Doing 1/2 the roof (instead of all)- is it really considered to be a necessary 'repair' for write off expenses

Hello,
My insurance company requires that I install new shingles on a roof of an investment property. I have the option to do the entire roof or only half the roof as the other half is in a better condition. I was told that it is better to do 1/2 of the roof at a time as it is then considered to be a necessary 'repair' (for write off expenses), as opposed to a capital improvement, which is not necessarily considered a repair expense.
Is this true? is there really an advantage of this kind to doing half the roof??
THANKS.

The CRA has interpreation bulletin on this topic.http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/E/pub/tp/it128r...

In my view, the payment for the 1/2 roof is a capital expenditure, and not repair expense, because of the significant amount and more importantly because the life of a roof (1/2 or whole) can be 20 yrs. In general, an expense is something you spend periodically (e.g., yearly) to maintain the roof in its working condition. However, your new 1/2 roof would probably last over 20 yrs (based on its warranty), and that is a capital expenditure (asset) of your insurance company.

You might as well do the whole roof, as it could be cheaper to do the whole thing, but regardless, the new roof (1/2 or whole) is a capital expenditure, and u can only claim CCA against your business income.

Doing half a job is NEVER better than doing the whole things. Never do something badly just because of tax considerations.

In any event, I suspect CRA would consider half a roof job to be a capital expense, because the roof will have a long term life, which is one of the criteria. Replacing a few damaged shingles? That would be a repair. Replacing a large part (1/2) of the roof? That would likely be deemed a capital expense.

Save some hassle (and problem later whe the other half of the roof fails), and do the whole job. One whole roof is going to cost less than two half jobs, anyway.