Expansion of the patent box scheme in Australia

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

Expansion of the patent box scheme in Australia

Sponsored by

fbrice-400px.png
barley-field-1684052-1280.jpg

Lee Miles of FB Rice discusses Australia’s patent box scheme which is set to introduce the agricultural and low emissions technology sectors

Originally designed to encourage home-grown innovation in the biotech and medical technology sectors, the Australian government announced in its 2022–23 Federal Budget the intention to expand the patent box scheme to include the agricultural and low emissions technology sectors.

Once operational (noting that the scheme is yet to pass through Parliament a year after it was initially unveiled), the patent box will enable companies operating in the agricultural and low emissions technology sectors to access a concessional tax rate of 17% (down from 30% for large businesses and 25% for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) for profits generated from eligible patents and plant breeders rights (PBRs) within Australia.

For the agricultural space, eligible patents will be those covering “practical, technology-focused innovations”, examples of which may include agricultural and veterinary products listed on the Public Chemicals Registration Information System (PubCRIS) register administered by the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA). Pleasingly, the government has also expanded the patent box to include PBR for new plant varieties.

For the low emissions technology sector, patents covering technologies which reduce emissions will be eligible. This arguably covers multiple industry sectors.

In another development, the budget announced that patents issued by the USPTO and EPO will also qualify for the scheme going forward, whereas previously only Australian patents were eligible. 

In this regard, the budget paper noted that this expansion “will remove regulatory barriers to accessing the patent box regime for Australian developed innovations patented in the major overseas jurisdictions with equivalent patent regimes”. Given the importance of the US and European markets to most patenting strategies, this is another welcome development.

For biotech and medical technologies, the patent box scheme is set to commence on July 1 2022 and will apply to eligible patents granted after May 11 2021. For the agricultural and low emission technology sectors, the scheme is set to commence on July 1 2023 and will cover patents or PBRs granted after March 29 2022.

 

Lee Miles

Senior associate, FB Rice

E: lmiles@fbrice.com.au

 

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

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
Firm says appointment of Nick McDonald will boost its expertise in cross-border disputes, including at the Unified Patent Court
In the final episode of a podcast series celebrating the tenth anniversary of IP Inclusive, we discuss the IP Inclusive Charter and the senior leaders’ pledge
Law firms are integrating AI to remain competitive, and some are noticing an impact on traditional training and billing models
IP partners are among those advising on Netflix's planned $82.7bn acquisition of Warner, which has been rivalled by a $108.4bn bid by Paramount
Sheppard Mullin’s Jennifer Ayers reviews modifications to the rules of practice for IPR petitions and considers what practitioners need to know
News of the EUIPO launching a GI protection system, and WIPO publishing a review of the UDRP were also among the top talking points
A team from Addleshaw Goddard secured victory for the changing robe brand, following a trial against competitor D-Robe
Bird & Bird, Brinkhof and Bardehle Pagenberg were successful at the Court of Appeal, while there was a partial victory for Amazon in a case concerning audio recordings
Gift this article