As the new CEO of RCK Partners, James Gibson isn’t chasing scale for its own sake. In a sector battling credibility issues, he’s betting on better judgement, fewer shortcuts, and a renewed focus on what clients actually need.
The UK’s R&D tax relief scheme was once a quiet enabler of innovation. For many years, it sat largely outside public view, encouraging businesses to invest in new technologies and ideas, with relatively little oversight.
That has changed.
Following reports of abuse and poorly handled claims, HMRC has tightened its grip. A series of high-profile enquiries and reform announcements have turned up the pressure on advisory firms.
For James Gibson, newly appointed CEO of RCK Partners, this is more than a regulatory correction. It’s an inflection point for the entire industry.
“There were firms operating in ways that couldn’t stand up to scrutiny,” he says. “HMRC’s response wasn’t surprising; it was necessary.”
Gibson joined RCK at its inception in 2020 and became its first employee. Since then, the firm has grown to over 65 people and established itself as a specialist in R&D tax relief and capital allowances. He stepped into the CEO role at the end of 2024, just as the sector’s rules and risks were shifting significantly.
Yet for all the changes, he argues the fundamentals haven’t moved.
“Clients want certainty. They want their claims to be accurate, and they want to avoid issues down the line. The question is whether your processes are built to deliver that before someone asks.”
At RCK, Gibson says the controls were already in place. The firm’s claims are reviewed by a team that includes scientists, engineers, and former HMRC inspectors. That level of internal scrutiny, he adds, should no longer be optional.
“The bar has been raised. You can’t meet it with templated advice.”
Behind the technical work sits a different challenge: trust. For many businesses, particularly those navigating R&D tax for the first time, the complexity of the system is matched only by the inconsistency of the advice they receive.
“There’s still a knowledge gap,” says Gibson. “And that gap isn’t always on the client side.”
He’s critical of advisory models that assume a baseline understanding of tax and compliance from founders, finance teams or commercial leads. In practice, he says, many clients are left unsure whether their activities qualify, how claims are assessed, or what to expect in the event of an enquiry.
“That’s where things fall apart. If clients don’t understand the process, they don’t trust it. And when they don’t trust it, they don’t invest.”
RCK’s approach sees each client assigned a single point of contact and supported throughout the process, from scoping and documentation through to submission and, where relevant, enquiry defence.
“We’re not trying to handle thousands of claims a year. We’re trying to be in the room with companies that are doing real innovation, helping them ask better questions and get reliable answers.”
That focus extends beyond the claim itself. Gibson sees R&D tax relief not just as a funding mechanism, but as a lens into the business. A way of understanding what’s changing in the UK’s innovation economy and where advisory firms can play a more constructive role.
“There’s a temptation to treat it as a formality. But when you do that, you miss what’s actually going on inside these companies. You stop listening.”
If the last five years were about establishing a presence, the next five will be about maintaining relevance. RCK plans to expand internationally, with Ireland the first confirmed destination. But Gibson is careful not to characterise this as a growth-at-all-costs strategy.
“We’re not interested in being everywhere. We’re interested in working where our model makes sense.”
For now, that means staying tightly focused. RCK does not currently offer support around Making Tax Digital, at least not yet.
“It’s not what our clients are asking for. We’ve always grown by listening first. If that changes, we’ll respond.”
Technology, too, is approached with caution. Gibson acknowledges the promise of AI in automating parts of the claims process and improving workflow efficiency. But he resists the suggestion that it can or should replace the advisory function.
“AI can do a lot of heavy lifting. It can help surface patterns, speed up documentation, even flag inconsistencies. But it can’t understand a business. It can’t explain trade-offs, or judge what’s material. That still takes people.”
At a time when the profession is increasingly fixated on automation, he believes there’s an opportunity for firms that remain grounded in judgement.
“Tax advice is not a commodity. If we treat it like one, we’ll see more mistakes, more enquiries, and more damage to the credibility of the whole sector.”
Gibson is not new to this conversation. Before joining RCK, he spent several years in commercial tax roles and has seen how quickly advisory work can shift from high-trust to high-risk when firms lose sight of their clients’ real needs.
Asked what skillset the next generation of tax professionals should prioritise, he doesn’t name a software or qualification. He says curiosity.
“If you’re not interested in what a business does, what it’s building, who it’s selling to, why it’s investing, you won’t give good advice. You might get the numbers right, but the claim won’t reflect reality.”
Communication, he adds, is just as important. Not because clients need hand-holding, but because the most powerful advice is often the clearest.
“We can’t expect clients to understand the structure of the merged R&D scheme, or the implications of a grant on their eligibility, unless we explain it properly. That’s our responsibility.”
As the interview closes, he returns to a phrase he’s used before: staying useful.
“In a sector full of noise, that’s what cuts through. You stay useful. You stay relevant. You earn the right to be in the room.”
For RCK, the next chapter will test that principle against new markets, new pressures, and new client demands. But if the firm holds its line on quality, transparency, and trust, it may find that what’s most useful is also what’s most enduring.
