Most of the research employees are great but useless to the company’s bottomline. the projects are outdated. they do no real work.
why can’t we just shut our research companies once and for all. there is no technology in the world that a vendor cannot offer better services from than our current employees who are hanging on for retirement? its a genuine question m, does anyone know whats the reason we still have semi decimated research teams?
Well sometimes it works, but really most of the time it doesn’t.
2200 PhD's, 5,000 employees at our Research and Technology Divisions, Breakthrough Technologies, and Stage-Gate Process for R&D equals $1 billion USD
ExxonMobil invests $1 billion per year in energy research, emerging technologies
ExxonMobil believes human ingenuity and innovation are critical to supplying the fuels and products that consumers need in a manner that is safe for our employees, communities and the environment.
Our approach
To support this, ExxonMobil is founded on a culture of science and technology. We employ more than 2,200 Ph.D scientists and 5,000 employees at our research and technology divisions around the world. Each year, we invest around $1 billion on corporate research and development efforts. Our goal is to develop breakthrough technologies that can benefit our business and have a positive impact on society and the environment.
Research and development
ExxonMobil conducts cutting-edge R&D through in-house efforts, via partnerships with other industries and by funding academic and other nongovernmental research projects. We are proud to say that as a result of these research and development initiatives, ExxonMobil was named one of the top 100 global innovators by Thompson Reuters in 2015 for our leadership performances in overall patent volume, patent-grant success rates, global reach and invention influence.
White paper process
In 2007, we started applying a white paper process to explore emerging technologies. These studies help to educate the company on emerging technologies, define our potential contribution to the science and assess the future applicability of the technologies to our businesses. The Corporation has engaged experts from a variety of disciplines within functional research labs to write white papers on topics ranging from biofuels to nanotechnology. In the course of developing these papers, ExxonMobil may determine that a particular technology warrants future investment.
At our core, we’re a technology company. We have 20,000 scientists and engineers, including more than 2,200 with Ph.Ds. We spend about a billion dollars a year in researching and developing new technologies, including potential breakthroughs, like algae for biofuels, fuel cells for carbon capture and reverse osmosis for more efficient manufacturing processes.
Darren Woods
Chairman and CEO
From innovation to deployment
As a technology moves from concept to research and application, ExxonMobil applies a consistent management approach.
The standard process for technology investment requires assessing technical feasibility through R&D. ExxonMobil’s research functions follow a stage-gate research management system to progress technologies from the early stages of innovation through the final stages of deployment. Researchers partner with the business lines to determine the business benefit of a technology, establish research and development goals and timelines, steward independent project reviews and authorize project funding.
Time horizons for these projects vary significantly. For example, we began evaluating remote gas detection in 2007. Researchers at ExxonMobil Research Qatar (EMRQ) determined its technical feasibility in 2010. In 2011, EMRQ partnered with Louisiana State University Fire School to conduct field testing. In 2014, ExxonMobil Upstream Research Company awarded the first commercial license for the InteliRed remote gas detection system to co-developer Providence Photonics, LLC.
Breakthrough technologies can take much longer to develop. More than 30 years ago, ExxonMobil researchers hypothesized that freezing the carbon dioxide (CO2) that is sometimes produced from underground natural gas reservoirs could be a more efficient approach to separation rather than an impediment. Now, this hypothesis has become a reality. ExxonMobil Upstream Research Company has completed the testing of the Controlled Freeze Zone™ (CFZ) technology at a Commercial Demonstration Plant (CDP) in our LaBarge, Wyoming gas facility. The CDP successfully and cost effectively processed a wide range of sour gas feeds and separated CO2 from natural gas into a high-pressure stream, ideal for use in sequestration or in enhanced oil recovery. Based on the success at LaBarge, CFZ technology is now ready for commercial use.
Upstream, Downstream, and Chemicals Research has been shrinking since 2015 if you factor in the cost of inflation at 4%. Not sure why Research and Development costs jumped in 2025. My guess is that the incremental funding was needed to close Clinton, New Jersey and collocate Clinton in Houston and our Technology Center in Bengaluru, India.
Year Research and Development Costs (in millions of USD)
2015 $1,008
2016 $1,058
2017 $1,063
2018 $1,116
2019 $1,214
2020 $1,016
2021 $843
2022 $824
2023 $879
2024 $987
2025 $1,228
The Upstream and Clinton research groups have the worst leeches and wosrt humans at EM. They know for sure that none of their technology is useful yet keep selling it to business and most busienss folls jist let them play in their corner without any actual value. it is a scam or some sort of a tax break thing, wither way stay away from anyone from the ‘research companies’
Most of EMTEC are just leeches, it's insane it even exists.
@1fh Agree. But they use this strategy to keep you underutilized, then PIP you and reduce the headcount
Actually most of Emtec is not adding anything but costs, need to be trimmed or just move those who are working there to business units who are struggling with work load.
We don’t and haven’t for a while now. Some research spend required as part of government obligations for winning leases.
Edison was moved to Baton Rouge in 2014.
BATON ROUGE, La.--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- ExxonMobil is investing more than $200 million to expand its Baton Rouge chemical and lubricants plants to increase capacity for synthetic lubricant base stocks manufacturing and lubricants blending, packaging and storage.
The expansion will increase ExxonMobil’s worldwide capacity of synthetic esters and alkylated naphthalene by more than 25 percent to meet the demand for high-performance lubricants made with these advanced products. The project will include construction of a state-of-the-art blending center for synthetic aviation oil at ExxonMobil’s lubricant blending plant in Port Allen, La.
"ExxonMobil continues to invest in its operations in Louisiana,” said Paul Stratford, manager of the Baton Rouge chemical plant. “Over the past three years, the corporation’s capital expenditures in the state exceeded $930 million. These investments help create jobs and contribute to the economic growth of the state and the region.”
Construction is expected to begin in late 2012. The project will create more than 400 direct construction jobs and the facilities will provide 45 new full-time local jobs when production begins in 2014.
This expansion project will make ExxonMobil’s Baton Rouge chemical plant the world’s largest producer of synthetic esters and alkylated naphthalene, which are used by producers and marketers of a wide variety of finished lubricants that include vehicle motor oils, gear oils and greases, as well as specialized lubricants for aviation, marine and industrial applications.
The new facilities in Baton Rouge will replace ExxonMobil’s existing base stock manufacturing and aviation lubricants blending, packaging and storage operations in Edison, New Jersey, which will continue production until the new facilities in Louisiana begin operation.
What about Edison?
Upstream research is a drag on business, needs to be ki-led in next wave of cuts
@cr you should have seen the Cluster in Edison
What's left of downstream research is working LCS. Once LCS folds (soon I think), the rest of research is toast.
What surprizes me is how some of the older managers haven't been pushed out yet ("Splenda" comes to mind - definition of a slimy backstabber who pretends to like you while sc--wing you).
Most if not all Presidents and Vice Presidents who transferred into EMRE (now EMTECH) retired as EMRE Executives. Presidents and Vice Presidents assigned to EMRE were considered end of career assignments historically.
Became senior managers and ‘shined’? No one who started at URC has ‘shined’ anywhere. It is considered a mark of disgrace to have started your career there.
Agree. The Upstream Research Company from 20-30 years ago disseminated excellent tools and data for decision-making. Turned into a sh1t show with excellent people looking for something to work on. The best became senior managers and shined. The rest held in to their misguided professional arrogance to get by in the real world and eventually forced out one way or another.
Spot on. Anyone who has Upstream Research Company on their experience list are the ones who you need to stay away from as they spread like a parasite to other parts of business, big ego phDs with 0 common sense and business acumen.
They would be so much better off elsewhere but chose to milk the ExxonMobil cow for no real valuable development. In fact billions have been spent in research with no bottom line value add.
Managers are known to cover up lab incidents which by law should be reported as "incidents". I once knew an employee that was exposed to benzene in a ventilation hood under repair. He was sent home without the mandatory checking of his ur--e for trace benzene.
Speaking of proxima there was a contractor that was exposed to a dose of dcpd recently. The hoods were down and some genius trying to get ahead opened a can of dcpd resin. well with no ventilation the dcpd vapor spread out of the hood. Some contractors located several feet away had their personal hydrocarbon monitors go off. They were exposed to dcpd. It gets better because now one of the smart contractors is suing exxon for the exposure. The stupervisor tried to cover it up but was not able to. This is just one of the many f ups that the proxima folks have done. The employee was trying to out do their fellow co workers and broke the rules. Another incident involved an old contractor who was not trained on how handle dcpd. This contractor spilled some dcpd in the lab and stunk it up. Another contractor complained and was sent home. The person who spilled it was fired and the mess was covered up by the supervisor and its minions. There was no mention of the incident or impact report. It is only a matter of time before someone really gets hurt. DCPD is highly flammable and I am waiting for the fire or explosion in the proxima building. Stay away from proxima at all costs.
The One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) restores full expensing for domestic research and development costs starting in 2025, offering taxpayers a welcome reversal of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act’s (TCJA) capitalization requirement. But this flexibility comes with complexity. Taxpayers—especially small businesses—face a series of elections around retroactivity, acceleration, and amortization that require careful modeling and strategic foresight.
Key provisions include:
Immediate expensing of domestic R&D expenses, with the option to capitalize and amortize over 60 months
Acceleration options for previously capitalized, unamortized costs
Retroactive treatment for eligible small businesses, potentially unlocking refunds for 2022–2024—but requiring amended returns and coordination with owners
The ability to continue to amortize capitalized domestic expenditures while allowing the taxpayer to choose a different option for current expenditures
Clarifications to coordinating provisions, including research credit disallowance and AMT adjustments
For businesses investing in innovation, the OBBBA presents a significant tax planning opportunity. But the right path forward depends on variables such as cash flow needs and broader strategic goals. This article breaks down the law’s nuances and outlines the decisions that matter most.
How the OBBBA changes the tax treatment of R&D expenses
The One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) returns the option for full expensing of domestic research and experimental expenditures (research costs) for tax years beginning after Dec. 31, 2024. Taxpayers may also choose to capitalize and amortize those expenditures over a period of at least 60 months. Foreign research costs remain subject to capitalization and amortization over a 15-year period. Importantly, software development expenditures continue to be treated as research costs under the provision.
This return to full expensing comes with options. While the provision is not retroactive, taxpayers can elect to accelerate any domestic research costs that were capitalized but still are unamortized. Taxpayers who make this election would accelerate those costs with their first tax return beginning after Dec. 31, 2024. Any amounts accelerated can be spread over one or two tax years.
On the topic of retroactivity, eligible small business taxpayers can elect to make the law retroactive to tax years beginning after Dec. 31, 2021 (instead of Dec. 31, 2024). This election generally requires an eligible small business taxpayer to amend its 2022, 2023 and 2024 returns and would subject the taxpayer to the fully restored section 280C, which would require taxpayers to haircut their R&D credits on the amended tax returns.
Eligible small business taxpayers also may elect to treat the retroactivity election as a change in method of accounting. Guidance from the Internal Revenue Service is likely necessary for taxpayers to make such elections.
The rules also allow other taxpayers an election to deduct unamortized amounts either in the first taxable year beginning after Dec. 31, 2024, or ratably over a period of two taxable years starting with the first taxable year beginning after Dec. 31, 2024.
The OBBBA instructs the U.S. Department of the Treasury to provide guidance for taxpayers that may have already filed returns for taxable years beginning after Dec. 31, 2024, and ending before July 4, 2025.
Small businesses: Definitions, clarifications and requirements
An eligible small business taxpayer is any taxpayer (other than a tax shelter prohibited from using the cash receipts and disbursements method of accounting) that meets the gross receipts test of section 448(c) for the first taxable year after Dec. 31, 2024.
The gross receipts test is computed by determining the average annual gross receipts over the preceding three taxable years; if the average annual amount is $31 million or less, the taxpayer may be an eligible taxpayer. Other rules apply to determine if a taxpayer is a tax shelter and to determine which entities to include in the average annual gross receipts test.
The retroactive application for small businesses requires an eligible taxpayer to first make an election to treat the law as being effective retroactively, and the OBBBA directs Treasury to issue instructions on how to make such election.
Per the OBBBA, an eligible small business taxpayer must make this election not later than July 4, 2026, and is to file amended returns for each taxable year affected by such election. Also provided is the ability to treat the retroactivity election as a change in method of accounting for the first taxable year affected by the election.
R&D expenses: Immediately deduct, or elect to capitalize and amortize?
Going forward, a taxpayer will have the option either to immediately deduct domestic research costs or to elect to capitalize such costs and amortize them over a period that is not less than 60 months.
Importantly, the OBBBA changes the amortization start date from what was required under the TCJA from 2022–2024. Under the TCJA, the amortization deduction started at the midpoint of the taxable year in which research costs were paid or incurred. Now, under the OBBBA capitalization provision, the start date for amortization of domestic research costs is the month in which the taxpayer first realizes benefits from the expenditures.
OBBBA changes to coordinating provisions
The OBBBA also cleans up some coordinating provisions as follows:
Amended section 280C(c)(1): Requires that a taxpayer reduce any domestic research cost deduction in the amount of the research credit claimed. Importantly, if an eligible small business taxpayer elects to make the expensing of research costs retroactive and amends returns, it must also make retroactive this coordinating provision.
Section 56(b)(2): Addresses AMT (alternative minimum tax) adjustments for individuals by requiring an individual taxpayer to capitalize and amortize over a 10-year period an amount allowable as a deduction for foreign and domestic research costs.
Section 59(e): Allows a taxpayer to elect an optional 10-year write-off for domestic research costs when the taxpayer otherwise fully expenses such costs (i.e., the taxpayer has not elected to capitalize and amortize domestic research costs over a period no shorter than 60 months). Previously, it was unclear whether a taxpayer could elect the optional 10-year write-off for capitalized domestic research costs.
Section 1016(a)(14): Makes clear that the section 174 capital account amortization is an adjustment to the basis of property. Previously, it was not clear whether the capitalized research costs were property. IRS guidance indicated that costs capitalized under the required capitalization era were not property.
What favorable tax treatment of R&D expenses means for businesses
The return to full expensing could be a significant cash tax benefit, especially for companies that invest heavily in innovation. But the OBBBA introduces options—particularly around retroactivity and acceleration—that require thoughtful consideration and modeling.
Small businesses
For eligible small businesses, the decision to amend prior returns could unlock refunds but may also trigger administrative complexity. Each option has potential benefits and drawbacks.
For example, required capitalization caused many to pay more in income taxes during the 2022–2024 taxable years. Amending returns may provide cash refunds but may also require pass-through entity owners to amend their individual returns. This could also require cash distribution analyses for entities. Owners could receive a refund of prior cash tax distributions, and entities will need to determine how they treat those refunds in any future distribution analysis.
In addition, amending returns also requires retroactivity for the coordinating research cost disallowance provision. Many taxpayers did not elect a reduced credit amount in 2022–2024 taxable years due to the ambiguity of how the disallowance applied when capitalizing research costs. Helpfully, an amending small business can elect or revoke an election on the amended returns if they are filed during the one-year period beginning on July 4, 2025.
Larger businesses
A larger business that deducts current domestic R&D expenditures may reduce taxable income in 2025, but it could also affect other provisions, such as the section 163(j) business interest expense limitation. More specifically, because amortized research costs are added back in the adjusted taxable income (ATI) calculation, but fully expensed costs are not, the choice could influence interest deductibility and overall tax posture.
https://rsmus.com/insights/services/business-tax/obbba-tax-research-development.html
The Upstream Research Company had some great work 20 years ago. And it has been a steep decline ever since. The smart ones left for actual technology work elsewhere, the snakes and salesmen are still left justifying year old technology in the name of innovation.
Agree research mist end at Exxon, it just breeds insecure, deceitful employees who carry some heavy baggage and trauma.
Tax deductions for corporate research - of any kind - has been eliminated in the US for several years now.
And we're a commodity company - not technology or science company anymore.
Studying science only gets us in trouble.
After 30 years in EMRE, even I agree. Why am I here.
But it was a good ride and I'm a wealthy elder now.
Lots of our tech are years behind the vendors because our people only talk to other exxon people. The worst part is using our half baked stuff is also slower and more expensive, but we are forced to use it due of internal politics or the "it's how we've always done it" mantra. It is easier to influence vendors to develop things the way we want to use them than to try to do it ourselves from scratch, but this company will never learn that.
Research is the backbone for growth
CMV, methane pyrolysis, Direct air capture, blue hydrogen, plastic recycling all useless and unprofitable. Some employees got a nice promotion and raise for pushing through these useless ideas. Algae was another one what a waste of money and resources. I just laugh at the crazy f ed up ideas exxon tries. All of these are just feel goods to placate the environmentalist and will generate no real money. I truly believe the management at exxon are Rtards and special needs. They were the ones that rode the special little bus to school. You could probably sell them the broken Brooklyn bridge and the great wall of china. They are the ultimate rubes and utterly clueless.
Yes proxima is sheet and useless. It is toxic and not able to be used in lots of countries. The resin and catalyst are not stable. The resin has lot s of impurities that interfere with ROMP reaction. It is not profitable because china's DCPD price is dirt cheap. The C5 process for cyclopentadiene is plagued with catalyst coking and high cost because of platinum cost and reactor erosion issues. I hate proxima and the a holes running it. The people are backstabbers that try to blame other groups who try to help. My group was blamed for incorrect data. We were not given the correct test conditions by the proxima a holes. I will never work with these j ack a sses again. The employees from california are the worst because they are trying to please daddy exxon and will sc--w anyone to get ahead. It is a sinking ship and employees are leaving if they can. If you are offered a proxima position dont do it.
Proxxima!!
Too bad no one outside EM will ever use it for anything.
Watch and see how these proxxima reinforced roads hold up after the assets are sold in a couple years.