first The demolition of a building can be treated for tax completely different
If a not objectively technically or economically spent building collapsed soon after the acquisition, can make the transferee deductions for extraordinary technical or economic condition and deduct the cost of demolition as a business expense in the income from renting and leasing. Prerequisite: The building was acquired without interruption intention. It is well established and in the decisions of the BFH v. 12 6. 1978 - GrS 1 / 77 and v. 3 3. 2009 - IX B 120/08 formulated.
is quite different this situation but assessed for tax purposes when the building was acquired in demolition intention. Then, the remaining prorated value of the broken building and the demolition costs of the production costs of the newly constructed building.
instead immediately 100% rule may be only 2% of the residual value and the demolition costs are tax deductible. But where is the difference?
takes a rule, the Treasury at a demolition within three years after purchasing a termination intention at the time of purchase to. It is the prima facie. This prima facie evidence of the taxpayer may rebut by evidence to the contrary. Then again, the BFH has in its decision dated 13th 4. 2010 - IX R 16/09 point. It is important to demonstrate that it has come to the demolition of the building only because of an unusual, not typical course of events. This would be the case if already given conversion work of the newly acquired building commissioned and initiated. I can as to negate a long-closed imagine lease under which the building is rented in the state in which it was purchased.
It is highly dependent on the representation of the substantiated evidence to the contrary, if you can make 100% or 2% of the cost of demolition and building in the first year for tax purposes. your accountant can assist on this matter. It's worth it.
second Commercial Land trade may be expensive
On 17 3. 2010 The BFH his sentence of 17 12. 2009 - III R 101/06. He made it clear that the personal or financial reasons are not relevant to the sale of property for the assignment to commercial property trading or asset management. lead Although economic constraints, such as pressure of the financing bank and the threat of coercive measures to sell the land, this may constitute a commercial property deals.
Since this predicament now does not occur so rarely, I will briefly address the issue.
speaks settled law of the BFH in principle, by a commercial property deals, if within 5 years, at least four real estate properties are bought and sold (eg, BFH, Order of 10:12 2001 -. GrS 1 / 98). The "real estate agents" then has business income and not from rental and leasing, but much more worse it is for him not to § 23 Income Tax Act. This means that the land for all time remain entangled and not tax can be sold tax-free after the 10-year holding period.
However, the BFH has in its decision to indicate that the conditional sale of intention can be rebutted by objective circumstances of acquisition. The designs of the taxpayer may be in temporal proximity to purchase that significantly complicate subsequent sale or uneconomical to make. This can for example be a long-term rental, would make a sale. for the long-term holding of the property speaks for funding, the premature cancellation of a significant Prepayment penalty would create.
In the case decided, the BFH made it clear that economic forces refute at least not the conditional intention to sell, not because it clear whether the taxpayer would have been prepared even without this need the property for sale and to that extent from the beginning had to at least a conditional intention to sell have.
third absence of a defined benefit pension as a constructive contribution
There
Currently, not a few members who are thinking about whether they agree with respect to their society to a pension entitlement.
The reasons are varied. For example, under the new rules of the Commercial Code to assess pension liabilities in the balance of trade with another interest rate than under tax rules. The current rates are well below 6%. Inevitably this leads to an increase in pension provision in the trade balance. This in turn reduces the equity. Even if there is a transition rule for the adaptation of the new balance of trade value There, the increase is not readily cope with for any business.
The OFD Karlsruhe has with its decision of 17.09.2010 - S 2742 / 107 - 221 St attention to the significant consequences of the waiver of a shareholder-manager of a pension benefit relative to its capital company. Is the present value of projected benefit from the amended pension plan is less than the present value of benefits earned up to the time of change part from the previous pension plan, so goes the managing partner of an asset in the amount of the unimpaired portion of the difference of the Present value as an activity for compensation. This means that the shareholders in accordance with this level wages. § 19 Income Tax Act should be taxed. The possibility to apply this value to the personal income tax, the private assets of the partnership is charged with substantial tax bills, although he declined to make him any benefit plans and funds accrued.
The amount received other hand, leads to subsequent acquisition cost of the shares of the company. He is the subject of a covert partnership of the shareholder. Tax deductible contribution is this concealed until the time of the sale of the shares.
There are solutions that will help avoid taxation at shareholder level, or defer. These solutions, however, are highly complex and adapt to the circumstances of the case.
Talk urgently with your tax advisor before you, for any reason whatsoever without, to a pension entitlement.
0 comments:
Post a Comment