Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Mikkelin LO 7.10.1986 831 AI generated

Administrative court allows mortgage interest deduction post-divorce when property division is pending.

Case Number Mikkelin LO 7.10.1986 831
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Administrative Court of the Finnish District of Mikkeli allowed the taxpayer to deduct mortgage interest incurred for a family home after divorce, despite the tax board's rejection. The tax board had deemed the taxpayer and ex-spouse a single entity because the property division had not yet been finalized. The court ruled that the right to deduct interest as a special expense persists until the property division is completed, thereby validating the deduction for the 1984 tax year.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Lain 2 § 1 mom; The right to deduct mortgage interest for a family home remains valid for the tax year following divorce even if the property division has not yet been finalized, provided the property was used as the taxpayer's own residence.

Keywords

AI generated
mortgage interest deduction divorce property division family home residence tax special expense administrative court ruling

Cited Legislation

AI generated
L 2 § 1 mom
AI generated
admin_1986_vaasa-county__3751
Spousal joint property purchase requires separate auction request only if ownership share is unclear.
kho-precedent_2017_183
Supreme Administrative Court allows refund of penalty interest when underlying transfer tax is void due to failed property transfer.
kho-precedent_2015_33
Interest on a loan is taxable income in the year it accrues, not when paid, if the lender has control over it.
admin_1988_mikkeli-county__820
Taxpayer allowed to claim asset income deduction on rental income from individual units in a property complex.
admin_1991_kuopio-county__276
Company denied deduction for greenhouse costs after tax authority increased prior year deduction.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

Yhdessä puolison kanssa omistettuun omakotitaloon kohdistuvien

ja valittajan maksamien lainan korkojen vähentäminen

avioeron jälkeen.

Avioero oli lainvoimainen, mutta ositusta ei ollut toimitettu.

Laina oli aikanaan otettu omana asuntona käytetyn omakotitalon

rakentamista varten. Valittaja oli 17.1.1984

muuttanut pois omakotitalosta.

Verolautakunta ei hyväksynyt lainan korkoja vähennykseksi valittajan

verotuksessa, vaan katsoi valittajan ja hänen entisen

puolisonsa muodostaneen yhtymän. Verolautakunta piti

korkoja näin muodostetun kiinteistöyhtymän vähennyskelpoisina

korkomenoina.

Lääninoikeus katsoi, että valittajalla on oikeus vähentää

omakotitalon rakentamisesta aiheutuneet velkojen korot

velkojen korkojen vähennysoikeuden rajoittamisesta verotuksessa

annetun lain mukaisina muina korkoina. Verovuosi 1984.

L velkojen korkojen vähennysoikeuden rajoittamisesta verotuksessa

2 § 1 mom