Skip to content
×
PRO
Pro Members Get Full Access!
Get off the sidelines and take action in real estate investing with BiggerPockets Pro. Our comprehensive suite of tools and resources minimize mistakes, support informed decisions, and propel you to success.
Advanced networking features
Market and Deal Finder tools
Property analysis calculators
Landlord Command Center
$0
TODAY
$69.00/month when billed monthly.
$32.50/month when billed annually.
7 day free trial. Cancel anytime
Already a Pro Member? Sign in here

Join Over 3 Million Real Estate Investors

Create a free BiggerPockets account to comment, participate, and connect with over 3 million real estate investors.
Use your real name
By signing up, you indicate that you agree to the BiggerPockets Terms & Conditions.
The community here is like my own little personal real estate army that I can depend upon to help me through ANY problems I come across.
Tax, SDIRAs & Cost Segregation
All Forum Categories
Followed Discussions
Followed Categories
Followed People
Followed Locations
Market News & Data
General Info
Real Estate Strategies
Landlording & Rental Properties
Real Estate Professionals
Financial, Tax, & Legal
Real Estate Classifieds
Reviews & Feedback

Updated 10 months ago,

User Stats

3
Posts
3
Votes
Sandy Chau
3
Votes |
3
Posts

Valuating Land at <1% of Purchase Price for Depreciation

Sandy Chau
Posted

Hi everyone,

There are couple of ways to value the price of land in depreciation, such as the 80/20 (20% to land) and Using Property Tax assessor's values, or getting an assessment of recently sold lots in the area.

I was discussing this with one of the CPAs, and he shared that if the cost of building the house is more than the purchase price, then the land is essentially of no value. 

For example: If I bought a house for $200K, and the quote to construct the very same house in the same location is $300K, then the value of improvements should be considerably high ($200K) and the value of the land be considered negligible (closer to 0).

Of course this helps depreciate more improvements in the life of the property, but I would like to hear your thoughts on whether this logic would hold up with IRS in the event of an audit.

What do you think?

Loading replies...