6 worked SR&ED Financial Documentation case studies — the position a client typically comes to us with, what we do, and what it is worth. Each is an illustrative example built on the rules that apply to sr&ed financial documentation work, not a specific client's file.
Case Study 1 · Scaling without breaking
Growth Handled Without A Missed Filing, $34,500 Freed — Late-Documented Claimant, Saskatoon
Client: A claimant whose project records were written after the work · Where: Saskatoon, Saskatchewan · Engagement: 6 weeks, fixed fee
Cash freed$34,500
Compliance failuresNone
ReportingMonthly
The situation — A claimant whose project records were written after the work, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
A claimant whose project records were written after the work in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan was opening in a second province. That meant different filing obligations and a different payroll regime. Eligible development work never claimed because nobody thought it counted as research already sat in the file.
What we did for A claimant whose project records were written after the work, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
We identified the eligible projects, documented the technological uncertainty and systematic investigation for each, and filed a claim that survived review without adjustment. We then put monthly reporting in place. That let the owner see the cash effect of growth while there was still time to act on it.
The result — A claimant whose project records were written after the work, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
Growth was absorbed without a compliance failure. $34,500 of cash was released, and the monthly reporting now flags a problem while it is still small.
Client: A food producer reformulating its product line · Where: Winnipeg, Manitoba · Engagement: 3 weeks, fixed fee
Penalty cancelled$59,000
Relief applicationGranted
ReturnAccepted as filed
The situation — A food producer reformulating its product line, Winnipeg, Manitoba
A food producer reformulating its product line in Winnipeg, Manitoba had already missed one deadline and was about to miss a second. Behind it sat a filing deadline missed by three weeks, extinguishing the entire claim. A penalty of $59,000 was accruing.
What we did for A food producer reformulating its product line, Winnipeg, Manitoba
We split the work into what had to happen before the deadline and what could follow it. Then we sat with the technical staff to write each project description around the uncertainty they actually faced and the tests they ran.
The result — A food producer reformulating its product line, Winnipeg, Manitoba
The outstanding return was accepted as filed, and the taxpayer relief application cancelled $59,000 of the penalty already assessed on the earlier year.
Case Study 3 · Sale and succession
Intergenerational Transfer Completed With $400,000 Deferred — Digital Media Game Studio, Vancouver
Client: A game studio claiming digital media credits · Where: Vancouver, British Columbia · Engagement: 9 weeks, fixed fee
Tax deferred$400,000
TransferCompleted
RecordsReview-ready
The situation — A game studio claiming digital media credits, Vancouver, British Columbia
A generational transfer at a game studio claiming digital media credits in Vancouver, British Columbia had been discussed for years without a plan. A shareholder loan balance that would have been picked up as income on closing meant the transfer as contemplated would have been fully taxable.
What we did for A game studio claiming digital media credits, Vancouver, British Columbia
We netted the government assistance against the qualified expenditure pool, so the claim matched what would survive a review. We sequenced the steps so each one was complete and documented before the next depended on it.
The result — A game studio claiming digital media credits, Vancouver, British Columbia
$400,000 of tax was deferred through the transfer, and the successor generation took over a corporation whose records stood up to review.
Case Study 4 · Planning that cut the bill
$66,000 Cut From The Annual Tax Bill — First-Time SR&ED Claimant, Guelph
The situation — A first-time SR&ED claimant, Guelph, Ontario
A first-time SR&ED claimant in Guelph, Ontario was compliant but paying more than it needed to. The prior year had been filed correctly. It still left a provincial grant for the same project left in place while the federal claim was made on the gross spend on the table.
What we did for A first-time SR&ED claimant, Guelph, Ontario
We modelled the current position against the alternatives before changing anything. Then we confirmed CCPC status and refiled at the enhanced 35% refundable rate.
The result — A first-time SR&ED claimant, Guelph, Ontario
The change saved $66,000 in the first year and repeats annually. Nothing about the filings became more aggressive. The position is simply the one the rules already allowed.
Case Study 5 · Objection and relief
Desk-Review Assessment Of $75,000 Vacated — Platform Software Company, Windsor
Client: A software company building a new platform · Where: Windsor, Ontario · Engagement: 7 weeks, fixed fee
Assessment vacated$75,000
Supporting recordsNow on file
AccountCleared
The situation — A software company building a new platform, Windsor, Ontario
A software company building a new platform in Windsor, Ontario was carrying $75,000 of penalties and interest. The charges arose from a claim filed at the 15% non-refundable rate when CCPC status supported 35% refundable. Much of that amount accumulated during a period the CRA itself had delayed.
What we did for A software company building a new platform, Windsor, Ontario
We put contemporaneous tracking in place — project logs tied to time records — so the following year’s claim was defensible by construction. We framed the relief application on the specific grounds the CRA guidelines recognise rather than on general hardship.
The result — A software company building a new platform, Windsor, Ontario
The assessment was vacated. $75,000 came off the account, and the documentation now on file makes the same position straightforward to defend next time.
Case Study 6 · Missed incentive claimed
Incentive Review Recovered $107,000 Across 3 Open Years — Clean-Technology Startup, Regina
The situation — A clean-technology startup, Regina, Saskatchewan
An incentive review at a clean-technology startup in Regina, Saskatchewan started from a simple question: what has never been claimed? The answer ran to 3 years. It was driven by a SR&ED claim prepared eleven months after the fact with no contemporaneous records.
What we did for A clean-technology startup, Regina, Saskatchewan
We separated eligible experimental development time from routine production work in the time records. That made the claimed portion traceable to a person and a date. We documented eligibility to the standard a reviewer would apply rather than the standard a claim form requires.
The result — A clean-technology startup, Regina, Saskatchewan
The credits produced $107,000 across the open years. The tracking now in place means the following year's claim is documented as the work happens rather than reconstructed afterwards.
Reviewed by Udit Gupta, Founder and Tax Accountant for the 2025 tax year. These case studies are illustrative worked examples composed from the CRA rules that apply to this type of work, not specific client files; figures are representative and outcomes depend on your own facts.
