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

The tie-up could result in the firm’s German and France-based teams, which both have strong UPC expertise, becoming independent
News of a slowdown in the UK’s clean energy IP landscape and an EPO report on unitary patent uptake were also among the top talking points
Price hikes at ‘big law’ firms are pushing some clients toward boutiques that offer predictable fees, specialised expertise, and a model built around prioritising IP
The Australian side, in particular, can benefit by capitalising on its independent status to bring in more work from Western countries while still working with its former Chinese partner
Koen Bijvank of Brinkhof and Johannes Heselberger of Bardehle Pagenberg discuss the Amgen v Sanofi case and why it will be cited frequently
View the official winners of the 2025 Social Impact EMEA Awards
King & Wood Mallesons will break into two entities, 14 years after a merger between a Chinese and an Australian firm created the combined outfit
Teams from Shakespeare Martineau and DWF will take centre stage in a dispute concerning the registrability of dairy terminology in plant-based products
Senem Kayahan, attorney and founder at PatentSe, discusses how she divides prosecution tasks, and reveals the importance of empathetic client advice
The association’s Australian group has filed a formal complaint against the choice of venue, citing Dubai as an unsafe environment for the LGBTQIA+ community
Gift this article