Register interest with Swanson Reed (opens in a new tab)
  1. Home
  2. Research
  3. Methodology

Accountability

Methodology

How our research is done, which sources we rely on, how each claim is checked before publication, and how we correct mistakes.

On this page
  1. 1What we study
  2. 2Which sources count
  3. 3How each claim is checked
  4. 4How positions are kept separate from facts
  5. 5How dates work
  6. 6How we correct mistakes

The Research Credit Integrity Alliance is published by Swanson Reed, which has a commercial interest in how R&D tax advisers are paid. That is a reason for readers to test our work, and for us to make that easy. This page sets out the rules every page on the site follows, so that anyone, including those who disagree with our position, can check how a statement was reached.

1What we study

Our research looks at the practice of contingent fees and other fee structures in R&D tax credit work: how they are calculated, what the law and professional rules say about them, and how claims are prepared, filed and reviewed. We analyze the practice, not individual firms. We do not name, describe or allude to any adviser firm other than Swanson Reed, and we do not use examples that could identify one. Where a court or regulator record is relevant, we cite it by its official citation and only for what it says about the law.

2Which sources count

Factual statements are supported by primary sources. In order of preference, these are:

  • Legislation: statutes, such as the Internal Revenue Code, and the equivalent legislation in the other countries we cover.
  • Regulations: for example Treasury regulations and Circular 230, as published in the Code of Federal Regulations.
  • Official guidance and forms from tax authorities: the IRS in the United States, HMRC in the United Kingdom, Revenue in Ireland, the CRA in Canada, and IRAS in Singapore.
  • Court and tribunal records, from official reporters or court websites.
  • Official reports from audit and oversight bodies and legislative staff.
  • Professional body rules, using the rules as each body publishes them.

News reports, commentary and adviser websites may help us find a primary source, but they are never cited as the source itself. We never cite another adviser firm's website. When we refer to government material, we link to it and summarize it rather than copying it at length.

3How each claim is checked

  1. Cited on the page. Every factual statement carries a numbered citation to the source that supports it. The citation gives the source's title, the pinpoint (such as the section or paragraph) and a link, with the date we accessed it.
  2. Recorded in the facts register. Each claim is logged in our facts register with its source, the date it was checked and its status.
  3. Marked until confirmed. Any statement that has not yet been confirmed against its source carries an internal marker. A page with any such marker cannot be published.
  4. Fact check. Before publication, each claim is checked against the primary source to confirm that the source says what the page says. If it does not, the wording is changed to match the source, or the statement is removed. We do not stretch a statement to fit a source, and we do not publish numbers, dates or amounts that we have not read in a source.
  5. Legal review. After the fact check, each page is reviewed against the site's legal requirements, including the separation of fact and position and the rule against naming firms.

A page is published only when it has no unconfirmed markers and has passed both the fact check and the legal review. These rules are built into the site's publishing system, not left to judgment page by page.

4How positions are kept separate from facts

Facts are cited. Swanson Reed's position, that Congress should prohibit contingent fees in federal R&D tax credit engagements under Section 41, appears only in boxes labeled "Our position", and only on pages about US federal policy.

Pages about other countries, comparisons between countries and pages about US state programs are factual only. They contain no positions, recommendations or assessments. We take no position on state programs and make no recommendations for countries other than the United States.

Our argument concerns the incentive created by a fee that rises with the size of the claim. It is not a claim about the conduct of advisers who charge such fees.

5How dates work

  • Rules as at. Country pages state the date at which the rules they describe are given. Rules change, so a page describes the law as at that date and not necessarily today.
  • Last reviewed. Country pages, comparison tables and entries in the legislative tracker show the date their content was last checked against its official sources.
  • Accessed dates. Each citation records the date we opened the source.

If you rely on any page, check the official sources it lists for later changes.

6How we correct mistakes

If you think something on the site is wrong, or unfair to you, please tell us at hello@researchcreditintegrity.org or through the contact form. We review every request against the sources. Where a correction is needed, we change the page and record the correction on our corrections page, which also explains how to ask for a right of reply.