Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Kuopion LO 4.4.1995 396 AI generated

Renting out a first home before moving in does not bar stamp duty refund if ownership and use conditions are met.

Case Number Kuopion LO 4.4.1995 396
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 appeal regarding a refund of stamp duty paid on a property purchase. The spouses bought the house in 1991, met the criteria for first-home buyers, but rented it out instead of moving in until 1994. The court ruled that the timing of the move was irrelevant because the statutory conditions for the duty exemption were fulfilled at the moment of purchase.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Stamp Duty Act 1991; Stamp Duty Act 1991: Renting out a property purchased as a first home before the owner moves in does not preclude a refund of stamp duty if the exemption conditions were met at the time of acquisition.

Keywords

AI generated
stamp duty refund first home buyer property ownership rental income tax administrative court ruling

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Stamp Duty Act 1991
AI generated
kho-precedent_2000_32
First-time homebuyer stamp duty exemption denied due to delayed occupancy after purchase.
admin_1996_hame-county__8
Finland's Supreme Administrative Court allowed interest deduction for a home loan where the house was sold before occupancy.
admin_2011_helsinki__1365
Continuous residence interrupted by subletting even if tenant retained right to use property.
admin_1988_turku-and-pori-county__834
Gift of vacation home to child with retained life tenancy does not trigger full property income tax.
admin_1988_uusimaa-county__1196
Court dismissed tax claim; ownership deemed to start at contract date, not transfer date, under Finnish tax law.

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

Oliko asunnon vuokralle antaminen esteenä leimaveron palauttamiselle

ensiasunnon ostajalle, kun omaan käyttöön

ottaminen tapahtui vasta yli kolme vuotta myöhemmin.

Puolisot olivat ostaneet 3.4.1991 asuinhuoneiston hallintaan

oikeuttavat osakkeet. Leimaveroa oli suoritettu

390.000 markan kauppahinnasta 6.240 markkaa. Puolisot eivät

kaupan teon jälkeen muuttaneet asumaan ostamaansa asuntoon,

vaan antoivat sen vuokralle. Puolisot olivat asuntoa ostaessaan

täyttäneet ensiasunnon ostajan edellytykset iän ja aikaisemman

omistuksen suhteen. He olivat ryhtyneet käyttämään

asuntoa omana vakituisena asuntonaan 1.6.1994 alkaen ja olivat

hakeneet suorittamaansa leimaveroa takaisin.

Lääninverovirasto oli hakemusesta palauttanut leimaveron,

koska leimaverovapauden edellytykset olivat täyttyneet veron

suorittamisen jälkeen.

Lääninoikeus hylkäsi verotusasiamiehen valituksen asiassa.