Posts tagged government
Today, during Ontario’s Civic Holiday, I finally got around to filling out Deloitte Technology Fast 50™ CEO Survey. There was an interesting question that sparked a thread that I’ve been thinking about lately:
“Specifically, do you think the SR&ED tax credit program is pretty good as is, or needs improvement? If it needs big changes, what would be the first change you would make?”
For those of you who don’t know what the SR&ED program is, go learn more because it can save your business tons of cash over time and help you finance your business with non-dilutive government assistance.
For those of you running (or have previously run) early-stage stage startups, here are my thoughts: Currently SR&ED will refund a portion of a startup’s R&D costs based on expenses incurred during the previous year – some of those earliest expenses claimed were incurred 18 months prior to the claim. For startups, this is an eternity. Today, startups can grow and die violently before they get their first SR&ED claim, which could have helped them to pay one more employee, solve one more problem or help one more customer.
The Canadian government should consider modifying the SR&ED program to include a faster-reimbursement timeframe for startups (making less than $1,000,000 in revenue per year). For example, this could mean making claims quarterly and being reimbursed within 60-90 days – this would massively improve startup financing in the short-term. A modification, as requested, would help startups build value and growth potential more quickly and help the overall competitiveness of the Canadian technology sector.
Will anyone help to stand behind an initiative to get the Canadian government to improve the SR&ED program for startups? Join the conversation in the comments below.
Today, I want to highlight a great article I found on the ethical issues in personalized medicine, which is centered around pharmacogenetic information (your specific DNA genotype for a number of specific genes). Firstly, if you want to get up to speed on pharmacogenomics, check out the US government-run Human Genome Project Information site that has some quick Q&A on this topic!
There was an article recently published online by Reagan Kelly, that discusses some ethical issues of personalized medicine, please see some excerpts below:
“Protecting patient privacy is one of the most important things that must be done before ordinary people will be willing to take advantage of individualized medical care, and just about everyone agrees that patient’s have a right to keep details about their health private from most people (even if not from, say, their insurance company or in some cases state or local governments). But how far does that right extend? Does it cover a person’s genetic makeup? That is something that undeniably influences health, and a fair amount of information about what diseases a person has or is at risk for can be extracted from genotype and gene expression information like what would be collected for personalized medicine services. How do you keep that information private and what uses are OK? … Additionally, what about the privacy of other family members? Families share genetic information, and by knowing something about their risk, a person also learns about their relatives’ risks.”
“One of the issues of privacy is also directly related to patient autonomy – the right of a patient to choose what happens to them. The question of what uses of a patient’s data are permissible is not exclusively a question of privacy but also one of autonomy. Is it OK to require a person to allow their data to be used for risk profiling or diagnosis as a condition of performing the service for them?”
“Cost, just like with the policy issues last time, is a significant ethical issue as well. Something like 46 million people are without health insurance today, and many more have insurance plans that cover only the most basic things. How can we provide access to personalized medicine to everyone? Is access for everyone a reasonable goal? Is it an attainable one?”
Please see the full article for more details.