Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Vaasan LO 8.8.1990 1341 AI generated

Tax deduction for child support denied because recipient was over 16 at year start.

Case Number Vaasan LO 8.8.1990 1341
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 for a child support deduction based on 1986 tax year income. The taxpayer had paid child support to a minor who turned 16 before the tax year began, arguing for a deduction under the Income Tax Act. The court ruled that such deductions are strictly limited to support paid to minors, rendering the claim inadmissible.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

TVL 3 § 1 mom; TVL 36 § 3 mom; TVL 57 § 3 mom: Deductions for child support are only permissible when the recipient is a minor at the time of payment.

Keywords

AI generated
income tax deduction child support payment minor status requirement tax year timing administrative court ruling

Cited Legislation

AI generated
TVL 3 § 1 mom
TVL 36 § 3 mom
TVL 57 § 3 mom
AI generated
insurance_2022_276-2022
Insurance court dismissed appeal; child support obligation starts from claim filing date when court order lacks specific start date.
admin_1989_hame-county__652
Tax court dismissed deduction claim for child support paid under prior settlement agreement.
kko-precedent_1991_27
Supreme Court voids child support for period child lived with father due to custody change.
appeal_1980_eastern-finland__216
Court reduces child support from 500 to 400 marks while maintaining custody arrangement.
appeal_1984_eastern-finland__1825
Alimony claim dismissed because child could self-support during military service without state reimbursement for living costs.

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

A suoritti verovuonna lapsen elatusta koskevan lainsäädännön

mukaisella tuomiolla vahvistettua elatusapua, jonka maksamisen

A oli aikanaan laiminlyönyt. Elatusapuun oikeutettu B

oli ennen verovuoden alkua täyttänyt 16 vuotta. A:lla ei

ollut oikeutta kunnallisverotuksessa tulosta tehtävään elatusvelvollisuusvähennykseen

eikä valtiolle suoritettavasta

tuloverosta tuolla perusteella tehtävään vähennykseen, koska

nuo vähennykset voidaan tehdä vain alaikäiselle lapselle

suoritetun elatusavun perusteella. Verovuosi 1986.

TVL 3 § 1 mom

TVL 36 § 3 mom

TVL 57 § 3 mom