A source of concern, a source of income: listed historical buildings! 

While maintenance costs are deductible for a listed historical building, improvement costs are not. Radical renovation of real estate, including maintenance costs, is non-deductible. The Haarlem district recently ruled that the determining factor is what was done in an architectural sense.

 Of relevance to the maintenance deduction is if the building was a source of income for the taxpayer before the work started. According to established case law, a building is no longer a source of income only if all possibilities to use it profitably can be considered to have failed. Only in exceptional situations does no income source exist, for instance, a derelict building, or a building declared uninhabitable. Whether or not the number of sustainable occupancy units changes, is not decisive. The Supreme Court has also ruled that relocation involves total investment costs. This ruling did not, at that time, immediately lead to a reasonable outcome. Would it be not be more practical to consider the source criterion obsolete? Do we not spend too much time elaborating on the way things were always done?

The author casts a critical eye on this topic.

Originial title:  Bron van zorgen, bron van inkomen: het monumentenpand!