SR&ED Technical Support

SR&ED Technical Support

Better-Framed R&D Produces Better Technical Evidence

I help technical teams organize the problem, investigation, evidence, learning, and decision path behind their R&D work, so the technical story is clearer for internal decisions and for discussion with qualified SR&ED professionals.

SR&ED Should Not Make Poorly Directed R&D Look Good

SR&ED can reduce the cost of eligible R&D work, but it does not make wasted technical effort free. A larger claim can sometimes reflect a longer, more expensive path. The better question is not only how much was captured. It is whether the work changed a decision.

The risk

High spend can hide weak direction

A project can consume time, people, tests, and documentation while still reducing the wrong problem.

The better question

Did the work change a decision?

The most useful R&D evidence is evidence that changes what the team can do next.

The opportunity

Frame the work as it happens

Stronger framing helps the team clarify the question, the test, the learning, and the decision before memories fade.

SR&ED Changes the Price of Failure. It Does Not Change the Sign.

A claim can reduce the cost of technical learning. It does not make every investigation a good investment. The strongest position is effective R&D with clear evidence, not simply more eligible activity.

What This Service Supports

This is technical support for the work behind the claim. It is not tax filing, legal advice, or an eligibility opinion.

Technical narrative

Clarify the Problem and Technical Question

Many R&D projects are documented after the fact, when the team is trying to remember why the work was started and what was technically difficult. I help clarify the technical problem, the route chosen, the alternatives considered, and the question the work was meant to answer.

Useful when The project history is scattered across emails, lab notes, meeting notes, test records, and memory.
Typical output A clearer technical story of the problem, route, investigation, and learning.
Problem framing

Connect the Work to the Decision

Good R&D is not just activity. It should answer something that matters. I help teams connect technical work to the decision it was supposed to change: continue, stop, scale, reformulate, redesign, select a supplier, change a process, or run a different test.

Useful when The team did many tests, but the decision logic is not clearly visible.
Typical output A decision-focused explanation of what was tried, what was learned, and why it mattered.
Investigation logic

Organize Hypotheses, Tests, Results, and Learning

I help structure the technical record around the logic of the work: what the team believed, what was tested, what happened, what changed in the team’s understanding, and what next step followed from the result.

Useful when The work was real, but the reasoning is buried inside disconnected records.
Typical output A clearer investigation map that shows the sequence from technical question to evidence to learning.
Forward-looking support

Build Better Evidence While the Work Is Happening

The best technical evidence is usually generated during the work, not reconstructed months later. I help teams set up practical habits for capturing problem definitions, route choices, test logic, observations, conclusions, and decision points as the project proceeds.

Useful when A team wants better documentation without turning R&D into paperwork.
Typical output A simple technical evidence workflow aligned with how the team actually works.

Two Ways This Can Help

SR&ED technical support can be useful both before the work happens and after the work has already been done.

Before or during R&D work

Structure the technical question, investigation plan, evidence capture, and decision logic while the work is still active.

After R&D work has been done

Reconstruct the technical story from available records, interviews, test results, project notes, and decision history.

Common Problems This Addresses

These are common technical documentation problems that can make legitimate R&D work harder to explain later.

The problem was real, but not clearly framed

The team remembers the difficulty, but the original technical question is not written clearly.

The tests exist, but the logic is scattered

Records show what was done, but not why each test followed from the previous result.

The learning is hidden inside decisions

The team changed direction, but the technical reason for that change was never captured.

The work was reconstructed too late

By year end, important assumptions, failed routes, and decision points may be difficult to recover from memory.

The claim story is disconnected from R&D value

Documentation describes activity, but not how the work changed the technical or business decision.

The team needs a better evidence habit

The goal is to capture useful technical learning without creating a paperwork burden that slows development.

How an Engagement Works

The first step should be non-confidential. More detailed records can be reviewed later if the fit and confidentiality process are clear.

Start with a non-confidential summary

Describe the project type, the technical problem, the work performed or planned, and the decision the work was meant to support.

Clarify the support needed

The need may be forward-looking evidence capture, technical reconstruction, project framing, or support for discussion with an SR&ED professional.

Review the technical record

Depending on scope, this may include project notes, test summaries, technical reports, meeting notes, lab records, decision history, and interviews with technical staff.

Organize the technical story

The output focuses on the technical problem, route, investigation logic, evidence, learning, and decision path.

Coordinate with the right professionals

Tax, accounting, legal, eligibility, filing, refund, and CRA matters should remain with qualified SR&ED, tax, accounting, or legal professionals.

What You Receive

The exact output depends on the project, but the focus is always the same: make the technical reasoning clearer, more organized, and easier to discuss.

Technical project narrative

A clearer explanation of the problem, route, investigation, evidence, learning, and decision path.

Evidence organization

A practical structure for connecting records, tests, observations, conclusions, and decisions.

Forward evidence workflow

A simple way for the team to capture technical learning as work proceeds, instead of reconstructing it later.

What This Service Does Not Do

The boundaries are important. This service supports the technical side of R&D work. It does not replace qualified SR&ED, tax, accounting, legal, or intellectual-property advice.

No tax or accounting advice: I do not provide tax planning, accounting advice, expenditure calculations, filing positions, refund estimates, or claim preparation as a tax professional.

No eligibility opinion: I do not determine whether work qualifies for SR&ED or whether a claim should be filed. Eligibility and filing decisions should be made with qualified professionals.

No CRA representation: I do not represent clients before the CRA. I can help organize the technical story and supporting evidence for discussion with the appropriate professionals.

No legal or IP advice: If the work involves patents, contracts, regulatory issues, or legal risk, qualified legal counsel should be involved.

How This Connects to Problem Framing

SR&ED documentation is strongest when the R&D work itself is well framed. The same thinking that helps a team choose the better technical route also helps explain what was uncertain, what was tried, what was learned, and why the result mattered.

Better decisions

Problem framing helps the team choose the route most likely to change the decision.

Better evidence

Clearer framing makes it easier to record the technical question, investigation logic, results, and learning as the work proceeds.

Learn About Problem Framing

Need a Clearer Technical Story for R&D Work?

Send a short, non-confidential summary of the project, the technical problem, the work performed or planned, and the decision the work was meant to support.

Start the Conversation