Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Lapin LO 10.2.1993 151 AI generated

Administrative court allows tax deduction for work travel costs even without employer-provided lodging.

Case Number Lapin LO 10.2.1993 151
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 Finland allowed a taxpayer to deduct travel expenses between their workplace and home, despite lacking employer-provided lodging. The taxpayer argued that frequent commuting between the work site and home incurred necessary costs, while the opposing party contended that the absence of employer housing should negate the deduction. The court ruled that the statutory requirement for lodging was not a prerequisite for claiming travel expense deductions under the Income Tax Act.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

TVL 83 § 1 mom; TVL 83 § 2 mom: The absence of employer-provided lodging does not preclude a taxpayer from deducting travel expenses incurred between their place of work and residence.

Keywords

AI generated
income tax deduction travel expenses employer provided lodging commuting costs administrative court ruling

Cited Legislation

AI generated
TVL 83 § 1 mom
TVL 83 § 2 mom
AI generated
admin_1987_uusimaa-county__1665
Court ruled daily commutes for special field workers are home-to-work trips, not income-generating travel under TVL 25.1.
kho-precedent_1998_72
Supreme Administrative Court allows tax deduction for cross-border travel costs between work and family home.
labour_1970_12
Labor court allows travel cost reimbursement for summer residents over 5km from site despite no permanent residence entitlement.
admin_1998_uusimaa-county__648
Administrative court quashes decision denying transport for disabled worker commuting within same building.
admin_2000_hameenlinna__189
Permanent employee commuting to employer-owned buildings must deduct costs as home-to-work travel, not special work trips.

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, jolla oli ollut yhdessä perheensä kanssa vakituinen

asunto kaupungissa A, oli hankkinut työviikkoja varten

asunnon myös kunnasta B, joka oli lähempänä hänen työmaitaan

kuin kaupunki A. Verovelvolliselle B:n kunnan ja työmaan

välillä 5-16 kertaa kuukaudessa matkustamisesta aiheutuneet

kustannukset oli verotuksessa vähennettävä hänen tulostaan,

vaikka hän oli saanut verotuksessa vähentää myös työmaan ja

A:n kaupungin välillä viikonloppuisin matkustamisesta aiheutuneet

kustannukset. Sillä seikalla, ettei verovelvollinen

ollut käyttänyt hyväkseen työnantajansa järjestämää työmaamajoitusta,

ei ollut asiassa merkitystä.

Verovuosi 1989. Äänestys 2-1.

TVL 83 § 1 mom

TVL 83 § 2 mom