---
title: "Draft an R&D activity description under Division 355 of the ITAA 1997"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/practice/taxation/draft-an-r-and-d-activity-description-against-the-eligibility-tests/commonwealth"
type: "task_jurisdiction_version"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "A26-T1-R10-CTH"
practice_area: "Taxation"
tier: "yellow"
lawyer_review: "required"
jurisdictions: ["CTH"]
last_reviewed: "2026-09-23"
---

# Draft an R&D activity description under Division 355 of the ITAA 1997

> Draft the activity description from technical notes, separating core (s 355-25) and supporting (s 355-30) activities, and list missing evidence and AusIndustry pitfalls.

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/practice/taxation/draft-an-r-and-d-activity-description-against-the-eligibility-tests/commonwealth  
Last reviewed: 2026-09-23

Site index for agents: https://ailawframework.com/llms.txt

## Key facts

| Fact | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Practice area | [Taxation](https://ailawframework.com/practice/taxation.md) |
| Human involvement | Yellow: Lawyer and AI draft together |
| How AI is used | Draft the activity description from technical notes, separating core (s 355-25) and supporting (s 355-30) activities, and list missing evidence and AusIndustry pitfalls. |
| What the lawyer must review | Apply s 355-25(1)(b); ordinary development is not experimental Check exclusions and ATO software R&D guidance Check the offset: 43.5% under $20m aggregated turnover, grouping included At $20m or more: company tax rate plus 8.5% (R&D up to 2% of expenses) or 16.5% Register by 30 April or 31 October |
| Written for | Commonwealth |
| Applies to | [Draft an R&D activity description against the eligibility tests](https://ailawframework.com/practice/taxation/draft-an-r-and-d-activity-description-against-the-eligibility-tests.md) |

## Checking plan

**Lawyer review required**

The responsible lawyer reviews the work against the instructions, sources and intended use.

- What the AI does: Potential support includes preparing preliminary structure or wording and identifying points for review. Confirm the tool’s capability and permitted scope.
- What the lawyer does: Set the scope, verify the evidence, resolve exceptions and approve the final output for its intended use.
- Who reviews: Responsible lawyer with competence in the matter
- Basis: Suggested checking approach based on the task guidance. Complete the assessment for the actual tool, information and jurisdiction.
- Why: The plan reflects the described work and review requirements. Policy colours are not used to determine permission or checking.

## Checks the lawyer makes

1. Calculate operative dates independently from the current rule and actual triggering event. Check exceptions and record the verified deadline.
2. Verify the applicable jurisdiction and the version of each relevant law, rule or instrument in force at the material time.
3. Confirm the output against the client’s instructions and the complete relevant source material, including omissions or contradictions.
4. Resolve exceptions and record the responsible lawyer’s approval of the exact output and intended use.

## Notes

- Confirm the required checking with the responsible lawyer before work starts. The checking approach does not establish permission to use AI.

*Practice guidance for planning and review. Confirm current primary sources and the requirements of the actual matter. This is general information, not legal advice.*