Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Kuopion LO 18.10.1989 538/II AI generated

Tax deduction denied for farm buildings when farming ceased and no current agricultural activity existed.

Case Number Kuopion LO 18.10.1989 538/II
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Administrative Court of Kuopio dismissed the taxpayer's request for a tax deduction regarding farm buildings and machinery. The court found that agricultural activity had ceased, fields were cleared for forestry, and no buildings or equipment were used for farming in the relevant tax year. Consequently, the statutory conditions for granting a deduction were not met, and the request was rejected.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

MaatVL 4 §; MaatVL 8 §; MaatVL 9 §: A tax deduction for farm buildings and machinery is not granted when agricultural activity has ceased and the assets were not utilized for farming purposes in the tax year.

Keywords

AI generated
agricultural tax deduction farm buildings depreciation ceased agricultural activity tax year utilization forestry land clearing income capitalization administrative court ruling

Cited Legislation

AI generated
MaatVL 4 §
MaatVL 8 §
MaatVL 9 §
AI generated
admin_2008_turku__292
Administrative court dismissed tax objection regarding tax-free sale of farm land by former farmer.
admin_1989_hame-county__292
Court dismissed tax equalization claim as farming cessation was not total before asset sale.
admin_2015_eastern-finland__1606
Rental income from land leased to a golf company is taxable as agricultural income if the land constitutes an independent agricultural unit.
admin_1997_vaasa-county__53
Court allows farming deductions when temporary suspension does not end farming activity permanently.
kho-precedent_1998_40
Rental income from land leased by a farmer with a surrender pension is agricultural income, not capital income.

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

Voidaanko maatalousrakennusten ja -koneiden osalta myöntää

poisto, kun maatalouden harjoittaminen on lopetettu ja ainoa

maatalouden tulo on edellisiltä vuosilta jaksotettu karjanmyyntitulo.

Maataloutta ei verovuonna ollut harjoitettu. Tilan pellot

oli metsitetty. Tulona maataloudesta oli ainoastaan edelliseltä

vuodelta jaksotettu karjanmyyntitulo. Rakennuksia ja

koneita ei verovuonna ollut käytetty maataloudessa.

Verolautakunta ei hyväksynyt maatalousrakennuksista ja koneista

vaadittua poistoa.

Lääninoikeus katsoi, että kun maatalouden harjoittaminen

oli lopetettu ja pellot metsitetty eikä rakennuksia ja koneita

ollut verovuonna käytetty maataloudessa, ei poistoa

voitu myöntää.

Verovuosi 1986

Äänestys 2-1

MaatVL 4 §

MaatVL 8 §

MaatVL 9 §