Best Answer Click here
This discussion has been locked. No new contributions can be made. You may start a new discussion here
Search https://www.irs.gov/irb/2012-14_IRB for Earthquake and you will see that IRS views this a depreciable.This is last of 6 hits for "earthquake"
Example 11. Betterment; regulatory requirement. X owns a hotel that includes five feet high unreinforced terra cotta and concrete parapets with overhanging cornices around the entire roof perimeter. The parapets and cornices are in good condition. In Year 1, City passes an ordinance setting higher safety standards for parapets and cornices because of the hazardous conditions caused by earthquakes. To comply with the ordinance, X pays an amount to remove the old parapets and cornices and replace them with new ones made of glass fiber reinforced concrete, which makes them lighter and stronger than the original components. They are attached to the hotel using welded connections instead of wire supports, making them more resistant to damage from lateral movement. Under paragraph (e)(2)(ii) of this section, if the amount paid results in a betterment to the building structure or any building system, X must treat the amount as an improvement to the building. The parapets and cornices are part of the building structure as defined in paragraph (e)(2)(ii)(A) of this section. The event necessitating the expenditure was the City ordinance. Prior to the ordinance, the old parapets and cornices were in good condition, but were determined by City to create a potential hazard. After the expenditure, the new parapets and cornices materially increased the structural soundness (that is, the strength) of the hotel structure. X must treat the amount paid to remove and replace the parapets and cornices as an improvement because it results in a betterment to the building structure under paragraph (h)(1)(iii) of this section. Therefore, in accordance with paragraph (e)(2)(ii) of this section, X must treat the amount paid for the betterment to the building structure as an improvement to the hotel building and must capitalize the amount paid under paragraph (d)(1) of this section. City’s requirement that X correct the potential hazard to continue operating the hotel is not relevant in determining whether the amount paid improved the hotel. See paragraph (f)(2) of this section.
Search https://www.irs.gov/irb/2012-14_IRB for Earthquake and you will see that IRS views this a depreciable.This is last of 6 hits for "earthquake"
Example 11. Betterment; regulatory requirement. X owns a hotel that includes five feet high unreinforced terra cotta and concrete parapets with overhanging cornices around the entire roof perimeter. The parapets and cornices are in good condition. In Year 1, City passes an ordinance setting higher safety standards for parapets and cornices because of the hazardous conditions caused by earthquakes. To comply with the ordinance, X pays an amount to remove the old parapets and cornices and replace them with new ones made of glass fiber reinforced concrete, which makes them lighter and stronger than the original components. They are attached to the hotel using welded connections instead of wire supports, making them more resistant to damage from lateral movement. Under paragraph (e)(2)(ii) of this section, if the amount paid results in a betterment to the building structure or any building system, X must treat the amount as an improvement to the building. The parapets and cornices are part of the building structure as defined in paragraph (e)(2)(ii)(A) of this section. The event necessitating the expenditure was the City ordinance. Prior to the ordinance, the old parapets and cornices were in good condition, but were determined by City to create a potential hazard. After the expenditure, the new parapets and cornices materially increased the structural soundness (that is, the strength) of the hotel structure. X must treat the amount paid to remove and replace the parapets and cornices as an improvement because it results in a betterment to the building structure under paragraph (h)(1)(iii) of this section. Therefore, in accordance with paragraph (e)(2)(ii) of this section, X must treat the amount paid for the betterment to the building structure as an improvement to the hotel building and must capitalize the amount paid under paragraph (d)(1) of this section. City’s requirement that X correct the potential hazard to continue operating the hotel is not relevant in determining whether the amount paid improved the hotel. See paragraph (f)(2) of this section.
You have clicked a link to a site outside of the Intuit Accountants Community. By clicking "Continue", you will leave the community and be taken to that site instead.