In the sale of so-called scrap-adoption homes are liable to tax, depreciation and amortization are also in depreciation be recognized
Owners of so-called scrap-homes who have negotiated with the financing bank debt relief must pay taxes on the adoption amount in the property sale of cheap objects even if the adoption of agreed time with the bank prior to the year of sale and effectively was. This was decided the Hessian court.
Advertising
The local dispute the plaintiff in 1997 had bought a condo for 100,000, - €. For the full purchase price he had financed by loan. The seller should renovate the apartment even before the handover, which was not, as the seller was insolvent. Due to the continued existing deficiencies, the applicant could not rent the apartment and not pay the loan installments. So he closed with the Bank financed in 2002 a reversal of arrangement whereby the Bank to the plaintiff an amount of 50.000, - € adopted and financed condominium could recover their money. In 2004, the plaintiff sold the condo for 6.000, - €, which were to be transferred to the bank. Tax is where debt cancellation as properties for sale are profitable.
The applicant made in the 2004 income tax return from the sale of a home loss claims of 22,000, - €. The Tax Office calculated against a capital gain of 32.000, - €, and it - in contrast to the plaintiff - in addition to the previously claimed depreciation amounts also in 2002 agreed debt of 50,000, - € tax-positioning on a sale.
It wanted the applicant does not accept, because in his view had to separate the credit and the sale transaction. The debt of 50.000, - € in 2002 was tax in 2004 to no longer collect.
Suction. Inflow principle is not constitutional reasons
The Kassel judges judged, that does not apply to the taxation of private properties sales of the so-called flow principle, whereby revenues are recognized only in the calendar year of the inflow, the systematic and constitutional grounds. The capital gain of 2004 should contain, in addition to the recent depreciation, the economic benefits of debt relief from 2002. The plaintiff had acquired the debt only because he had given the bank in return for the right to dispose as owner of the condominium. The home buyer in 2004 was also a subsidiary company of the Bank have been adopted, which was just for the purpose of unwinding of failed real estate transactions and loan agreements have been established.
