imputing the rental value of the apartment. We AFFIRM on the issues of the depreciation deduction and the exclusion of interest income from Deborah’s income. 1 . The superior court stated that, Joe’s income calculation must include imputed rent for the value of the apartment occupied by Joe. Since the triplex was valued based on the stream of income from all units in the building, thi or straightline depreciation of the parent’s business real estate as an ordinary and necessary business expense; rejecting argument that Civil Rule 90.3 cmt. III.B categorically disallowed all depreciation of real estate); see also Ogard, 808 P.2dat819 (allowing a deduction for straightline depreciation of business equipment). 4 . See, e.g., Lawrence v. Tise, 107 N.C.App. 140, 419 S.E.2d 176, 181 (1992) (<HOLDING>). See generally Frank J. Wozniak, Annotation,
holding that the trial court had discretion to deduct from a parents monthly gross income the amount of straightline depreciation allowed by the internal revenue code 26 usc  167 168 1990 fora reasonable allowance for the exhaustion and wear and tear of certain property over its useful life holding that the statement of current monthly income was the presumptive amount of projected disposable income but presumption could be rebutted by the debt or upon a showing of substantial change of circumstances holding that the debtor lacked standing to bring a claim against the internal revenue service for the improper assessment of a tax deficiency because the cause of action was the property of the estate and had not been abandoned to the debtor holding that a courts power to allocate tax exemptions between parents must be exercised in accord with the internal revenue code holding that the segregation of funds was not a prerequisite to the establishment of a statutory trust under the internal revenue code