Area: Okolje in prostor
Competent authority: MF
EZU URL: .nan
Initiative ID: 190
Initiative accepted and completed: '2013-11-05'
Initiative classified in EZU: .nan
Initiative forwarded in response: '2013-08-22'
Initiative published: '2013-08-22'
Initiative submitted: '2013-08-14'
Response from the competent authority: 'Reply from the Ministry of Finance: We have
  received initiatives concerning the taxation of the functional land of multi-apartment
  buildings for which ownership is not regulated. The problem arises from the non-implementation
  or obstruction of the implementation of the provisions of the building regulations
  which allow for the determination of the functional land or building plot for multi-apartment
  buildings on the basis of the construction documentation from the time of construction
  of these buildings. As a non-ministerial competent authority, we will not go into
  the reasons for the lack of regulation of these plots. We can, however, provide
  clarifications on your suggestions in the light of the draft Law on Property Tax.
  The proposals propose to define, for tax purposes, as land belonging to multi-apartment
  buildings on adjacent land, for which the co-ownership of the owners has not yet
  been established, and to apply a higher tax rate of 1.5% to such land. If we understand
  the proposal correctly, the higher tax rate is to be applied to unregulated building
  plots, thus encouraging regularisation.The Civil Code defines immovable property
  as land with its appurtenances, except in the case of freehold ownership, which
  is defined as the ownership of an individual part of a building and the co-ownership
  of the common parts. In the case of a known owner of the land on which a building
  stands, other than the owner in fee simple, it can be assumed that the owner of
  the land is also the owner of the building. However, in the case of freehold ownership,
  without identifying the common part (which may be the common part of the building,
  but may also be the land under the building and part of the adjoining land (the
  functional land or building plot)), the presumption that such land is owned by the
  owners of the freehold cannot be made. Therefore, in order to regulate the common
  land, it is necessary to carry out procedures for the definition of the building
  plot, which cannot be regulated by tax legislation. As regards the proposal, we
  consider that it is not feasible. However, the tax on such land, even if it is used
  by the owners of the land, will be paid by the landowner, and will amount to only
  0,5 % of the generalised market value of the land according to its intended use.
  This is most often the municipality, but can also be a legal entity, the successor
  to the construction company that built the building. We believe that the very fact
  that the tax will be paid by the owner should encourage the process of regulating
  building plots. In the system of compensation for the use of building land, which
  is replaced by property taxes, such land has often not been subject to the levy.
  It is also proposed that the higher tax rate of 1,5 % also be applied to land already
  designated as adjacent land, namely for the part of the area exceeding that specified
  in the conditions laid down in the zoning acts in force at the time of the construction
  of the multi-apartment building. We understand that, in order to promote the rational
  use of space, you wish to increase the tax rate for a certain part of the area in
  excess. The draft law on property tax does not directly provide for such a solution.
  It is, however, implicit in the system itself for determining the generalised market
  value of such land. The Regulation on the establishment of models for the valuation
  of immovable property (Official Gazette of the RS, No 95/11) provides that the area
  of the land attached to a building is to be considered as twice the area of the
  land under the building (fundus). This is not valued, as its value is included in
  the value of the dwellings. The remaining land on this plot is valued as land for
  the construction of buildings, but if the land is not assigned such a use, it is
  valued according to its actual use, which in urban settlements is usually no longer
  agricultural but usually other building land. The larger the area of the remaining
  land, the larger the tax base and, of course, the higher the tax burden. There is
  also a proposal to heavily tax areas that would have the status of a built public
  good but do not yet have it, in order to regulate this status. With regard to this
  initiative, we would point out that the unregulated status of the built public good
  is linked to unregulated ownership and that such properties may be located on land
  owned by individuals, natural or legal persons, who cannot dispose of such a piece
  of land because it is occupied by public infrastructure.  We do not consider it
  appropriate to shift the burden of the tax on such areas to the innocent owners.
  Therefore, the draft Law on Real Estate Tax provides that the parts of the parcels
  under undirected public infrastructure, which should have a regulated status of
  public good, shall be excluded from the area of the rest of the parcel for the purposes
  of the tax assessment. Of course, this part of the parcel is also not taxed, as
  the Bill provides that immovable property which is a public good is exempt from
  tax.'
Text file: 190.txt
Title: ' Comments on the proposal to tax land attached to buildings'
URL: https://www.stopbirokraciji.gov.si/pobuda/?st=190
