Singapore: IPOS lowers filing fees for IP protection

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

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

Singapore: IPOS lowers filing fees for IP protection

The Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) announced last month that the fees for patent search and examination reports and for trade mark applications will be reduced effective April 1 2017.

Requests for patent search and examination reports where the International Search Report or International Preliminary Examination Report has been established by IPOS under the Patents Cooperation Treaty (PCT) will see the largest decrease of 37%. IPOS has been acting as International Searching Authority (ISA) and International Preliminary Examining Authority (IPEA) under the PCT since September 1 2015.

Patent applications where IPOS has not acted as ISA or IPEA will also see a fee decrease of 25% for requests for patent search and examination reports.

IPOS states that the announced fee decrease is part of the Office's efforts to support Singapore's innovators and make IP protection more affordable, in keeping with its vision to help drive innovation in Singapore.

While announcing the reduction in patent filing fees, IPOS also announced the introduction of an excess claim fee of S$40 ($28) per claim in excess of 20 claims from April 2017. The excess claim fee will apply when filing a request for examination and during payment of the grant fee.

According to IPOS, the implementation of the excess claim fee will help reduce the current burden on patent examiners. IPOS also observed that the average patent application has around 18 claims and thus they do not expect the excess claim fee to apply to most applicants.

Voluntary amendments can be made in Singapore any time before a request for examination has been made. In addition, it is important to note that Singapore accepts multiple dependent claims and, unlike other jurisdictions, it is permissible in Singapore for multiple dependent claims to refer to other multiple dependent claims. Accordingly, one should take advantage of such claim dependencies to cover important combinations of features or secondary inventive embodiments.

Despite the excess claim fee being paid at the time of requesting examination, IPOS would still require payment on excess claims when the patent application becomes granted. However, the excess claim fee payment at grant only applies to claims over and above those paid for during examination stage.

In addition to revision of patent fees, IPOS will reduce fees for applying for trade marks using a pre-approved list of goods and services by 30%.

IPOS Chief Executive Daren Tang said: "Singapore's innovation scene is becoming more vibrant, with more companies and start-ups seeking to create business value through IP. The fee revisions make it easier and cheaper for them to protect their brands and technology. We hope that more of our creative enterprises and inventors will be encouraged by these changes to have a strong foundation for taking their ideas to the world."

With the fees adjustment on April 1 2017, Singapore remains one of the most attractive countries for IP filing, with competitive rates compared to other major jurisdictions.

Maximilian Stelzer

Edwin Dai


Spruson & Ferguson (Asia) Pte Ltd152 Beach Road#37-05/06 Gateway EastSingapore 189721Tel: +65 6333 7200Fax: +65 6333 7222mail.asia@spruson.comwww.spruson.com

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Leaders at US law firms explain what attorneys can learn from AI cases involving Meta and Anthropic, and why the outcomes could guide litigation strategies
Attorneys reveal the trademark and copyright trends they’ve noticed within the first half of 2025
Senior leaders at TE Connectivity and Clarivate explain how they see the future of innovation
A new action filed by Nokia against Asus and a landmark ruling on counterfeits by South Africa’s Supreme Court were also among the top talking points
Counsel explain how they’re navigating patent prosecution matters and highlight key takeaways from Federal Circuit cases
A partner who joined Fenwick alongside two others explains what drew her to the firm and her hopes for growth in Boston
The England and Wales High Court has granted Kirkland & Ellis client Samsung interim declaratory relief in its ongoing FRAND dispute with ZTE
A UDRP decision that found in favour of a small business in a domain name dispute could encourage more businesses to take a stand in ‘David v Goliath’ cases
In Iconix v Dream Pairs, the Supreme Court said the Court of Appeal was wrong to interfere with an earlier ruling, prompting questions about the appeal court’s remit
Chris Moore at HGF reflects on the ‘spirit of collegiality’ that led to an important ruling in G1/24, a case concerning how European patent claims should be interpreted
Gift this article