This Supplementary Order Paper inserts new clause 41C to redress significant tax disadvantages faced by commercial, industrial, retail, and heritage property owners when looking to bring buildings above the earthquake-prone building threshold required by this Bill. Major chartered accountants (like KPMG and others), property owners, and even Local Government New Zealand have been outspoken in their belief that Inland Revenue is inconsistently treating the tax deductibility of business costs by considering seismic works to be a capital expense for tax purposes. As the Property Council of New Zealand noted in its April 2014 submission: “The expenditure required to remedy this will not increase the value of the building, on the basis that earthquake strengthening will not qualitatively change the function of the building (i.e. will generally not result in a higher rental stream)… . In short, expenditure on earthquake strengthening is largely made to mitigate a loss in economic value, not enhance to the value of a building”. Without this consequential amendment, many buildings may be demolished without replacement, creating blight in areas of lower capital value.