Possibly — but writing software is not automatically R&D. The R&D Tax Incentive is for activities that resolve genuine technical uncertainty through a systematic, experimental process, not for routine development or configuring existing tools. If you can show a real unknown you had to experiment to solve, and you’ve documented it as you went, a claim may be available. Documentation is where most claims live or die.
What it depends on
Where judgement stays human: Drawing the line between genuine experimentation and routine development is a judgement on your actual project — and it’s the judgement the programme is built to scrutinise.
The programme tests the nature of the work, not the industry. “Core” R&D activities are experiments whose outcome you genuinely couldn’t know in advance; a lot of ordinary software build — integrating, configuring, applying known techniques — doesn’t meet that bar even though it’s hard work.
The other half is contemporaneous records: the hypothesis, the experiments, the results, the eligible expenditure. Reconstructing this after the fact is exactly what reviews target, so the discipline has to run alongside the build.
Drawing the line between genuine experimentation and routine development is a judgement on your actual project — and it’s the judgement the programme is built to scrutinise.
No question is silly, and there's no judgement about where things are at. Tell us what is different about your situation and a CPA will reply personally — usually within one business day.
Reviewed by Graham Chee FCPA (TPB registered tax agent, RAN 15375009) on 1 September 2026.
Brand & IP · general information current as at 1 September 2026. This is general information only, not personal financial, tax or legal advice.