The study is already a search.

The R&D credit is documentation of qualified research the company already spent. Accountants who already know you send the manufacturer they already file for. Engineering consultants do the same. That is a short list, and it repeats.

The CFO who just closed a year of qualified research is searching for a study, not waiting on that accountant’s next lunch. We do not write to every manufacturer with a lab on the website.

Cost segregation is the building. WOTC is the hire. This is the research credit. Those leaves live on this hub.

How these deals actually work

The company has been doing qualifying work and has not claimed it, or the current preparer is leaving credit on the table. The R&D credit is documentation of research already spent: a four-part test, QREs, and a study a CPA will file. The CFO or founder, the tax preparer, engineers or developers who did the work, and the study firm are in the room. Accountants who already know you send the manufacturer they already file for. Engineering consultants do the same. That list repeats.

Lookback years are often the real money, not the current year alone. Software and manufacturing both qualify when the work qualifies. A lab coat is not the test. A shop that only speaks “we’re a lab” will miss the software CFO who is actually searching.

Cost segregation is the building. WOTC is the hire. This is the research credit.

What a buyer is actually searching

They type R&D tax credit, research and development credit study, R&D credit software, manufacturing R&D credit. Today is year-end, a new CFO, or a preparer change. Last year they assumed they did not qualify. This year someone told them they might.

The intent is money already earned and unclaimed, not a grant application. Landing pages that look like a science-fair contest will bounce the CFO.

CPAs and engineering consultants are LinkedIn. The CFO who thinks they left money on the table is Google.

Objections we hear

We’re not a lab. The test is qualified research, not a white coat. Software and process work show up in this search for a reason.

Our preparer already took it. Then they did, or they took a sliver. The CFO searching suspects the sliver.

Audit risk. A study that cannot be defended is not a study. Mills that sell a guaranteed credit are how this vertical got a reputation. Do not look like one.

Who this is actually for

Firms that actually document QREs and stand behind the filing. The lead worth the spend has years of work already spent and a tax owner who will sit the study. A two-person shop with no books is not that lead. A company shopping a “we get you X back” guarantee is not a lead you want.

This page is a poor fit for a shop that wants to mail every manufacturer with a lab photo on the website. That is outbound.

Payroll, supplies, and contract research are different QRE buckets. Section 174 capitalization changed how companies think about research spend; it is a live tax issue, not a trivia fact, and it is one reason a CFO who ignored the credit is suddenly searching. ASC 730 documentation helps some filers and is not a substitute for a four-part-test study. Lookback years are often larger than the current year. Software companies and manufacturers both show up in this search. A page that only speaks to labs will miss one of them.

A preparer change is a common trigger. So is a new CFO reading last year’s return. The company that has claimed a thin credit for years and wants a real study is a different intent than the company that has never claimed at all. Both are this vertical if you actually do the work.

Contract research paid to a third party is a different QRE problem than internal payroll. Some companies have been paying a vendor to build product for years and have never run the study. That is a search. So is the manufacturer whose process work never looked like “R&D” to the controller. The campaign has to be willing to sound like those files, not like a university lab.

Ready to grow your pipeline?

Share a few details and we'll follow up with exactly how this works for a firm like yours.

Leave blank

Name *

Firm / Company *

Email *

Phone

Send

How the campaign runs

Google ads for CFOs and tax directors searching R&D tax credits, not one generic “tax credit” campaign. Keywords are always custom to the work you do. Brand bidding and competitor-brand bidding only when the strategy calls for it. Details: paid search.

Foundational work in parallel: the website, local directories, and general search appearance, so the click lands on the shop and not a mill. A landing page may be included; a full website is quoted separately. Directories and bios: online profile development.

LinkedIn ads aimed at CPAs and engineering consultants: lunch-and-learns, not a message sequence. Paid ads only. We do not offer LinkedIn message outreach (InMail, connection sequences, or DMs). That is a different channel, we do not run it, and it is not part of this program.

Ads produce inbound while the search is live. Foundation is why the buyer or a referrer trusts the shop enough to call.

Why we're not generalists

Generalist marketing agencies will not take the time to understand how this practice actually wins work. The practice is too specialized, the file count is too small, and the work of understanding it bores them. They want large spend and a lot of traffic to a landing page. We will run a tight campaign for a shop that closes fewer files at a higher value. That is the point of this page.

Most agencies do not understand specialized industries well enough to advertise them honestly. We take the time to learn how the work is sold so the keywords and the page the click lands on match the work you actually take. A complex practice deserves that. A generic landing page does not.

How fast this can run

We can get ads live in under a week. What usually slows that down is approval on your side: the keywords, the spend, the page the click lands on. Directories, bios, and a site a buyer will trust take longer to finish. The website and listings are why the person who clicks trusts you. It is not the same as going live on search.

How this is billed

This is Visibility Program work, not the outbound program. You pay ad spend directly to the platforms (Google and, where we run it, LinkedIn). ROI Wire is billed on a retainer that scales with that spend. That is not a flat project fee, not a percentage of closed files, and not an outbound retainer.

A landing page may be included at no additional cost. A full website build is always quoted and billed separately. Foundational services (copywriting, CRM, multichannel sequences, web design) sit under this track as the credibility layer, not as a correspondence program.

Scope is on the Visibility Program. Search mechanics are on paid search. Surfaces are on online profile development.

What is not included

We do not build a solicitation list of manufacturers. We do not write, mail, or phone CFOs who did not ask. We do not sit the study. We make the shop findable. The shop does the work.

This is not cost segregation or WOTC. Those are different pages.

Program pages

Visibility Program

How this work is scoped and billed.

Paid search

Google ads. You pay the ad spend. We bill a retainer that scales with it.

Online profile development

Directories, bios, and reputation surfaces a buyer checks after they see you.