If a doctor does research through a medical professional corporation, a written agreement with that corporation can become one of the most useful records in an SR&ED claim.
The agreement does not make research eligible. It does not turn personal work into corporate work after the fact. Its job is simpler: to record what the doctor and the corporation actually agreed to do.
Why the relationship matters
A medical research project can involve a physician, their corporation, a hospital, a university, a sponsor, and a research centre. The physician may sign protocols in their own name because only a licensed investigator can take on certain responsibilities. RAMQ billings may also identify the physician personally.
None of those facts answers the corporate tax question on its own.
For the corporation to include the doctor's salary in an SR&ED claim, it must have incurred salary or wages for its own employee. The research time being claimed must also relate to eligible work performed for the corporation. If another organization hired the doctor to conduct the research, the contractual arrangement may lead to a different result.
What a useful agreement should explain
The document should reflect the real working relationship in plain language. Depending on the practice, it may address:
- the doctor's role as an employee, officer, or contractor;
- the medical and research services performed for the corporation;
- how salary or other remuneration is set and paid;
- whether professional fees and research income are received for the corporation;
- how hospital, university, and sponsor obligations fit with the corporate role;
- responsibility for research expenses, records, results, and intellectual property.
The details must agree with the rest of the file. T4 slips, payroll entries, bank records, invoices, research agreements, and corporate resolutions should tell the same story.
The timing matters
An agreement signed years after the research carries less weight than one that governed the relationship while the work was being done. The CRA can look beyond the wording and ask what happened in practice.
If the corporation supposedly employed the doctor for research, was salary actually paid or incurred? Was the research part of the corporation's business? Did project records distinguish the doctor's corporate work from duties owed personally to a hospital or university?
A clean agreement helps organize those facts. It cannot repair facts that point somewhere else.
What the Lamy decision shows
In Andre Lamy Medicine Professional Corporation v. The Queen, the Tax Court accepted that Dr. Lamy performed cardiac research as an employee of his professional corporation. His employment agreement was part of the evidence. So were his testimony, corporate records, remuneration, research activities, and the nature of the corporation's business.
The decision is helpful, but it is not a universal rule that every incorporated doctor's research belongs to their corporation. It shows why the complete relationship matters.
Put the paperwork in place before filing
The best time to review the arrangement is before the project begins. The next best time is before an SR&ED claim is prepared, while the people and records are still available.
A lawyer and the corporation's tax adviser should review the agreement itself. An assessment of SR&ED for physicians can then determine whether the documented research and expenditures fit the program and identify gaps before they become a filing problem.