Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Lapin LO 26.2.1993 231 AI generated

Court ruled software development fees are commercial income, not taxable advance payment compensation under Finnish law.

Case Number Lapin LO 26.2.1993 231
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 Lapland overturned the tax authority's decision regarding a software development fee paid to a licensed engineer. The tax authority argued the fee constituted compensation under the Advance Payment Act because the recipient did not use the corresponding business name. The court determined the payment was merely commercial income from a service contract rather than the specific statutory compensation defined in the Advance Payment Act.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

EnnakkoperintäL 6 § 1 mom 2 kohta; The court established that fees for specialized software development services constitute commercial income and do not qualify as the specific compensation type requiring advance payment withholding under the Advance Payment Act.

Keywords

AI generated
Advance Payment Act commercial income software development tax withholding licensed engineer service contract business name

Cited Legislation

AI generated
EnnakkoperintäL 6 § 1 mom 2 kohta
EnnakkoperintäL 6 § 1 mom 2 kohta
AI generated
admin_1991_oulu-county__776
Court dismissed stamp duty refund claim as share transfer constituted taxable instrument under stamp duty act.
admin_1997_vaasa-county__70
Inheritance and Gift Tax Act allows deducting hidden tax debt from asset value but not inheritance tax relief.
admin_1987_uusimaa-county__595
Administrative court dismissed liability marking for social security payments as it applies only to tax advance payments.
admin_1990_kuopio-county__96
Court held share transfer tax not due as shares were not defined under tax law.
admin_1987_uusimaa-county__127
Court allows tax deduction for boat usage benefit as salary, not hidden dividend, rejecting advance ruling request.

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

Diplomi-insinööri oli asentanut rakennesuunnitteluun ja rakennusalan

lujuuslaskelmiin erikoistuneen yhtiön tietokoneeseen

kehittämänsä yleisesti myynnissä olevan ja insinööritoimistojen

yleisesti rakenteiden lujuuslaskelmien tekemiseen

käyttämän atk-ohjelmiston. Lääninverovirasto katsoi, että yhtiön

diplomi-insinöörille ohjelmistosta suorittamaa korvausta

oli pidettävä ennakkoperintälain 6 §:n 1 momentin 2 kohdassa

tarkoitettuna korvauksena, josta olisi tullut toimittaa

ennakonpidätys, koska suorituksen saaja ei käyttänyt siinä

toiminnassa, jota suoritus koski, kaupparekisteriin merkittyä

toiminimeä. Lääninoikeus katsoi, että puheena oleva korvaus

oli diplomi-insinöörin saamaa kauppahintaa eikä sanotussa

lainkohdassa tarkoitettua korvausta ja kumosi

lääninveroviraston päätöksen ja poisti maksuunpanon.

EnnakkoperintäL 6 § 1 mom 2 kohta