Vortex – Tax Court of Canada characterizes purported SR&ED as routine engineering conducted by trial and error

In confirming the denial of the claim of the taxpayer that it had engaged in experimental development in building mobile direct-contact water heaters for use in fracking, Spiro, J. found inter alia that there was an absence of any expert evidence demonstrating technological risks or uncertainties which could not have been removed by routine engineering or standard procedures, and that the work could instead be characterized as routine engineering that was conducted by trial and error.

Neal Armstrong. Summary of Vortex Energy Services Ltd. v. The King, 2025 TCC 63 under s. 248(1) – SR&ED.