VSSome owners may have just received a property tax notice for a swimming pool that they have had for years, but which they have never declared to the tax authorities. Recently, it has in fact been able to flush out basins that have not been reported to it, thanks to a software that uses aerial views from the National Institute of Geographic and Forestry Information (IGN).
This is how, in 2020, Mme X, owner of a swimming pool in Vaucluse since 2017, receives a tax notice of 224 euros. She disputes it, maintaining that the shot of her swimming pool was “illegal”, “abusive”, and that it constituted a “intrusion into [sa] private life “. THE July 6, 2022the administrative court of Nice judges that it is well-founded, the identification of the swimming pool having been « produced from the office, based on different recordings offered by two shooting services () online “.
In general, to contest their taxation, this is another argument used by taxpayers, such as Mr. Y, owner in Marseille: when he is asked to pay 531 euros, he protests that the flushed swimming pool is “an above-ground swimming pool, installed by [son] tenant, who must dismantle it when he leaves”and cannot be subject to property taxation.
Moving without damage
The administration replied that “this semi-buried construction of eight by four meters, embedded in a wooden terrace, the installation of which required an electrical connection and water evacuation as well as, by nature, earthworks », does not seem to have “destined to be moved” and constitutes “a built amenity element”. What the administrative court of Marseille, July 22, 2022. The Council of State has in fact judged, April 13, 2016than a swimming pool “in kit » constituted built property, because“it could not be moved without being demolished or damaged”.
With IGN’s views, it’s impossible to cheat on dates, as Mr. Z learned the hard way. In May 2019, he asked to benefit from the two-year property tax exemption, provided for new constructions, on the grounds that he had just completed those of his house and swimming pool. The administration replied that he was not entitled to this, as he had not submitted this request within ninety days following the actual completion of the work, which it set at 1er July 2018: from September 2017, in fact, a ” aerial photo “ allowed him to see that “the swimming pool was in water, therefore usable”. The administrative court of Nice judges, July 19, 2023that he is not entitled to the exemption provided for by theArticle 1383 of the general tax code.
You have 19.45% of this article left to read. The rest is reserved for subscribers.