Singapore: New fee structure aims to foster innovation
Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

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

Singapore: New fee structure aims to foster innovation

The Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) announced a fee revision for patents and trade marks with effect from April 1 2017. Regarding patents, the application fees for searches or supplementary search reports, local search and examination reports, and international search and examination reports, are reduced by 14%, 25% and 37%, respectively. There is also a 30% fee reduction in the application to register trade marks that utilise the IPOS pre-approved list of goods and services. Thus, businesses and entrepreneurs will see a substantial fee reduction for patent and trade mark applications.

In addition, a new excess claim fee structure is introduced that is payable when requesting combined search and examination (S&E), examination (E) and grant. Previously, excess claim fees were only payable at time of grant. With the revised fees, $40 is charged per claim in excess of 20 claims when requesting S&E or E and is payable together with a grant fee for claims in excess of the number of claims previously paid (i.e. only the excess unpaid claims will be charged on grant). The changes to the claim fee structure will streamline the patent application process at IPOS and encourage applicants to file claims sets that are concise with the aim of saving costs and time required for the patent application process.

The fee revision also includes an increase in patent renewal fees from the eighth year onwards and an increase in trade mark renewal fees. While this renewal fee revision increases the overall lifecycle costs for patents and trade marks in Singapore, Singapore continues to remain competitive with lower overall lifecycle costs as compared to other countries such as Korea, Japan, China, the USA and Australia.

According to IPOS, the increase in renewal fees will discourage IP hoarding by encouraging IP owners to utilise their valuable IP while releasing non-performing IP to the public domain. To further facilitate this initiative, the fees for surrendering or cancelling IP are removed. Additionally, applicants who license their patents will enjoy a 50% discount off their renewal fees. Thus businesses are encouraged to manage their IP portfolio strategically.

Collopy_Dan

Shahera Anwar

Daniel Collopy


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 ros bottom lb

More from across our site

High-earning businesses place most value on the depth of the external legal teams advising them, according to a survey of nearly 29,000 in-house counsel
Kilpatrick Townsend was recognised as Americas firm of the year, while patent powerhouse James Haley won a lifetime achievement award
Partners at Foley Hoag and Kilburn & Strode explore how US and UK courts have addressed questions of AI and inventorship
In-house lawyers have considerable influence over law firms’ actions, so they must use that power to push their external advisers to adopt sustainable practices
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Counsel say they’re advising clients to keep a close eye on confidentiality agreements after the FTC voted to ban non-competes
Data from Managing IP+’s Talent Tracker shows US firms making major swoops for IP teams, while South Korea has also been a buoyant market
The finalists for the 13th annual awards have been announced
Counsel reveal how a proposal to create separate briefings for discretionary denials at the USPTO could affect their PTAB strategies
The UK Supreme Court rejected the firm’s appeal against an earlier ruling because it did not raise an arguable point of law
Gift this article