Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Oulun LO 17.12.1986 1189/I AI generated

Deductible expenses for vocational training in a new role are not deductible under Finnish tax law.

Case Number Oulun LO 17.12.1986 1189/I
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Administrative Court dismissed the taxpayer's claim to deduct study expenses incurred while transitioning from a bank clerk to a marketing role. The court found that although the taxpayer lacked prior professional education, the study was deemed basic training for the new position rather than a means to earn or retain income. Consequently, the expenses were ruled non-deductible under the relevant tax provisions.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

TVL 25 § 1 mom; TVL 27 §: Expenses for vocational training are deductible only if they are intended to earn or retain income, excluding basic training for a new role.

Keywords

AI generated
tax deduction expenses vocational training study new job position basic training exclusion income retention rule

Cited Legislation

AI generated
TVL 25 § 1 mom
TVL 27 §

Cited Case Law

AI generated
OLO T:1184/I, A:17.12.1986
OLO T:1184/I, A:17.12.1986
AI generated
admin_1986_oulu-county__1184
Tax court allows deduction for marketing secretary training costs as professional skill maintenance.
admin_1986_oulu-county__1106
Tax court allows deduction for monthly weekend travel costs incurred by a student during work training.
admin_1989_turku-and-pori-county__42
Administrative court denied tax deduction for Dale Carnegie course fees as professional development costs.
admin_1986_oulu-county__1188
Tax court denies deduction for business school fees as they are considered general education, not income-generating training.
admin_1987_oulu-county__555
Tax court allows deduction for teacher's salary expenses for purchasing a specific Finnish cookbook series.

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

Verovelvollinen, joka oli työskennellyt vuodesta 1960 alkaen

pankkitoimihenkilönä, mutta jolla ei ollut aikaisempaa ammatillista

koulutusta, oli aloittanut 5.9.1984 markkinointisihteerin

tutkintoon tähdänneen opiskelun Markkinointi-instituutissa.

Opiskelun syynä oli ollut työn luonteen muuttuminen

alkuvuodesta 1985, jolloin työtehtävät olivat suuntautuneet

markkinointiin ja verovelvollisesta oli tullut pankin yrityssektorin

yhteyshenkilö. Siihen nähden, että verovelvollisella

ei ollut aikaisempaa ammatillista koulutusta työhönsä ja

että hänen asemansa työnantajan palveluksessa oli muuttunut

opiskelun johdosta, opiskelua pidettiin peruskoulutuksena

uuteen tehtävään. Opiskelukustannukset eivät olleet tulon

hankkimisesta tai säilyttämisestä johtuneita, verotuksessa

vähennyskelpoisia menoja. Verovuosi 1984. Täysistunto.

TVL 25 § 1 mom

TVL 27 §

Vrt. OLO T:1184/I, A:17.12.1986