Hi C.J.
Yes, the tax implications is the ususal excuse for tearing down historic structures.
There are two schools of thought on this, however, I'll explain it from my immediate UP vs. MP perspective. The Pre-Mopped UP followed the school that it was cheaper to leave a building standing and find another use for it, or that it was cheaper to pay the taxes on it than to demolish it and rebuild it again if it was needed for another use. The Modern MP school of thought is the "Slash and Burn" school where, if a building is abandoned or perhaps old, you demolish it and lease a mobile building, like a double-wide, and use it to replace the previously demolished building.
I mentioned Art Shoener and his yellow paint can. He stepped off his business train in Laramie, took a look around and said "I don't like this place". Within a month Laramie was no longer a Terminal (no switch engines), two double wides were moved in, the switchman's shack was demolished at Fremont St., and the Freight Depot was condemned. The only thing that he was unsuccessful at was closing the Rail Plant there.
He would put yellow paint on each building that he wanted demolished and B&B would have to follow his orders. Word did get back that he went a bit overboard with his yellow paint and demolished a building that belonged to the BN. The BN found out and made the UP rebuild it, just like before, in brick.
Sometimes saving a couple of pennies has its consequences.
Rick