A · Team and IP
University ties, employment duties, inventors, code and design ownership. CityU Tech 300 eligibility must be confirmed in writing. Being a CityU P60 applicant is not, by itself, proof.
HK–SZ FUNDING MAP · NOT AN AWARD LIST
Maximise subsidies by splitting work, not adding ceilings
Pass eligibility gates first. Split R&D tasks and costs. Then file by concept, talent, corporate R&D, public trial, market and manufacturing. Awards depend on review and compliance. Published maxima are not PipeGuardian grants.
Hong Kong is the natural home of auditable research evidence: university commercialisation, corporate R&D matching, public-sector trials. Shenzhen / Qianhai amplify results that have already happened in Hong Kong. Shared invoices, hours or deliverables across both sides create claw-back risk larger than the extra dollars.
PSTS-class trials want a real user and acceptance tests — a confined-space reconnaissance mission can be written that way. TSSSU wants university technology relationships and an R&D process. ESS wants matching cash and Hong Kong substance. Qianhai’s 1:1 youth matching presupposes a Hong Kong award. None of those sentences is a claim that we have been funded.
B · Hong Kong R&D substance
Company, BR, people, equipment, contracts, accounts and project control that actually occur in Hong Kong.
C · Shenzhen / Qianhai substance
Office, staff, engineering, tax and youth shareholding/responsible-person tests where required.
D · No double funding
Separate project IDs, tasks, budgets, timesheets, invoices and acceptance. One prototype invoice cannot feed two programmes.
The Chinese funding page carries the live table of public programmes (Tech 300, HKSTP, TSSSU, ESS, RTH-TC, PSTS-TC, BUD, NITTP, Qianhai matching, Shenzhen youth and R&D schemes) with official links. English readers should treat that table as the canonical summary of published ceilings. This page states the operating rules those programmes impose on an evidence-gated robotics project.