides a specific statutory apportionment regime under which each eligible partner may register the partnership’s activities and claim its proportion of the relevant notional deductions. In other collaborative arrangements, each entity’s entitlement must be assessed separately against the registration, expenditure and “conducted for” requirements.
What to Settle Before the Collaboration Starts
Illustrative checklist, not legal advice — and worth doing with your adviser.
Identify the intended claimant for each work package before work starts, and ensure the contractual arrangements and actual conduct are consistent with the relevant expenditure and “conducted for” requirements.
Check consolidated group registration: In a consolidated group, check the registration is in the head company's name. Every year.
Document R&D partnership proportions: If you may be in an R&D partnership, decide the proportion deliberately and record the agreement, rather than defaulting to the profit share by accident.
Map activities and roles: Map the programme into activities and document each party's role. For an R&D partnership, each partner wishing to claim registers the relevant partnership activities and claims its statutory partner's proportion. For other collaborations, assess each entity's registration and expenditure separately under the ordinary rules.
Document rights and risks: Document the actual ownership of results, decision rights and allocation of financial risk — these are relevant facts in the “conducted for” analysis.
Diarise deadlines: Diarise the registration deadline for each entity that needs to register for the relevant income year.
Where an RSP Fits
AusIndustry describes Research Service Providers as scientific or technical service providers you can engage to conduct R&D activities on your behalf, registered in specific fields (business.gov.au). In a collaboration, an RSP is often the cleanest way to give a multi-party programme a single coherent experimental design while keeping each party's activities and records separable — which is precisely what a per-entity registration needs.
Note the structural nuance if the below-threshold route matters to you: R&D expenditure for the income year must generally be at least $20,000 — that is the lower bound of the entitlement in s 355-100(1) of the ITAA 1997 (ATO), qualifying expenditure incurred to a non-associate RSP may still form part of the offset where total notional deductions are below the usual $20,000 threshold. Precisely: where total notional deductions fall below A$20,000, the offset base is generally limited to qualifying expenditure incurred to a non-associate RSP for services in a registered field, together with eligible CRC Program contributions — the substituted base set out in the table in s 355-100(2) — other in-house amounts do not automatically join that base. In a group or JV setting the non-associate condition is worth checking rather than assuming. See claiming R&D under $20,000. Using an RSP does not guarantee eligibility — you still self-assess, and an RSP supplies research capability, not tax advice.
What the 2026-27 Budget Announced
The 2026–27 Federal Budget announced proposed R&DTI reforms for income years starting on or after 1 July 2028. The measures are not yet law. Until any amendments take effect, current-year R&DTI claims continue to be assessed under the existing rules. See our Budget update for further details on the proposed changes and their status.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: Which company in a consolidated group claims the R&D Tax Incentive?
A: The head company. Under the single-entity rule, subsidiary members are treated as parts of the head company, so the head company is the R&D entity, registers the activities and claims the offset for the group — even where the research is performed inside a subsidiary. Registering in a subsidiary's name is a common and costly error. You self-assess.
Q: Can a partnership register for the R&D Tax Incentive?
A: An R&D partnership — one where every partner is an R&D entity — cannot itself register. Each partner wishing to claim registers separately before claiming, and claims its proportion of the partnership's notional R&D deductions.
Q: How is R&D split between joint venture partners?
A: In an R&D partnership, each partner's proportion is based on its interest as a partner in the net income or loss, unless the partners have agreed they should bear or be entitled to a different proportion. Outside the R&D-partnership regime, there is no equivalent statutory partner-proportion rule. Each entity's entitlement must instead be assessed separately under the ordinary R&DTI rules, including registration, qualifying expenditure and whether the activities were conducted for that entity.
Q: Can two companies claim the same R&D activity?
A: Potentially, depending on the structure and facts. Section 355-210 can prevent duplication in some circumstances, but it does not impose a blanket one-claimant-per-activity rule. Each R&D entity must independently satisfy the relevant registration, expenditure and “conducted for” requirements. In an R&D partnership, Subdivision 355-J expressly apportions the partnership's R&D amounts between the partners according to each partner's proportion.
Sources & Further Reading
ATO — Tax Reform: better targeting the R&D Tax Incentive — the announced 1 July 2028 measures and their status
legislation.gov.au — Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 — Div 355, incl. Subdiv 355-J and ss 355-210, 355-405
Related: the R&D Tax Incentive pillar · refundable vs non-refundable offset · registration deadline · what an RSP is · claiming R&D under $20,000
Talk to Ignition Research before the collaboration agreement is signed — as a Registered Research Service Provider in Adelaide, we help multi-party programmes split the work into activities the appropriate claimant or claimants can register — the head company in a consolidated group, each partner in an R&D partnership, each party in a contractual collaboration — with records that keep the claims apart. We are not a registered tax agent: your company self-assesses and remains responsible for its own claim, with advice and lodgement handled by your tax adviser. Get in touch.
This article is general information from a Registered Research Service Provider about the R&D Tax Incentive. It is not tax, legal or financial advice; eligibility depends on your circumstances and you should self-assess and seek your own advice.
Thinking about a project like this?
If you're weighing up an AI, software or technical improvement project and can't tell yet whether it's implementation or research, start with a quick read on where it sits.