Abstract
Several earthquake ordinances have been enacted requiring owners of pre-1934 unreinforced masonry buildings either to upgrade their seismic strength or to demolish them. In this paper some of the factors which an owner must consider, including the relative costs of rehabilitation and reconstruction, are reviewed and specific examination of the after-tax returns for a hypothetical California building is made. It is shown that whereas there may be little direct income benefit gained from upgrading a particular building, tax shelter advantages may well provide sufficient financial inducement to justify a decision to upgrade rather than to demolish.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.