Bauexperte
2012-01-10 11:26:43
- #1
In three rulings, the BFH clarified that the input tax deduction from the production costs of a shed or roof constructed for this purpose is generally possible.
Often, in connection with the installation of a photovoltaic system, a shed is built as a carrier for the system or the roof of an already existing shed is re-covered. The input tax deduction from the system itself is undisputed. Whether and to what extent the input tax deduction from the production costs of the shed or the new roof is also possible was previously unclear. Now, three pleasing rulings from the BFH are available. They relate to years in which the Seeling model was still applicable. Contrary to the tax authorities, which did not want to grant any input tax deduction for the production costs of sheds or roofs at all, the new rulings at least allow a partial input tax deduction.
Case 1: New carport
A homeowner built a new carport on his property in which he parked his private car. A photovoltaic system was installed on the roof of the carport. He applied for the input tax deduction from the total production costs.
According to the BFH, the entrepreneur was able to assign the partly business, partly private used carport to the business and thus claim the full input tax deduction not only from the production costs of the system but also from the production costs of the carport. He must tax the private share of the parking space. Prerequisite: the entrepreneurial use of the carport must be at least 10%. An area key cannot be applied when checking the ten percent limit. Rather, a turnover key must be determined by comparing the fictitious revenue for renting out the roof space to a third party for operating a photovoltaic system to the fictitious revenue for renting out the carport. (BFH ruling dated 19.7.2011, XI R 21/10, DStR 2011 p. 2148).
Note: From 2011 onwards, in such a case only the proportional input tax deduction from the production costs is possible as in case 2, since the Seeling model with full input tax deduction was abolished by the legislator.
Case 2: New shed
A homeowner built a new shed on his property, on whose roof a photovoltaic system was installed. Otherwise, the shed was not used but stood empty.
According to the BFH, assigning the shed to the business is not possible in this case, as this presupposes partial private use. However, vacancy does not constitute private use. The Seeling model and thus the input tax deduction from the entire production costs of the shed was therefore not applicable. The input tax deduction is only possible according to the entrepreneurial use, which must be at least 10%. The determination of deductible input tax is made according to a turnover key based on fictitious rental income as in case 1 (BFH ruling dated 19.7.2011, XI R 29/09).
Case 3: New roof on old barn
A homeowner had the roof of an old barn re-covered and installed a photovoltaic system on the new roof. The barn itself stood empty.
In this case, the BFH came to the same result as in case 2: input tax deduction only to the extent of the entrepreneurial usage share of the entire barn and allocation of the input tax from the production costs of the new roof according to a turnover key (BFH ruling dated 19.7.2011, XI R 29/10).
Source: 29.12.2011 Editorial Steuertipps
Kind regards
Often, in connection with the installation of a photovoltaic system, a shed is built as a carrier for the system or the roof of an already existing shed is re-covered. The input tax deduction from the system itself is undisputed. Whether and to what extent the input tax deduction from the production costs of the shed or the new roof is also possible was previously unclear. Now, three pleasing rulings from the BFH are available. They relate to years in which the Seeling model was still applicable. Contrary to the tax authorities, which did not want to grant any input tax deduction for the production costs of sheds or roofs at all, the new rulings at least allow a partial input tax deduction.
Case 1: New carport
A homeowner built a new carport on his property in which he parked his private car. A photovoltaic system was installed on the roof of the carport. He applied for the input tax deduction from the total production costs.
According to the BFH, the entrepreneur was able to assign the partly business, partly private used carport to the business and thus claim the full input tax deduction not only from the production costs of the system but also from the production costs of the carport. He must tax the private share of the parking space. Prerequisite: the entrepreneurial use of the carport must be at least 10%. An area key cannot be applied when checking the ten percent limit. Rather, a turnover key must be determined by comparing the fictitious revenue for renting out the roof space to a third party for operating a photovoltaic system to the fictitious revenue for renting out the carport. (BFH ruling dated 19.7.2011, XI R 21/10, DStR 2011 p. 2148).
Note: From 2011 onwards, in such a case only the proportional input tax deduction from the production costs is possible as in case 2, since the Seeling model with full input tax deduction was abolished by the legislator.
Case 2: New shed
A homeowner built a new shed on his property, on whose roof a photovoltaic system was installed. Otherwise, the shed was not used but stood empty.
According to the BFH, assigning the shed to the business is not possible in this case, as this presupposes partial private use. However, vacancy does not constitute private use. The Seeling model and thus the input tax deduction from the entire production costs of the shed was therefore not applicable. The input tax deduction is only possible according to the entrepreneurial use, which must be at least 10%. The determination of deductible input tax is made according to a turnover key based on fictitious rental income as in case 1 (BFH ruling dated 19.7.2011, XI R 29/09).
Case 3: New roof on old barn
A homeowner had the roof of an old barn re-covered and installed a photovoltaic system on the new roof. The barn itself stood empty.
In this case, the BFH came to the same result as in case 2: input tax deduction only to the extent of the entrepreneurial usage share of the entire barn and allocation of the input tax from the production costs of the new roof according to a turnover key (BFH ruling dated 19.7.2011, XI R 29/10).
Source: 29.12.2011 Editorial Steuertipps
Kind regards