The Internationalization of Corporate R&D

More documents

Recommendations

Info

THE INTERNATIONALIZATION OF CORPORATE R&DNanotechnology Blue Ribbon Task ForceCalifornia has a leading position in many growing markets, particularly in the semiconductorand biotechnology industries. Nanotechnology is considered to play a criticalrole as an “innovator” in these markets. Nanotechnology is also considered to have amajor market potential, by some analysts expected to exceed the market value of informationtechnology in the future.To ensure California’s leadership within the field of nanotechnology, a Blue RibbonTask Force was appointed by State Controller Steve Westly and Congressman MikeHonda in 2004. The 48-member panel is comprised of nanotechnology experts fromindustry, academia, government and venture capital firms from across the state. Theobjectives were to evaluate the status and what actions were needed from state andfederal policymakers to make the nanotechnology industry a state success.The Task Force suggested launching a “California Innovation Initiative” as a step towardtaking advantage of the convergence of the strong base of nanotechnology, informationtechnology and biotechnology assets in the state. These emerging technologiesare extremely disruptive and California is aiming at becoming a leader through astrategic and coordinated effort (BRTSN 2005).Stem Cells Initiative – Proposition 71In the 2004 November election in California, voters approved a three-billion dollarbond to fund embryonic stem cell research over 10 years. The California Stem CellResearch and Cures Initiative (Proposition 71) will give California the “potential toemerge as a global leader in the development of stem cell therapies, create high-wagejobs and foster the establishment of new biotechnology companies” (MI 2005).Already, top-level researchers and stem cell companies from other states andcountries are establishing themselves in California to take advantage of these fundingopportunities. This is an example of inward affiliated offshoring that could contributeto improving the R&D environment in California.On the other hand, some experts interviewed for this study question whether the stategovernment really should allow voters to select technological winners, claiming thatCalifornia is more likely to find big winners in IT and biotechnology generally,rather than in one single area.R&D Tax CreditMany countries offer a number of tax incentives for attracting foreign companies andtheir R&D activities. Part of the effort to reduce offshoring of R&D, is to make theR&D environment in the U.S. more favorable, and several major multinational compa-196
THE INTERNATIONALIZATION OF CORPORATE R&Dnies (some from Silicon Valley) have lobbied federal legislators to update and extendthe existing R&D tax credit.The present federal tax credit expired in December 2005. Congress is expected to announcean extension soon which will include a major increase in tax credits calculatedby a new formula more favorable to growing companies. The new formula is calculatedon R&D spending over the last three years and the tax credit can reach up to 20 percent(Puzzanghera 2005). President Bush also recently proposed to work with the Congressto make a new R&D tax credit permanent (ACI 2006).The state of California offers all companies that conduct R&D in the state a tax credit.The tax credit is 24 percent for basic research and 12 percent for other types of researchon the state corporate income tax (FTB 2006).8.5.3 Policy RecommendationsAccording to a report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), proposedpolicy responses on the federal level in the U.S. can be divided into four categories: 1)improving U.S. global competitiveness; 2) addressing effects on the U.S. workforce; 3)addressing security concerns; and 4) reducing the extent of offshoring (GAO 2005).Examples of proposals to improve U.S. competitiveness include increasing governmentsupport for R&D and improving education and training of U.S. workers (GAO 2005).There have also been some proposals to limit the effects of offshoring on U.S. workers.On a federal level, some of the measures have the aim to limit the effects of displacedworkers from production being offshored.For example, the Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) program, established in 1974,provides financial assistance to individuals who lose their manufacturing jobs due toforeign imports or shifts in production to foreign countries. Services available for qualifiedworkers include weekly income assistance, training, and job search and relocationservices. Analysts have suggested that the U.S. Congress expand the coverage of theTAA to include service workers (Brainard & Litan 2004).Another proposal for addressing effects on the U.S. workforce, that has received attention,is to introduce wage insurance. This wage insurance, combined with subsidies forhealth insurance, would be available to workers who lose their jobs through “no fault oftheir own.” The insurance would take effect only after the laid-off person finds a newjob: if the new position pays less than the previous job, the worker would receive halfthe salary difference for up to two years (Kletzer & Litan 2001).This program can be seen as a reaction to the fact that not only manufacturing jobs arebeing offshored but also other business segments, including services and R&D.197
Page 1:
A2006:007The Internationalizationof
Page 4:
ITPS, Swedish Institute For Growth
Page 7 and 8:
THE INTERNATIONALIZATION OF CORPORA
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148: THE INTERNATIONALIZATION OF CORPORA
Page 197: THE INTERNATIONALIZATION OF CORPORA
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
Page 275 and 276:
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Page 289 and 290:
Page 291 and 292:
Page 293 and 294:
Page 295 and 296:
Page 297 and 298:
Page 299 and 300:
Page 301 and 302:
Page 303 and 304:
Page 305 and 306:
Page 307 and 308:
Page 309 and 310:
Page 311 and 312:
Page 313 and 314:
Page 315 and 316:
Page 317 and 318:
Page 319 and 320:
Page 321 and 322:
Page 323 and 324:
Page 325 and 326:
Page 327:
The Swedish Institute for Growth Po
show all

The Internationalization of Corporate R&D

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?