18 Apr 2023 8:05 am
You have once again demonstrated you don't know **** about business. You said, "The truth is the depreciation deduction in the tax code essentially serves to encourage the sale of the fully depreciated property..." - No it doesn't. The purpose of depreciation (be it GAAP or tax depreciation) is to properly allocate cost in a manner that matches the revenue generated from using the asset. That is it...period...full stop. The time period over which an asset is depreciated is an estimate. There are recommendations in GAAP and the IRS has established useful lives...which may or may not agree with each other. For tax purposes, every company I have ever encountered uses the IRS useful lives. However, many businesses use experience to determine if the useful life they assign should deviate from the GAAP recommendations. For example, if a company is replacing an asset the was depreciated over 5 years (per GAAP recommendations) but actually lasted 7 years, they will likely assign a useful life of 7 years to the new asset as the have concrete evidence supporting the deviation.Xavier_Onassis » 17 Apr 2023, 10:27 am » wrote: ↑ The reality is that after the property is fully depreciated it is utterly worthless. And that is a fiction. The lot the property sits on is always worth something unless it is under water, covered by lava from a volcano or some other rare natural phenomena. The truth is the depreciation deduction in the tax code essentially serves to encourage the sale of the fully depreciated property, which at the present time is surely far greaer than its original purchase price.
The subject here is the excessively high price of rental property and houses on the market for sale.
You also seem to be confusing net book value of real property with market value. You really should either educate yourself on this topic or shut the **** up.