Julia Ohayon,calcalist.co.il

The issue of improvement levies in the local authorities is one of the burdens, expensive and controversial among the various players in the real estate industry. These are heavy levies imposed on developers and property owners for the increase of property value, and as a result of approval of city building plans and the regulation of rights therein, the developer is required to pay for the improvement. The localities, for which the improvement levy constitutes a considerable source of income, work to remove high and often excessive assessments, because the lawyers in the field, as well as the real estate appraiser, often believe that the charge is excessive or incorrect, and sometimes to the point of eliminating it altogether.

Praise moles are subject to many parameters, appraisal and legal, which is a short cut here to contain. The common denominator is that everyone is subject to interpretation - legal, planning and appraisal, the result of which often reveals considerable gaps between assessments for the same property. Naturally, and being a significant revenue source, the local authorities are taking a very broad approach to collection options to the maximum. On the other hand, for the developers, a high improvement levy can spell out and eliminate the feasibility of a venture, especially if it is a Tama 38 project.

Read more at the real estate scene:

One of the hardest blows the municipalities suffered in recent years was TAMA 38, which dismisses the praise levy for its rights. At the same time, TAMA-38 entrepreneurial authorities have erected in their territory often trying to find creative ways to charge levies, sometimes without any legal or legal basis. Basically.

Adv. Yanur Bertenthal: "There is almost no mole coming out of a local committee, which cannot be reduced “Photo courtesy: Weinberger Bertenthal

For the veteran players operating in the field, it is clear that the improvement moles are not definitive or permanent but constitute one of the hardest blows that the municipalities have suffered in recent years was the TAMA 38, the dismissal from the HITA praise for its rights. Creativity to charge for improvements, sometimes without any legal basis or appraiser.

The basis for the entrepreneur's demand for changes, sometimes substantial ones. Occasionally, a mole attack by entrepreneurs and property owners will yield dramatic reductions that translate into substantial sums. So which authorities, for example, can achieve the most significant reductions in the improvement levies? Here is the list we prepared with the help of Weinberger Bertenthal Law Firm , which specializes in improvement levies and planning and construction.

Tel Aviv

The approval of the city's district plans has given rise to very high rates of improvement from the municipality. However, a recent Calcalist study found that there were about 70 decisive assessments against the local municipality out of about 150. These rulings paint an encouraging picture: While the average payment requirement issued by the municipality for the improvement levy in District 3 was NIS 267,000 per apartment, the decisive appraisal ruling reduced the amount of the levy to NIS 17,000 - an average reduction of 92%. The situation is similar in the fourth quarter, where the average payment requirement was NIS 305,000, while the crucial appraisal rulings averaged NIS 35.5,000 - a reduction of 89.5%.

In addition to the well-known controversies over the high improvement levies in quarters 3 and 4, there is also another controversy, which also has a significant impact on the level of improvement levies in the entire city, which concerns building easements.

"This is a long-running debate that deals with existing rights that require relief, for example in the building line," says Adv. Revital Applebaum, partner and director of the planning, construction and improvement department at the Weinberger Bertenthal office. "Three years ago, the municipality changed its policy for years and years. Charge a 100% improvement cap for the relief, even when there is no relief due to extra rights, but only allows the exercise of existing rights. Unlike the relief needed to obtain the rights, it is in fact only a removal of a barrier, and sometimes only an improvement in planning, for which it is customary to charge only about 20% of the value of the improvement. "

For example, in the portfolio that her office represented, relief from the building line was required for the construction of improved balconies. "The municipality demanded 100% improvement charges for the relief, even though balconies in the same area could also be erected within the building lines," says Appleboim. "And indeed, the decisive appraiser has set the common factor in improving planning while reducing the levy by 80%." According to Adv. Yanur Bertenthal, one of the founders of the firm: "It is felt that the Tel Aviv municipality has entered into a spinning bill. In our view, it continues to demand inflated surcharges despite the existing decisions, and in the process, in vain leads the developers to legal proceedings. "