Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Uudenmaan LO 22.9.1992 1023/4 AI generated

Tax authority allowed taxation of forest land despite land use restrictions under the Land Act.

Case Number Uudenmaan LO 22.9.1992 1023/4
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Administrative Court allowed the tax authority's decision to tax the respondent's forest land. The land was subject to land use restrictions under the Land Act, but the lower court found these restrictions did not prevent taxation of the pure yield. The court upheld the decision because the statutory limitations on forest use did not exempt the property from tax obligations.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

10 § of the Land Act; 11 § of the Land Act: Restrictions on land use for forest purposes do not exempt the property from taxation of the pure yield.

Keywords

AI generated
land use restrictions forest yield taxation Land Act provisions taxable property status pure yield definition

Cited Legislation

AI generated
10 § of the Land Act
11 § of the Land Act
AI generated
kho-precedent_2001_25
Supreme Administrative Court ruled no transfer tax applies to water usage rights separate from land lease rights.
kko-other_2003_957
Court held that nature change from crown land to tax land does not automatically satisfy lease term requirements.
admin_1990_turku-and-pori-county__20
Court allows tax refund offset when company continues business after partner swap, not a dissolution.
ECLI:FI:KHO:2022:16
Supreme Administrative Court quashes waste tax assessment where no clearly separated storage area existed for a landfill site.
admin_2018_helsinki__556
Sweet tax dismissed as state aid because it was fiscal, not health-based, and lacked direct link to aid.

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 ei ollut saanut kiinteistön saannolleen

maanhankintalupaa, minkä vuoksi kiinteistö oli hänen

omistusaikanaan oikeudesta hankkia maa- ja metsätalousmaata

annetun lain 10 §:n tarkoittamien maankäyttörajoitusten

alainen.

Lääninoikeus katsoi, etteivät puheena olevan lainkohdan

metsän käytölle asettamat rajoitukset olleet esteenä

verovelvollisen verottamiseen kiinteistön metsäalueesta

hänen omistusajaltaan metsän puhtaan tuoton verottamista

koskevien säännösten mukaan.

MaatVL 11 §