Book a Call
Programs
Research Allowance ZIM GRW WIPANO BAFA EEW KMU-innovativ KfW Innovationskredite EXIST Eurostars 3 EIC Accelerator Horizon Europe EU Innovation Fund Compare all programs
Who we fund
AIHealthcareSustainabilityRoboticsManufacturingSolarBiotechAgricultureEVAll industries
Case Studies
Browse case studies Research Allowance ZIM GRW WIPANO BAFA EEW KMU-innovativ KfW Innovationskredite EXIST Eurostars 3 EIC Accelerator Horizon Europe EU Innovation Fund
Resources
Guides Blog
About Us
Metrology · Case study

Contract research struck from the allowance, and we win it back.

A Mittelstand metrology maker had its project certified, but the certification body struck the external development work. We are getting it recognised on appeal.

€80,000
research allowance granted
€230,000
eligible base
Up to 35%
SME funding rate
Free assessment Read the story
At a glance

The mandate in figures

IndustryMetrology / sensorsScientific instrument making
Research allowance granted€80,000Secured so far; appeal for more
Eligible base€230,000
ScenarioCertified; contract research on appeal
Projects1
SME funding rateUp to 35%
About the company

The company, and the R&D underneath

The company develops a compact, pressure-resistant measuring system for demanding conditions in process analytics, considerably more pressure-resistant than products on the market and designed for very small installation spaces. The project carries clear technical uncertainties: pressure-resistant continuous operation well above what competitor products achieve, reproducibly stable internal flow, and a simplified drive electronics without a finished reference solution.

For exactly these critical parts, the new circuit and firmware development and the integration with established industry software, external specialists were commissioned. In the Mittelstand this is the norm: what is not covered in-house is bought in for a purpose.

The challenge

Where the funding really sat

The certification body recognized the project. Novelty, risk and systematic approach were expressly affirmed. In the same decision, however, the external development work was classified as a pure service and thereby excluded, on the grounds that no scientific or technical problem is solved independently there.

This contains a tension within the decision itself. If the overall project is recognized as R&D and the external work addresses exactly the critical, risk-bearing parts of that project, then the blanket classification as a service is hard to sustain. This internal inconsistency is the strongest lever in the procedure.

Novelty Technical risk / uncertainty Systematic approach
Our approach

How we built the case

Substantive overlap

We show that the external work coincides exactly with the work packages that the decision itself certifies as eligible R&D. A circuit topology to be validated experimentally, without a finished reference solution, is not a routine service but the independent solution of a technical problem with an open outcome.

Differentiating the contractors

Not every external service is equally strong. We assess each engagement separately: where the work independently solves a technical uncertainty, the case is strong; where it is more about implementation to specification, it is weaker. This honest separation increases the credibility of the appeal as a whole.

Formal safeguard

We check the contract design for a result-oriented structure and make sure there is no constellation that could be read as the mere provision of labor.

How the case moved

✓
Certified
Project recognised as R&D
✕
Struck
Contract research excluded
↻
Appeal filed
Procedure ongoing

What made up the eligible base

Secured (in-house) ~68%Disputed (contract) ~32%
In-house work, securedContract research, on appeal

In-house work of €230,000 is secured; the contract research is what the appeal is about. A win lifts the base, and the allowance, by a five-figure amount. Split shown is illustrative.

The result

A €80,000 research allowance.

The project itself is already certified, the in-house work in the order of magnitude of around EUR 230,000 is secured and leads to a research allowance in the low six-figure range. The appeal is about the additional recognition of the contract research. If it is recognized, the eligible base, and thus the research allowance, rises by a five-figure amount. The procedure is ongoing.

Eligible base €230,000 · SME rate Up to 35%
Certified; contract research on appealThe outcome of the mandate.
Eligible base €230,000Recognised cost the allowance is calculated on.
SME rate Up to 35%Applied to the eligible base.
Key takeaways

What other companies can learn

A partial rejection of contract research is common, and it can be challenged. Three points are decisive:

01

Find the contradiction in your own decision

If the project is recognized but the external work addresses exactly its critical parts, the classification as a service is vulnerable. That internal logic carries the case.

02

Assess each engagement individually

Arguing in bulk weakens the strong engagement with the weak one. A clean separation is more persuasive.

03

Set up contracts correctly in advance

Contract research must be result-oriented and independently solve a technical problem. Thinking this through before signing avoids the dispute altogether.

“
Not every rejection concerns the whole project.
BeFunded On the research allowance
FAQ

Your questions, answered

The most common questions on this kind of case. Short answer first, detail after.

When the contractor independently solves a scientific or technical problem and thereby generates new knowledge for the client. The work must be result-oriented. Pure staffing or implementation to a rigid specification is not recognized.

Yes. Even if the project is otherwise certified, the excluded part can be challenged with a timely objection.

A share of the recognized contract cost, 60% in the relevant periods, flows into the eligible base. The funding rate is applied to that.

A result-oriented work-contract structure, a clearly defined technical task with an independent solution, and arm's-length terms. Constructs that only supply labor endanger eligibility.

Keep reading

More case studies

Free eligibility check

See if your R&D qualifies for the Research Allowance

Tell us about your project. One of our funding advisors reviews your case by hand, then either comes back with feedback or a few follow-up questions. No obligation.

  • Whether your R&D qualifies for the allowance
  • A first read on the amount you could reclaim
  • What to prepare, including for 2022 and 2023

We reply within one working day. Your details go straight to our funding team.