Even if the spouse of the professional co-owner or cohabitant bears the restructuring costs, the works that provide for the facilitation of the Superbonus carried out in a residential real estate unit also used for the exercise of the professional activity, the deduction due is reduced to 50 percent. As reported The sun 24 hours, this rule is also extended to the Sismabonus, by virtue of the fact that the basic principles are the same as the restructuring bonus, while the analogy is used to apply it also to theEcobonus and 110% subsidized interventions.
This is justified by the aim of avoiding arbitrage between spouses. The Revenue Agency, on the other hand, does not clarify the possibility of the professional to deduct 50% of the expenses from his / her self-employment income as costs incurred on a mixed property pursuant to Article 54, paragraph 3, Tuir. But on this point there are no doubts, as indeed for the properties promiscuously used in the use of the company, as a result of article 64, paragraph 2, TUIR. Referring to circular number 20 / E / 2011 (point 3.4), on Ecobonus works the deductibility of costs, in compliance with the rules of the accounting regime adopted, must be limited, while the deduction should have remained full. The deduction referred to in article 54, paragraph 3, Tuir is allowed on condition that the taxpayer does not have, in the same municipality, another property used exclusively for the exercise of the art or profession.
The limitation of the deduction to 50% for properties used promiscuously applies both in the case of an activity carried out habitually, as well as in that exercised occasionally. A specific example are many bed & breakfast. The reflection that is made concerns a specific point: if the activity is carried out occasionally (in the absence of a VAT number) why differentiate these properties from those in which you live and, occasionally, you rent or loan a room to third parties? Or in which short leases are made? Putting on the same level who has a VAT number and who is (legitimately) without VAT, and differentiating the latter from the “private” taxpayer creates a lot of controversy.