Most companies treat SR&ED documentation as a fiscal year-end problem: a mad scramble to reconstruct what happened eight or ten months ago. Reconstructed records are weaker evidence than contemporaneous ones — and they’re far more work to produce. A lightweight system built into the regular workflow removes almost all of that year-end effort.
The Core Principle: Capture, Don’t Create
A good documentation system doesn’t ask staff to write anything new. It captures evidence that’s already being generated — tickets, commit messages, meeting notes, lab logs — and tags it in a way that makes it findable at claim time. The goal is zero additional work during the project, and minimal reconstruction work at filing time.
A Simple System That Scales
● Tag project management tickets with a lightweight SR&ED flag when technical uncertainty is identified
● Require one sentence of “why” in commit messages and design docs, not just “what”
● Keep a running log per project of what was tried, what failed, and what was learned
● Track time by project/technical activity, even at a rough weekly level, rather than reconstructing it from memory
Who Owns It
Documentation systems fail when they’re owned by no one. Assign a single internal point person — often a technical lead or finance team member — to do a light quarterly check that tagging is happening, rather than waiting until year-end to discover it wasn’t.
The Payoff
Companies with a documentation habit built into their normal workflow consistently produce stronger, faster, and less expensive claims than companies reconstructing evidence after the fact — and they’re far better positioned if the CRA ever selects the claim for review.
