Expansion of the patent box scheme in Australia

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Expansion of the patent box scheme in Australia

Sponsored by

fbrice-400px.png
barley-field-1684052-1280.jpg

Lee Miles of FB Rice discusses Australia’s patent box scheme which is set to introduce the agricultural and low emissions technology sectors

Originally designed to encourage home-grown innovation in the biotech and medical technology sectors, the Australian government announced in its 2022–23 Federal Budget the intention to expand the patent box scheme to include the agricultural and low emissions technology sectors.

Once operational (noting that the scheme is yet to pass through Parliament a year after it was initially unveiled), the patent box will enable companies operating in the agricultural and low emissions technology sectors to access a concessional tax rate of 17% (down from 30% for large businesses and 25% for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) for profits generated from eligible patents and plant breeders rights (PBRs) within Australia.

For the agricultural space, eligible patents will be those covering “practical, technology-focused innovations”, examples of which may include agricultural and veterinary products listed on the Public Chemicals Registration Information System (PubCRIS) register administered by the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA). Pleasingly, the government has also expanded the patent box to include PBR for new plant varieties.

For the low emissions technology sector, patents covering technologies which reduce emissions will be eligible. This arguably covers multiple industry sectors.

In another development, the budget announced that patents issued by the USPTO and EPO will also qualify for the scheme going forward, whereas previously only Australian patents were eligible. 

In this regard, the budget paper noted that this expansion “will remove regulatory barriers to accessing the patent box regime for Australian developed innovations patented in the major overseas jurisdictions with equivalent patent regimes”. Given the importance of the US and European markets to most patenting strategies, this is another welcome development.

For biotech and medical technologies, the patent box scheme is set to commence on July 1 2022 and will apply to eligible patents granted after May 11 2021. For the agricultural and low emission technology sectors, the scheme is set to commence on July 1 2023 and will cover patents or PBRs granted after March 29 2022.

 

Lee Miles

Senior associate, FB Rice

E: lmiles@fbrice.com.au

 

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

US counsel review the key copyright and trademark trends of 2024, including generative AI disputes and SCOTUS cases
If 2024 is anything to go by, the next 12 months could see more IP firms seek investment opportunities while IP lawyers are increasingly likely to work alongside other functions
Practitioners reflect on the impact of USPTO guidance, as well as PTAB and litigation trends
We discuss Managing IP’s 50 most influential people in IP list and look back on the biggest talking points in the last month
Firms explain how they question jurors and account for potential bias in trade secrets cases
A meeting between the EPO and Ericsson, Paul McCartney weighing in on AI and copyright, and a law firm’s STEM pledge were among the top talking points
National courts could combat inconsistencies over the speed of judgments – and provide parties with much-needed certainty – by looking to the UPC
Sources in four jurisdictions discuss the downsides of delayed judgments and why they prefer a well-reasoned, late finding, over a quick ruling that lacks substance
Counsel discuss how likely SCOTUS is to remand closely watched trademark case, which centres on the principle of corporate separateness
Partners at Baker Botts explain why oral arguments were a crucial factor in convincing the Federal Circuit to affirm a lower court ruling
Gift this article