--- layout: default title: "Better Intellectual Property Values Luring Indian Startups Abroad" description: "An Economic Times report examining why Indian startups are incorporating overseas and moving their intellectual property to countries like the US and Singapore, featuring expert analysis from Sunil Abraham on India's inconsistent patent jurisprudence and the impact of high transfer taxes on technology valuations." categories: [Media mentions] date: 2015-04-10 source: "The Economic Times" authors: ["Evelyn Fok", "Varun Aggarwal"] permalink: /media/better-intellectual-property-values-luring-indian-startups-abroad/ created: 2025-12-14 --- **Better Intellectual Property Values Luring Indian Startups Abroad** is a report published in *The Economic Times* on 10 April 2015, written by Evelyn Fok and Varun Aggarwal. The article investigates why major Indian startups are incorporating outside India and transferring their intellectual property overseas, driven by higher valuations from global investors and more favourable tax treatment. It features commentary from Sunil Abraham on India's inconsistent patent jurisprudence and the challenges startups face with unpredictable judicial decisions on intellectual property matters. ## Contents 1. [Article Details](#article-details) 2. [Full Text](#full-text) 3. [Context and Background](#context-and-background) 4. [External Link](#external-link) ## Article Details
đź“° Published in:
The Economic Times
✍️ Authors:
Evelyn Fok and Varun Aggarwal
đź“… Date:
10 April 2015
đź“„ Type:
News Report
đź“° Newspaper Link:
Read Online
## Full Text

Synopsis
Major Indian startups are incorporating outside as global investors seem to value companies with patents overseas much higher.

BENGALURU: Prime Minister Narendra Modi says Make in India. But anyone who wants to, finds that their intellectual property is valued much more if the patent is filed in the US, or anywhere else, but India. Take the case of BITS Pilani graduate Sriram Kanuni, for instance, who decided to come back to India after spending 12 years with SAP in Germany. His family thought he was out of his mind, but he wanted to work for India and primarily serve Indian clients.

His core vision hasn't wavered five years down the line, but he has been forced to move a large part of his company's intellectual property (IP) to the US, just to get a better valuation for his next round of funding. And his is not an isolated case. "Global investors seem to value companies with patents in the US much higher. Therefore, it makes more sense to shift patents out of India, in case you're looking to raise money or exit the company," Kanuni, who is the CEO and co-founder of Arteria Technologies, said. Major Indian startups such as Flipkart, Myntra and ZipDial, which have either raised over a billion dollars or exited, already have their IPs outside the country. Experts say that is one of the reasons that attracted investors.

"If a company with its IP in India is acquired by an international firm, and post acquisition the buyer wishes to transfer the IP to a different jurisdiction, such transfer would need to be at a fair value decided by the government and the company is taxed at the rate of 34% on that," one of the bankers who was part of a large exit told ET.

"For tech-centric companies where the value of IP would comprise over 70-80% of their value, such high taxes can possibly make them unattractive for potential investors," they added. With better valuation and exits in mind, startups are moving out their innovation to countries such as Singapore and the US, leaving behind very little intellectual property that the country can proudly call its own.

"You would want to incorporate somewhere with a respected reputation for maintaining legal protection when it comes to copyright and trademarks, especially with global licensees or partners," said Sharad Devarajan, co-founder and CEO of character entertainment company Graphic India, which is incorporated in Singapore. "Incorporation in a country like the US where potential for M&A is higher, especially for core technology startups, will generally make it more attractive to potential buyers as it avoids a lot of legal and financial paperwork," said Brij Bhasin, India investment lead of Japanese venture capital firm Rebright Partners.

Investor concerns over IP are well founded. "Indian courts aren't uniform when it comes to developing jurisprudence around copyright and patent infringement," explained Sunil Abraham, executive director of Bengaluru-based research organization Centre for Internet and Society.

"There is a high chance that a judge who doesn't understand the details would give an injunction. Then the loss of six months, etc., can be quite expensive, because in six months' time your competitor might eat into all of your market," he said.

{% include back-to-top.html %} ## Context and Background The outflow of intellectual property from Indian startups in 2015 reflected deeper structural issues in India's innovation ecosystem. Whilst Prime Minister Modi's "Make in India" campaign encouraged domestic manufacturing and entrepreneurship, the reality for technology startups revealed significant disadvantages to maintaining intellectual property within Indian jurisdiction. The 34% transfer tax on IP relocations created a punitive barrier for companies seeking international acquisitions, effectively penalising successful exits rather than celebrating them. Sunil Abraham's observation about inconsistent judicial treatment of patent and copyright disputes identified a critical governance gap. India's patent system, particularly following the 2005 amendments that strengthened protections for pharmaceutical innovations whilst maintaining flexibility for other sectors, had created interpretative ambiguities. Judges without technical backgrounds sometimes issued injunctions that halted legitimate business operations for months, during which competitors could capture market share. This unpredictability made Indian IP holdings riskier investments compared to jurisdictions with more established and consistent legal frameworks. The article documented how successful Indian startups like Flipkart, Myntra, and ZipDial had already incorporated overseas—a pattern suggesting systemic rather than isolated concerns. These companies' decisions reflected investor preferences for jurisdictions offering predictable legal protections, straightforward acquisition processes, and favourable tax treatment. Singapore and the United States emerged as preferred destinations, combining respected IP regimes with established venture capital ecosystems and M&A markets. The tension between encouraging domestic innovation and creating conditions where that innovation flows abroad highlighted policy contradictions. Tax regulations designed to prevent profit-shifting through IP transfers inadvertently discouraged startups from maintaining their most valuable assets in India, whilst weak judicial consistency undermined confidence in domestic IP protection. These factors combined to create incentives for exactly the capital flight policymakers sought to prevent. ## External Link - Read on The Economic Times