Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Uudenmaan LO 15.4.1997 212/4 AI generated

VAT deduction for planning services not allowed when plans remain unused and not resold or used.

Case Number Uudenmaan LO 15.4.1997 212/4
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 foundation's appeal regarding VAT deductions for planning services. The foundation had claimed deductions based on purchases made for business purposes but failed to utilize the plans further. The court ruled that costs from unfulfilled plans cannot be deducted under VAT Law sections 22 and 31 if the plans were neither resold nor used for business.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Arvonlisäverolain 22 §; Arvonlisäverolain 31 §: Costs for planning services are deductible only if the plans are resold or used for business; unfulfilled plans do not justify a deduction.

Keywords

AI generated
VAT deduction planning services unused plans business purpose VAT Law sections administrative appeal tax liability

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Arvonlisäverolain 22 §
omaan käyttöön arvonlisäverolain 22 §:n 1 momentissa tai
Arvonlisäverolain 31 §
Arvonlisäverolain 102 §

Cited Case Law

AI generated
KHO:n päätös A:20.3.1998 T:493
KHO:n päätös A:20.3.1998 T:493 : Ei muutoksenhakulupaa
AI generated
admin_1987_uusimaa-county__199
Investment tax credit must be added to income and deducted from assessed tax for discretionary tax review.
kho-precedent_1999_35
Court dismissed VAT deduction for project management costs as no business activity was performed under VAT Act.
kho-precedent_2001_63
Finnish Supreme Administrative Court ruled MBA costs are business expenses, not salary, exempting employer from advance tax withholding.
kho-precedent_2001_14
VAT refund claim dismissed as claimant failed to prove goods were used for taxable purposes.
ECLI:FI:KHO:2018:142
VAT deduction allowed for TV production house construction but requires adjustment if final use differs.

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

Säätiö sai vähentää hankkimiensa suunnittelupalvelujen ostohintoihin

sisältyvän arvonlisäveron, kun hankinta tapahtui

liiketoimintaan, josta se oli verovelvollinen joko

myynnin verollisuutta koskevien yleisten säännösten tai rakentamispalvelun

omaa käyttöä koskevien säännösten perusteella.

Toteutumattomista suunnitelmista aiheutuneita kustannuksia,

joista verovelvollinen oli tehnyt mainitun vähennyksen,

ei ollut luettava suoritettavan veron perusteeseen,

kun suunnitelmaa ei ollut myyty edelleen eikä otettu

omaan käyttöön arvonlisäverolain 22 §:n 1 momentissa tai

31 §:n 1 momentissa tarkoitetuin tavoin.

ArvonlisäveroL 22 §

ArvonlisäveroL 31 §

ArvonlisäveroL 102 §

KHO:n päätös A:20.3.1998 T:493 : Ei muutoksenhakulupaa