Grow companies and accelerate clean growth

Search By: 'What more can be done to increase business enterprise R&D (BERD) spending?' Show all

Greater Vison Required to Develop New "Greener and Cleaner" Economy

Question:What more can be done to increase business enterprise R&D (BERD) spending?
on 10/19/2016 1476904654
Tags:
Larger ideas would make the idea of a greener country and culture more exciting and therefore more possible as we create exciting employment opportuni .... Read more

Larger ideas would make the idea of a greener country and culture more exciting and therefore more possible as we create exciting employment opportunities in many areas of the economy! Let's not only look for Band-Aid solutions to clean up existing technologies or approaches, but instead, create ways to utilize new and budding methodologies to augment those that already exist. For example, what can we do with rainwater that falls on the roofs of office towers and runs off 20+ storeys to augment the amount of electricity it uses? Are we really harnessing the energy that wind has to offer?

Of course a lot of alternatives already exist and some such as tidal energy in the Bay of Fundy is still at the developmental phase, but Canada should take it to the next level by combining existing alternatives while discovering new ones. 

2

Views

0

Comments

1

Follows

1

Like

Defence spending on research and development should be a big part of our innovation solution

Question:What more can be done to increase business enterprise R&D (BERD) spending?
on 10/03/2016 1475501468
Tags:
There are two central points here for building a successful innovation agenda in Canada. First, defence procurement and defence R&D can be powerful i .... Read more

There are two central points here for building a successful innovation agenda in Canada.

First, defence procurement and defence R&D can be powerful instruments in the innovation policy arsenal. This can lead to commercial applications that have enormous long-term benefits for a country's productivity and competitiveness.

Second, defence companies need to be thought of more broadly as technology firms and innovators. A recent ISED/Statistics Canada report concluded that almost 60 per cent of Canadian defence companies derived less than half their revenue from military sales.

Defence spending on procurement and R&D can and should be a major part of Canada's innovation solution.

http://www.infomedia.gc.ca/ic/articles/unrestricted/2016/09/ic201693422195464_68.htm

Defence spending on research and development should be a big part of our innovation solution

Globe and Mail

September 28 2016

Credit: Christyn Cianfarani, President of the Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries (CADS

3

Views

0

Comments

1

Follows

1

Like

Enable transfer of IP from government to business

Question:What more can be done to increase business enterprise R&D (BERD) spending?
on 09/30/2016 1475259163
Tags:
Intellectual property that is developed inside government should be made available to Canadian enterprises - or those that wish to create and keep job .... Read more

Intellectual property that is developed inside government should be made available to Canadian enterprises - or those that wish to create and keep jobs in Canada, without charge. The government should write license agreements that specify very minimal or no royalty payment back to the crown, although a means of ensuring that the accrued economic benefit remain in Canada should be built into the agreements.

 

2

Views

0

Comments

1

Follows

1

Like

Create equal access to all industry sectors to the BCIP and create Federal Innovation Vouchers

Question:What more can be done to increase business enterprise R&D (BERD) spending?
on 09/23/2016 1474660942
Create equal access to all industry sectors to the BCIP and create Federal Innovation Vouchers Expand the Build in Canada InnovationProgram (BCIP) .... Read more

Create equal access to all industry sectors to the BCIP and create Federal Innovation Vouchers

  1. Expand the Build in Canada InnovationProgram (BCIP) program to allow for demonstration projects in mining operations. The Federal Government does not own any underground hard rock mines, therefore unable to enroll mining innovations via the BCIP.
  2. Create a Federal innovation voucher program that allows companies to redeem the vouchers at qualified organizations that would directly contribute some “value add” to aid in their research and development projects. Qualified organizations could then recover their expenditures to create a win-win-win situation.
Credit: Centre for Excellence In Mining Innovation, CEMI

1

Views

0

Comments

1

Follows

1

Like

Give equal incentives to R&D and activities that accelerate and encourage business growth.

Question:What more can be done to increase business enterprise R&D (BERD) spending?
on 09/19/2016 1474322314
Access to reliable financing programs and capital is essential to the development and maintenance of a robust Canadian video game industry. So far, ac .... Read more

Access to reliable financing programs and capital is essential to the development and maintenance of a robust Canadian video game industry. So far, access to capital has been particularly challenging for the digital media sectors, where projects often require substantial investments at early stages, are unproven and cannot guarantee a predictable return.

The entertainment software sector is a very good example of this. In fact, a national survey of Canadian video game companies, access to capital was viewed quite poorly.[1] The global video game market is intensely competitive, and with potentially large development budgets ($10-30 Million) and lengthy development timelines (up to three years), there is a real likelihood that a company will not recoup its significant investments in a game title post release.[2] The consequential high level of risk, coupled with the “newness” of the industry, means that venture capital and other forms of outside financing found in the technology sector are required, but these funds are scarce and difficult to obtain. As a result, game development studios continue to have to rely on financing from major publishers (in the form of recoupable advances) to fund game development, which is not always possible. Cumulatively, these realities have led to significant underinvestment in this growing sector by firms outside the industry.

To support the Canadian video game industry and sustain a vibrant digital economy, with Canadian companies developing innovative digital products, services, distribution methods and business models, it is imperative the federal government proactively improve access to capital for the digital media industries. There are two main requirements to achieve this goal:

  1. Direct government funding to the industry in the form of a new fund; and,
  2. Tax incentives in the form of favourable tax treatment of expenditures related to R&D, development, marketing and distribution of interactive digital media.
  3. Continued support through Global Affairs with regard to trade missions and export support at key trade shows and business events. Through the adoption of these measures, Canada’s development of new sources of capital for digital will incentivize foreign and domestic investment in the domestic digital media industries, provide investors a means to hedge against risk, increase the number of development studios and projects, create more jobs, and stabilize a currently volatile industry and create more predictability. 
Direct government funding to the industry a.      Expand CMF and introduce new interactive digital media fund that emphasizes commercially viable projects

To build and maintain a successful digital economy, the Federal Government should increase its emphasis on commercialization, and increase funding to the "experimental" stream of the CMF or create an entirely new fund that is specific to interactive digital media.

b.      Create a new interactive digital media fund

ESAC strongly encourages the creation of a new interactive digital media fund that is distinct from the CMF. Interactive digital media (and entertainment software specifically) is fundamentally different than television (or other audio-visual content),[3] and the game industry employs vastly different production methods and business models. Accordingly, to maximize the creation of new and world-leading interactive digital media, as well as the development of viable digital business models, access to the fund should not be tied to a broadcast component, but instead solely focused on the development of interactive media. The fund should be outward looking to reflect the global market for this type of media, and provide financial support for both development of content for the global market,[4] as well as associated marketing and distribution costs.

 

ii.            Ensure tax incentives encourage foreign and domestic investment in digital media sectors

Well-constructed tax incentives are absolutely critical in facilitating foreign and domestic investment in the digital media sectors. This includes improving the existing federal Scientific Research and Experimental Development (SR&ED) tax credit.

The current innovation tax credit (“SR&ED”) promotes and supports the successful commercialization of our industry’s R&D. The credit is highly valuable and it plays an important role in financing the proprietary technologies, such as game engines underlying video and computer games. However, the existing SR&ED credit suffers from several critical deficiencies that undermine its effectiveness.

Specifically;

  • The higher rate refundable credit is restricted to very small R&D performers, stifling the full potential benefit of the credit;
  • The recent reduction in the rate of the non-refundable SR&ED credit from 20 percent to 15 percent coupled with the exclusion of capital costs from the rate base render the non-refundable credit even less applicable, to our industry; and,
  • The re-allocation of resources to direct R&D programs further limits its applicability to our industry.

These limitations present significant obstacles for the Canadian video game industry, where a significant proportion of innovation in the industry occurs at large, foreign-owned development studios which collectively employ more than half of the Canadian industry.   ESAC recommends that the SR&ED tax credit program be changed to allow all firms to access the refundable tax credits, and that the current definition of SR&ED be broadened to better recognize the global nature of the digital economy and support the full commercialization process for advanced technologies and the sector moving forward.

Many Canadian game development studios also rely on provincial digital media tax credits and other sources of government funding to assist in financing game development. While these different credits and funding sources often apply to distinct types of activities, receiving any other form of "government assistance" results in a proportional reduction of the SR&ED tax credit. Having game companies effectively choose between SR&ED tax credits and other funding sources creates an incentive for large multinational companies to develop game technologies in other jurisdictions, and for smaller game development studios to outsource R&D activities or not pursue R&D at all. ESAC strongly recommends that this obstacle to the SR&ED tax credit be removed.

Finally, the SR&ED tax credit should be adjusted to reflect inflation and to keep competitive with other countries that are providing more generous credits for technology companies.[5] Canada should consider increasing the size of the SR&ED tax credit if it is committed to sustaining itself as a global competitor in the digital economy.

 

[1] Entertainment Software Association of Canada, Canada’s Entertainment Software Industry: The Opportunities and Challenges of a Growing Industry (2009). Furthermore, over 30% of game companies cited rising costs as a top risk to the Canadian industry, while 22% indicated lack of funding was a top risk. Canada’s Entertainment Software Industry in 2011, Entertainment Software Association of Canada, May 30,2011.

[2] According to Electronic Entertainment Design & Research, only 20% of video game titles released ever attain profitability, and for every commercial success there are a multitude of commercial failures. See Luke Plunkett, "Only 20% of Games Make a Profit - EEDAR" (24 November 2008), online: Kotaku . Furthermore, most game titles will earn the vast majority of their overall sales revenue within the first 60 days after release, with the bulk of sales occurring within the first few weeks of release. Thus, in order to continue developing and publishing a diverse range of video game titles, video game companies must use the revenues from successful titles, much of which is earned immediately after release, to offset the development costs of unsuccessful games.

[3] For instance, audio-visual content is typically passive and linear, with each end user essentially hearing and/or seeing the same sounds and/or visual images in the same sequence and having a very limited degree of control over their individual experience. By contrast, IDM (and entertainment software specifically) is inherently interactive and non-linear, with control over the experience resting with the end user, who continually changes the sequence, timing, and even the nature of the experience him or herself. Consequently, IDM does not comport with any conventional understanding of “audio-visual” content.

[4] According to PricewaterhouseCoopers, the Canadian entertainment software market represents less than 3% of the global market. Consequently, the Canadian market is simply not large enough to sustain the enormously high creative costs associated with video game production, and virtually all video games are produced for the global entertainment software market.

[5] For example, France is reducing 50% of R&D expenditures for start-up companies in their first year, 40% in the second, and 30% thereafter. See Terry Matthews, (Speech delivered to “Canada’s Digital Economy: Moving Forward”, June 2009), online: CATA .

Credit: The Entertainment Software Association of Canada

1

Views

0

Comments

1

Follows

1

Like

Support the creation and development of innovative companies

Question:What more can be done to increase business enterprise R&D (BERD) spending?
on 09/17/2016 1474144614
The innovation ecosystem is composed of two parallel sets of activates: a private sector set and a public sector set. Overall, the public sector perfo .... Read more

The innovation ecosystem is composed of two parallel sets of activates: a private sector set and a public sector set. Overall, the public sector performance ranges from average to excellent, whereas the private sector performance is pretty dismal all around. Canadian companies are particularly awful at R&D spending, workplace training and venture capital.

To examine Canada’s innovation performance, consult the Conference Board of Canada’s website. The International comparisons are particularly useful: http://www.conferenceboard.ca/hcp/details/innovation.aspx

The solution to the private sector’s poor performance is to replace the existing set of companies with new ones that are more innovative. This can be done, in part, by moving government support of private sector innovation from tax credits (SRED) to front-end funding. Tax credits benefit large, established companies (who are responsible for the private sector’s dismal innovation performance). It is primarily large companies that have the financial resources to pay for R&D up front and then apply to get it back in tax credits. Moreover, the uncertainty surrounding the approval of the tax credit, after the investment has already been made, reduces the impact of the program. In other words, because companies are unsure they will get the tax credit, they tend to limit their R&D to what they would have funded anyway, without regard to the tax credit.

To encourage the growth of new companies with more intensive R&D the government should follow an approach providing up-front shared-risk funding. Companies would have to have some skin in the game but would be free to sub-contract to anyone in Canada they choose or to conduct the work in-house. Ideally, the funding would come in the form of a low-interest repayable loan, with generous terms. Since the government’s goal is to encourage innovation rather than make money, the government should expect such an operation to generate a loss. (Keep in mind that the current alternative of tax-credits generates a 100% loss).

It should be noted as well that Canada’s R&D funding is more focussed on tax credits than other competing nations (https://www.oecd.org/science/inno/2498389.pdf). Consequently, reducing the tax credits in favour of up-front funding would align Canada more closely with competing nations with superior innovation track records.

Finally, the Federal government as well as the provinces already have programs in place to deliver up-front funding. It’s simply a matter of shifting resources from tax-credits to up-front funding.

 

1

Views

0

Comments

1

Follows

1

Like

To improve BERD, we need programs that support business-led research.

Question:What more can be done to increase business enterprise R&D (BERD) spending?
on 09/15/2016 1473954861
Tags: innovation  funding 
Current research and innovation funding tends to support the technology push model.  BERD investments are made with a market pull motivation; the mot .... Read more

Current research and innovation funding tends to support the technology push model.  BERD investments are made with a market pull motivation; the motivation is commercial success.  To improve BERD, we need programs that support business-led research. 

Currently, the primary Federal support programs are 1) The Scientific Research and Experimental Development Tax credit (SRED), and, 2) the Industrial Research Assistance Program (IRAP).  There are some provincial initiatives targeted at business, such as innovation voucher programs.  Most of the remaining innovation funding programs are rooted in fundamental research; the requirement for academic partnership, peer review of the scientific principles, academic credentials of the principal researchers, etc. are elements that are appropriate for fundamental research but are often not critical to business-led research.

Improving BERD will require:

  1. Continued improvement in the accessibility and funding for IRAP;
  2. More Federal programs that support business-led projects i.e not simply encourage commercialization of fundamental research but support projects that originate form business;
  3. Evaluate more projects on business potential. For example, it is encouraging that Genome Canada has introduced some programs targeted at business-led research. 
Credit: Eric Cook, P.Eng on behalf of the Board of Innoventures Canada

5

Views

1

Comments

2

Follows

2

Like

Partnerships with R&D centers

Question:What more can be done to increase business enterprise R&D (BERD) spending?
on 09/13/2016 1473796150
Tags:
Canada could consider partnership with Europe's largest research and development organization, German based "Fraunhofer",  having resources both dom .... Read more

Canada could consider partnership with Europe's largest research and development organization, German based "Fraunhofer",  having resources both domestically and internationally to enhance the portfolio of R & D services. The R&D centres can work in tandem with the innovation hubs and complement one another. 

One area that we can start with is increasing storage capacities for solar energy, esp in a country like Canada. These centers can be located in cities which are not yet brimming with large populations as this will interalia help spur growth and development of these cities. 

3

Views

2

Comments

2

Follows

1

Like

BERD is a red herring

Question:What more can be done to increase business enterprise R&D (BERD) spending?
on 09/13/2016 1473780840
Tags:
Canada-US-world BERD disparities are primarily the result of different reporting methodologies amongst different countries/regions.  Canadian firms m .... Read more

Canada-US-world BERD disparities are primarily the result of different reporting methodologies amongst different countries/regions.  Canadian firms mostly report SR&ED figures, which typically under-represent actual BERD by 60% or more.

Decades of government policy have failed to accelerate BERD primarily because BERD levels are actually in most instances at OECD levels.  Peter Nicholson's landmark Council of Canadian Academies report points out that BERD levels in Ontario and Quebec - 60% of the population - are actually at or above OECD levels.

The Panel should avoid the BERD Issue ... it is truly a red herring ... and focus on other aspects of innovation strategy.

 

5

Views

1

Comments

2

Follows

1

Like

Agricultural Institute of Canada

Question:What more can be done to increase business enterprise R&D (BERD) spending?
on 09/06/2016 1473190689
Tags:
Strategic partnerships and investments can help Canadian R&D achieve a competitive advantage at the international level. Innovation support programs s .... Read more

Strategic partnerships and investments can help Canadian R&D achieve a competitive advantage at the international level. Innovation support programs should then be designed to enable the environment needed to maximize knowledge transfer strategies in interdisciplinary and cross-sectoral research projects while growing Canada’s knowledge and talent advantages.

Additionally, collaborative research projects need to incorporate funding for knowledge management from the outset including capacity-building measures for staffing, training and retention of IP experts.

 

Credit: Agricultural Institute of Canada

2

Views

0

Comments

1

Follows

1

Like

Creating Policies that Help Canadian Companies Scale

Question:What more can be done to increase business enterprise R&D (BERD) spending?
on 08/22/2016 1471890673
Tags:
Make BERD profitable for companies by ensuring an ecosystem where an investment can have a positive return for the company, not negative. So the first .... Read more

Make BERD profitable for companies by ensuring an ecosystem where an investment can have a positive return for the company, not negative. So the first step is creation of policies that support innovative companies to scale globally so that they generate a return on this investment.  

Credit: Council of Canadian Innovators

5

Views

1

Comments

2

Follows

1

Like

The government could provide significant loans that are forgivable as long as the company stays headquartered in Canada and grows, but which are due in full with interest the moment the firm leaves the country.

Question:What more can be done to increase business enterprise R&D (BERD) spending?
on 08/16/2016 1471372318
Tags: innovation  R&D  loans 
“The government could provide significant loans that are forgivable as long as the company stays headquartered in Canada and grows, but which ar .... Read more

“The government could provide significant loans that are forgivable as long as the company stays headquartered in Canada and grows, but which are due in full with interest the moment the firm leaves the country. Provide enough funding to make them succeed as global leaders, while creating a sufficient barrier to exit so that the investment that Canada makes in their success pays off in Canada. The government could require a certain percentage of the loan be spent on R&D activities in Canada in order to help foster a made in Canada innovation. If the absolute value of the loan is high then the percentage allocated to R&D can be low but still be impactful.”

Dr Robert Luke, VP Research and Innovation at George Brown College, Innovative proposals for an innovation minister, Re$earch Money, June 23, 2016

Credit: Dr Robert Luke, VP Research and Innovation at George Brown College

3

Views

0

Comments

1

Follows

1

Like

Canada should be providing strategic financial assistance to firms who have the potential to grow into global leaders.

Question:What more can be done to increase business enterprise R&D (BERD) spending?
on 08/16/2016 1471372050
Tags: R&D 
“To stem this exodus of talent and firms, Canada should be providing strategic financial assistance to firms who have the potential to grow into .... Read more

“To stem this exodus of talent and firms, Canada should be providing strategic financial assistance to firms who have the potential to grow into global leaders. Continuing to incentivize firms to co-invest in R&D with university and college partners helps to de-risk the research and innovation enterprise while ensuring students from across the credential spectrum gain key innovation literacy the skills and competencies required for the 21st century economy.”

Dr Robert Luke, VP Research and Innovation at George Brown College, Innovative proposals for an innovation minister, Re$earch Money, June 23, 2016

 

Credit: Dr Robert Luke, VP Research and Innovation at George Brown Colleg

1

Views

0

Comments

1

Follows

1

Like

Companies are lead by businessmen - not innovators

Question:What more can be done to increase business enterprise R&D (BERD) spending?
on 08/16/2016 1471371882
Tags:
Businessmen are naturally not innovative. I think money that is spent to encourage established small companies to innovate is wasted. What must be enc .... Read more

Businessmen are naturally not innovative. I think money that is spent to encourage established small companies to innovate is wasted. What must be encouraged is to spin of companies from universities. Innovation comes from creative people and these people are usually young and reckless and can be found on campuses. Unfortunately, the young and reckless do not have the means, meaning the funds and business knowledge, to build a company. Better help the young and reckless than the old and established. It will also be cheaper in the end.

4

Views

0

Comments

1

Follows

1

Like

More Canadian Based Head Offices!

Question:What more can be done to increase business enterprise R&D (BERD) spending?
on 07/22/2016 1469228189
Tags:
A corollary to this would be discouraging Canadian company owners from selling to foreign companies. We can take foreign investments but keep board .... Read more

A corollary to this would be discouraging Canadian company owners from selling to foreign companies. We can take foreign investments but keep board of directors and head offices in Canada. We should be the ones acquiring abroad.

https://www.chapters.indigo.ca/en-ca/books/viking-economics-how-the-scandinavians/9781612195360-item.html

https://www.chapters.indigo.ca/en-ca/books/the-truth-about-canada-some/9780771041662-item.html

This is one of the reasons why we need more companies with their global headquarters in Canada, and incentivize more Canadian technology companies not to sell out to foreign buyers who intend to replace the head office location, as strategic decisions like investing in R&D are made at the head office. We therefore need to have a bigger and better Canadian investor community and allow individual Canadians the ability to invest in companies more easily, through crowd-funding or other. We should target Canadian based companies directly per sector, and encourage those in particular to invest in BERD. Those that have clients that expect the best solutions. The issue is the same established companies have entrenched senior employees that prefer not to rock the boat or change anything or do too much more or do anything out of their comfort zone, that effectively helps to put the brakes on significant changes like significantly increasing BERD. If Canadian companies created export sales oriented subsidiaries, those would help to put pressure on upper management of the parent company to make changes and improvements, as they would quickly find out that their offerings aren’t good enough as-is, to compete in many markets.

Businesses invest in product R&D when they are going after a bigger market opportunity. Businesses invest in process R&D when they are trying to stay competitive. Process R&D would include information systems, robotics and automation; we are good in Canada at automating information processes with IT systems, but why haven’t we invested in robotics automation? Possibly for no good reason other than attending to other priorities or the head office location that makes the decisions is out of country. This is an overlooked opportunity that can be addressed immediately for Canadian based operations at least. Most Canadian process industries, manufacturing or warehouse logistics, are probably behind the curve when it comes to robotics and automation. The easiest way to stimulate would maybe be to offer a robotics and automation grant program, when purchasing from Canadian based robotics or automation integrators or service or technology providers. Take Purolator for instance, I don’t know what technology they have in their warehouses or back office but we know it’s not as good as Amazon’s.

Now for product R&D. If the head offices are Canadian based, and they haven’t been investing in R&D, the company has probably had modest expectations for competing in the global market. It is easier to compete in new, growing but underdeveloped market segments. But then again, software IP is not as pursued as historically hardware IP has been, mainly because of the complexity of the space and the litigations in the US over the last many years, giving the impression of futility in registering software IP. We really need a national IP strategy and to improve our IP regulations and environment as a healthy substitute to the US system. And we really need to incentivise retaining more head office locations in Canada.

2

Views

0

Comments

1

Follows

1

Like

Implement alternate vehicles and incentives for increased focus on BERD

Question:What more can be done to increase business enterprise R&D (BERD) spending?
on 07/22/2016 1469200867
Tags:
The objective of increased focus on BERD investments is to recognize and implement alternate vehicles and incentives to enable better collaboration be .... Read more

The objective of increased focus on BERD investments is to recognize and implement alternate vehicles and incentives to enable better collaboration between academia and business and drive a better balance between direct and indirect investment. In doing so, the federal government can look at the opportunity to increase the business-led percentage of the total investment provided to R&D as well potentially deliver a targeted incentives/fund for academic/business partnerships or even a bonus for business efforts engaging an academic R&D partner.

IRAP is the key program representing only a tiny fraction of the technology push funding. With encouragement and some incentives, business will invest in innovation. For example, IRAP funding is consistently fully subscribed by the end of the first quarter of the year. 

Since most of Canadian corporations have fewer 15 staff on payroll, one must investigate whether the incentive of tax credits and grants is sufficient. Given their limited staff, it is unlikely that they have staff with time or experience to investigate thoroughly their next markets or competition and then proceed to build a new offering that will leapfrog others in the marketplace.

Compounding the issue is that this type of research is not recognized in the SR&ED program as eligible research expense. However, without the upfront investigative work, companies cannot viably move into the product development phase. As such, even if the company is eager to leverage the SR&ED program, the lack of internal resources and inability to be granted credit to hire external resources severely limits the program uptake

3

Views

1

Comments

2

Follows

1

Like

The (slightly comprehensive) Wendman Plan

Question:What more can be done to increase business enterprise R&D (BERD) spending?
on 07/15/2016 1468615119
Tags:
The Wendman Plan, (SEEDS) for Persistent Canadian S&T Innovation Growth - SHORT FORM SBIR implementation, (copy near exact US program per capita of C .... Read more

The Wendman Plan, (SEEDS) for Persistent Canadian S&T Innovation Growth - SHORT FORM

SBIR implementation, (copy near exact US program per capita of California)

SBIR Is US Federal Small Business Innovation Research program.  Please read the wiki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_Business_Innovation_Research

and go to their website https://www.sbir.gov/

and NSF (US) National Science Foundation's version of SBIRs(some success stories and links back to SBIR ) http://www.nsf.gov/eng/iip/sbir/

With SBIR's pre revenue Startups unmatched funding(not requiring partner funding), SMEs with matched funding, $50m annual direct company grants, 3 phases of project topic efforts (increasing funding levels per phase, as succeeding, being booted out if failed own technical phase milestones), $10m (NRC IRAP) annual program overhead and staffing, run by NRC IRAP with dedicated staff, and teaming commercial and academic ( sub contractor ) so that students are trained in the endeavors, and for possible future employment, but academic teaming not required merely encouraged.

Capital Gains (CG) Tax waiver (means investments into SBIR graduates is TAX FREE investment revenue) for Canadian investment Capital into SBIR particpants, pre IPO (initial public offering of stock) or pre M&A? (mergers and aquistions) -

The CG waiver is void of tax loss write offs ( in exchange for the opportunity )

NRC labs opened at 10-20% capacity? for free use to SBIR participants, At least pre revenue startups possibly not only SBIR, prioritized for startups in preparation of POC (proof of concept) prototypes, to assist in grant and investment funding solictations, even for preparation of prototypes for SBIR proposals and in SBIR team advances ( separately ).

Possible quid pro quo for NRC divisions / staff to gain some modest annual pooled equity, motivating partly in lieu of billings (mitigating the apparent NRC accounting losses)

Twice annual Canadian Innovation (mentoring) Clinics regionally. Held 2x/yr on most regional major university campuses, open to all credible technical submissions (not academic only), reviewers mentors staffed by teams from NRC & IRAP and industry professionals, some skilled academics, possibly done via Skype (video conferencing) etc to minimze overhead, but maximize skilled mentoring reviews of new product ideas contemplated.

Proposals open to all academicand local professionals of any kind - reviews held in confidence, reviewers to be technically skilled in commercial R&D and product development - teams of actual experts, external on occasion.

Direct Federal and provincial Support of University and seed stage startup Patenting,Thrifty patenting by on campus student interns and academic staff, drafting, strategizing with technical founders & innovators. Helped in low cost to get more patents filed.

Striking Down ( if not done already ) the WRONG Canadian NSERC Precompetitive (commercial) R&D restriction on academic research, to encourage on campus startups,& to minimize inflated campus research overhead if pursuing a startup & product development (ie foster non nepotistic good conflicts of interest, minimize overhead charges in lieu of modest equity grants to professors & university / TT to get stuff happening)

Realize and act upon implementing support is needed to gain a vibrant large startup ecosystem in S&T (science and technology) endeavors that might lead to large scale domestic manufacture, are of strategic economic interest of Canada, & S&T startups need help with persistent ongoing funding programs, without stupid matching funds requirements - to regularly birth new companies born of actual innovations.

In lieu of large markets orientation to funding grants, is "profitable niche product markets" in scientific instrumentation of novel patented designs of high performance or large cost reduction.

Expect only 20-30% to succeed from SBIRs but realize the frothy farm teams vetted sensibly and responsibly we can find many successes that can grow big.

8

Views

3

Comments

4

Follows

2

Like

Streamline the application process

Question:What more can be done to increase business enterprise R&D (BERD) spending?
on 07/05/2016 1467741668
Tags:
Streamline the application process for accessing government funds for R&D and economic development.  One project proposal should suffice for all gove .... Read more

Streamline the application process for accessing government funds for R&D and economic development.  One project proposal should suffice for all government programs, as long as the proposal is detailed and complete.

4

Views

0

Comments

1

Follows

1

Like

R & D = Innovation = succès et croissance

Question:What more can be done to increase business enterprise R&D (BERD) spending?
on 07/04/2016 1467659836
Tags: innovation 
Il faut : 1. informer les entreprises sur l'innovation et les sensibiliser à l'importance de l'innovation pour demeurer concurrentielles et croitre .... Read more

Il faut :

1. informer les entreprises sur l'innovation et les sensibiliser à l'importance de l'innovation pour demeurer concurrentielles et croitre 

2. offrir des programmes de formation en Innovation et en Productivité répondant aux besoins des PME 

3. il faut accompagner les entreprises dans leurs initiatives et projets innovants. Ceci à tous les niveaux et aspects de l'innovation, soit:

- développement de produits

- développement de procédés

- développement organisationnel (incluant productivité, processus innovant, technologies numériques...)

- commercialisation de l'innovation.

- interface avec les institutions du savoir et maillage avec des entreprises complémentaires.

4. soutenir les projets innovants avec des programmes de soutien financier simples et adaptés aux PME.

Comment: grâce à des organismes d'intermédiation spécialisés offrant des services regroupant les thèmes listés précédemment.

2

Views

0

Comments

1

Follows

1

Like

Unlock Canada’s Greatest Resource, Land.

Question:What more can be done to increase business enterprise R&D (BERD) spending?
on 06/23/2016 1466716026
Tags:
The Canadian population is becoming more urbanized. As urban density increases, urban properties get smaller and property values increase uncontrollab .... Read more

The Canadian population is becoming more urbanized. As urban density increases, urban properties get smaller and property values increase uncontrollably.

We have lost the back yard, the basement, and the garage. These are places of experimentation where innovation is practiced, prototypes are built, and small businesses start. There is simply a shortage of space to create and engage in projects on a small scale. Renting space is prohibitively expensive, especially considering the limited means and disposable income most Canadians have after paying their high mortgages. Raising capital to pursue an idea is not a possibility for most people, nor should it be a barrier to pursue one’s concept or idea. Urbanization is a reality and we must adapt.

Outside of cities there are very large swathes of land that sit unused for generations. The use and division of this land is locked by land use regulation and subdivision legislation. These regulations limit how much the land can be subdivided, effectively creating a minimum entry point to buy land.  That entry point is out of reach for most Canadians. The price per acre is affordable, but due to subdivision rules there is a minimum number of acres one has to purchase, so it becomes prohibitively expensive.  In rare cases, if land is already subdivided into smaller parcels, then the price goes up to match the difficulty in subdividing, and it becomes too expensive as well. For example, let’s say I need 10 acres of land to start an organic farm, the average price per acre where I live is $3,000 which is affordable, but I would have to buy 160 acres to get the $3,000 price putting my minimum required investment at $480,000. If I bought the $160 acres, it would be virtually impossible for me to subdivide it and sell what I am not using and recover my costs. Because subdividing is so difficult and rare that same 10 acres subdivided already would cost around $230,000. This resource is frozen and unused because the barriers to entry are so high. One of the reasons the regulations are in place is to maintain the historical natural look and way of life of the Canadian country side. They are there in place to maintain the status quo. But we must adapt, evolve, and innovate to match our new realities and our population’s needs. How did maintaining the status quo ever become the default correct path. This is contrary to innovation, freedom and opportunity.

Canadians like myself long for the opportunity to own an affordable small parcel of land that would suit their needs and projects. The land parcels could be as small as an acre or two. Possible land uses include a small organic farm, a small orchard, a greenhouse operation, an eco-tourism site, A solar energy installation, a church retreat, an off grid cabin manufacturing site, a cooperative garden, a bio-diesel demonstration plant, a hay collection and export point of sale location, a place to walk your dog, a robotics testing site, an obstacle course track, an artist’s retreat, a specialized animal farm, just use your imagination.

If the land can only be bought and sold in large parcels, we lose the opportunity of utilizing that land as a resource. Through progressive legislation and by allowing subdivisions we can unlock the land as a frozen resource and create liquidity in that market. This would stimulate the economy, create jobs, enhance skills, create wealth, and stimulate innovation through opportunity. Canada cannot continue to primarily rely on large business for meaningful job creation. We need to encourage localized micro economies in our path towards innovation and financial security.  We can achieve these goals responsibly and at the same time respect land use regulation and zoning, we already do this effectively in the city.

I encourage you to consider the matter presented above.

Thank You.

10

Views

0

Comments

1

Follows

2

Like