Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
United States Patent and Trademark Office (view source)
Revision as of 15:31, 10 December 2015
, 15:31, 10 December 2015→Fee Diversion
This practice of fee diversion helped other sectors of the federal government cover additional expenses without exceeding appropriation limits. The USPTO reacted to this practice by closely estimating expected revenue and matching this estimate with its annual appropriations proposal for Congress.
The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (OBRA) of 1990[http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/STATUTE-104/pdf/STATUTE-104-Pg1388.pdf] established the USPTO as a fully fee funded organization. The passage of this act, designed to cut the budget deficit, meant that Congress would not appropriate additional sources of funding for the USPTO. Instead, the office would have to remain afloat through only the fees it collects through processing patent and trademark applications. During the eight years of OBRA, an estimated $234 million in fee payments were collected by the USPTO in excess of the budget authority for the office.[https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS20906.pdf] The excess funds were not placed in a reserve fund, and instead were appropriated to non-USPTO related activities. A Congressional Research Service report has estimated $1.009 billion diverted or made unavailable to the USPTO from FY1990 to FY2011.[https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS20906.pdf]
The Leahy-Smith Act America Invents Act created a USPTO reserve fund to hold excess fees collected in a given fiscal year. Although the reserve fund balance may only be appropriated to USPTO activities, the director of the USPTO must still petition Congress to use these funds in its annual budget request.
