R&D credits valuable
Trib readers might be interested to know that in addition to the Keystone Innovation Zone tax credit program described in Melissa Daniels' news story “202 tech startups reap Pennsylvania tax credits” , there's another Pennsylvania tax credit program that encourages technology-intensive companies to stay here and helps them to thrive.
Research and Development Tax Credits help offset the costs of the R&D process, which can be quite lengthy and expensive, especially for life sciences companies. Fortunately for early-stage companies like those supported by the Pittsburgh Life Sciences Greenhouse (PLSG), up to 20 percent of the available credits are set aside for small businesses. PLSG has 11 companies in the portfolio that have taken advantage of these tax credits. I know these companies have worked very hard for every dollar of funding and the tax credits were immediately beneficial and put to good use. Furthermore, nondilutive capital like these tax credits encourages follow-on investment from “angel” investors, private equity and venture capital.
As the Keystone Innovation Zone and R&D Tax Credit programs demonstrate, relatively modest public investment leads to greater investment from entrepreneurs and the private sector, helping to drive the entire economy forward. To our policymakers and the electorate, let's ensure that funding for such worthy programs continues.
John W. Manzetti
The writer is president and CEO of the Pittsburgh Life Sciences Greenhouse (plsg.com) and founder and managing director of the PLSG Accelerator Fund LLC.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Russia, not Rice
- Positive & healthy ...
- Ferguson & contradictions
- More answers, please
- ... Or free-riding fad?
- Thanks for the coverage
- Goodell’s ‘pick-six’
- Sticker shock
- Blame judges
- Hiring in Westmoreland II
- Hiring in Westmoreland I