26 U.S.C. § 280B — Demolition of structures

submitted 50 years ago by Pub. L. 94-455 to r/title-26-INTERNAL-REVENUE-CODE · 74 words · no verdicts yet

in plain englishAI-generated · not legal advice

When a building or other structure is torn down, the owner or renter cannot deduct the demolition costs or any resulting loss. Instead, those costs must be added to the tax basis of the land where the structure stood.

When any structure is demolished: (1) The owner or renter cannot deduct the cost of tearing it down, and cannot deduct any loss from the demolition. (2) Those costs must instead be added to the "capital account" for the land the structure was on — meaning they get treated as part of the cost of the land itself, not as a current deduction.

the actual law source: uscode.house.gov ↗public domain

In the case of the demolition of any structure—

(1)

no deduction otherwise allowable under this chapter shall be allowed to the owner or lessee of such structure for—

(A)

any amount expended for such demolition, or

(B)

any loss sustained on account of such demolition; and

(2)

amounts described in paragraph (1) shall be treated as properly chargeable to capital account with respect to the land on which the demolished structure was located.

Source credit: (Added Pub. L. 94–455, title XXI, § 2124(b)(1), Oct. 4, 1976, 90 Stat. 1918; amended Pub. L. 95–600, title VII, § 701(f)(5), Nov. 6, 1978, 92 Stat. 2902; Pub. L. 96–541, § 2(b), Dec. 17, 1980, 94 Stat. 3204; Pub. L. 97–34, title II, § 212(d)(2)(C), Aug. 13, 1981, 95 Stat. 239; Pub. L. 98–369, div. A, title X, § 1063(a), (b)(1), July 18, 1984, 98 Stat. 1047.)

history & why it existsrecord from the source credit

1976Enacted · Pub. L. 94-455 · 90 Stat. 1918
1978Amended · Pub. L. 95-600 · 92 Stat. 2902
1980Amended · Pub. L. 96-541 · 94 Stat. 3204
1981Amended · Pub. L. 97-34 · 95 Stat. 239
1984Amended · Pub. L. 98-369 · 98 Stat. 1047

A history note hasn’t been published yet. The record shows enactment by Pub. L. 94-455 on 1976-10-04.

all 0 arguments · sorted by: best

no arguments yet — make the first case