FRS 38 Intangible Assets in Singapore: Recognition, Amortisation and the R&D Tax Deduction Trap

Most Singapore SMEs are used to thinking about their fixed assets, their stock, and their receivables. Far fewer stop to ask how their accountant is treating the software licence they built in-house, the customer list they paid to acquire, or the two years of development work behind their new product. That is the territory of FRS 38 Intangible Assets, and getting it wrong is one of the more common reasons a set of accounts draws audit queries or an unwelcome IRAS adjustment.

Raffles Corporate Services works with a panel of experienced Singapore law firms who offer cost-effective and efficient legal service and advice. This article is general information only and is not legal advice.

This guide walks through how FRS 38 requires intangible assets to be recognised and amortised, why research spend and development spend are treated so differently, and where the accounting answer and the tax answer under the Income Tax Act can quietly diverge.

What Counts as an Intangible Asset Under FRS 38

FRS 38 defines an intangible asset as an identifiable non-monetary asset without physical substance. To even qualify for recognition, three tests must all be met: the item must be identifiable (separable from the business or arising from contractual or legal rights), the company must control it (able to restrict others from the economic benefits), and it must be probable that future economic benefits will flow to the company, with cost measured reliably.

Common examples for Singapore SMEs include purchased software licences, acquired customer contracts, registered trade marks, capitalised website development costs that meet the recognition criteria, and acquired patents. Internally generated goodwill, brand value you built yourself rather than bought, and internally generated customer lists are explicitly excluded, no matter how valuable they are commercially.

The Research vs Development Line

This is where FRS 38 causes the most friction in practice, because it draws a hard line between two phases of the same project.

Research Phase: Always Expensed

Spending during the research phase, such as activities aimed at gaining new knowledge, searching for alternative materials or processes, or evaluating possible product alternatives, must be expensed as incurred. FRS 38 takes the view that at this stage a company cannot yet demonstrate that an intangible asset exists that will generate probable future economic benefits, so capitalisation is not permitted, full stop.

Development Phase: Capitalise Only If Six Criteria Are Met

Development costs may be capitalised, but only once the company can demonstrate all six of the following simultaneously:

If even one criterion fails, the spend is expensed, not capitalised. In our experience reviewing SME accounts, this is the single most common FRS 38 error: development costs are capitalised because the project “felt” far enough along, without a documented assessment against all six criteria. Auditors will ask for that documentation, and if it does not exist, expect a prior-period adjustment.

Amortisation: Finite vs Indefinite Useful Life

Once recognised, an intangible asset is classified by its useful life.

An intangible asset with a finite useful life (most software, most acquired customer contracts, most patents) is amortised on a systematic basis over that useful life, typically straight-line unless another method better reflects the pattern of consumption of benefits. The residual value is normally assumed to be zero unless there is a committed third party buyer or an active market for the asset.

An intangible asset with an indefinite useful life (rare for SMEs, but occasionally seen with certain perpetual licences or trade marks with no foreseeable end date) is not amortised at all. Instead, it must be tested for impairment at least annually, and whenever there is an indication it may be impaired, following the same approach used for goodwill under FRS 36 impairment testing.

The Tax Deduction Trap

Here is where FRS 38 quietly diverges from the Income Tax Act, and where SMEs most often overpay or underclaim.

Amortisation Is Not Automatically Tax Deductible

Book amortisation charged under FRS 38 is not, by itself, a tax-deductible expense. The Income Tax Act does not generally allow a deduction for amortisation of intangible assets the way it allows capital allowances on plant and machinery. Whether a deduction is available at all depends on which specific IRAS provision the asset falls under, not on the accounting treatment.

Where Relief Does Exist

Two routes commonly apply for Singapore companies. Acquired intellectual property, such as a purchased patent, registered design or trademark, may qualify for writing-down allowances under Section 19B of the Income Tax Act 1947, spread over a specified number of years (commonly 5 years by default, or over the useful life elected, subject to conditions and IRAS approval). Development costs that qualify as qualifying R&D expenditure may instead attract enhanced tax deductions under Sections 14C and 14D of the Income Tax Act, which is often more generous than ordinary capital allowance treatment but is claimed on the underlying R&D spend, not on the book amortisation figure.

Goodwill is the clearest trap: goodwill amortisation, whether from a business combination or otherwise, is not tax deductible under Singapore tax law in any circumstance we are aware of, regardless of how it is treated in the FRS 38 or FRS 103 accounts.

Practical Reconciliation

Because book amortisation and the available tax treatment rarely match year for year, companies preparing their ECI and Form C-S/C computations need to add back book amortisation in full, then separately claim whatever writing-down allowance or R&D deduction the asset actually qualifies for. Skipping this step either overstates the tax deduction claimed or, just as often, leaves genuine Section 19B relief unclaimed because nobody tracked which intangible assets originated from a qualifying acquisition.

A Quick Self-Check for Directors

Three questions are usually enough to surface an FRS 38 problem before your auditor does. Has any development spend been capitalised without a written assessment against all six FRS 38 development criteria? Is amortisation on acquired IP being claimed as a tax deduction without checking whether Section 19B actually applies to that specific asset? And is any goodwill amortisation sitting in the tax computation as a deduction, when it should have been added back in full?

If the answer to any of these is “we are not sure,” it is worth a targeted review before the next audit or IRAS filing, not after.

How Raffles Corporate Services Can Help

Getting the FRS 38 recognition test and the corresponding tax treatment right at the same time takes both accounting and tax expertise working together. Raffles Corporate Services prepares FRS-compliant financial statements and the accompanying corporate tax computations as a single, reconciled exercise, so intangible assets are never capitalised on one side and mismatched on the other.

The Editorial Team, Raffles Corporate Services