I heard a story about land to be inherited from an individual. This site is connected to an arterial road in the suburbs of the region, and the ground surface is a little more than 1 m lower than that arterial road. There is no way to get in or out from the main road, and they are entering and leaving from the farm road on the back side.
“Residential land where usage value has declined significantly” is ① residential land at a position higher or lower than the road with a significant difference in elevation compared to residential land nearby ② residential land with severe irregularities on the ground ③ residential land with severe vibration ④① to ③ and recognized as being affected by the transaction amount due to noise, sunlight obstruction, odor, disgust, etc. If any of ① to ④ is recognized, a 10% reduction in evaluation can be received.
That person thought it really fell under ①, and it seems that they consulted with the tax office beforehand. The tax office answered that although the decline in usage value was acknowledged due to the situation in the area, it was difficult to say that the degree was “significant,” and unfortunately the 10% reduction in evaluation was postponed. However, anything objective about whether it is “remarkable” or not remarkable is difficult to understand.
Suburban roadside service stores have opened stores on land where it is possible to enter and leave the main road in contact with this area at the same height, and it is thought that route prices are attached as land with potential to be used by such commercial stores. If so, if the same front route price as the land that can be entered and left at the same height as the road in question is adopted for evaluation, wouldn't it be a grossly unfair evaluation? As for the land in question, it seems that an amount equivalent to the cost of building it to at least the same height as the road can be depreciated.
According to Section 22 (principle of evaluation) of the Inheritance Tax Act, the value of property acquired by inheritance (excluding those specified separately) depends on “the market value at the time of acquisition of the property,” and the criteria for evaluating the market value referred to here are stipulated in the Basic Property Evaluation Notice. When the market value falls below the valuation value calculated in accordance with this notification, the market value should be recognized as the valuation value on the inheritance tax return, and real estate appraisal will be used as one evidence of reasonable market value here.
Since route prices in the same notification are conservatively kept lower than market prices, and whether or not real estate appraisals can be utilized depends on individual cases, but I think that showing evaluations with numerical values called real estate appraisal values will also lead to the provision of objective judgment materials on whether the degree of decline in usage value is “significant.” It is possible to see the possibility that real estate appraisals can be utilized even in such cases.
