Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Turun HAO 11.6.2002 02/0375/3 AI generated

Investment loss deduction denied because transfer agreement lacks necessity for asset control.

Case Number Turun HAO 11.6.2002 02/0375/3
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 taxpayer's claim to deduct investment losses from capital gains. The taxpayer argued that losses incurred due to the fund company's owners diverting funds should be deductible, but the court found the transfer agreement insufficient to prove the necessity of asset control. Consequently, the loss was not treated as a deductible counterpart to the capital gain.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Tuloverolaki 50 § 3 mom 3 kohta; A loss incurred by a taxpayer due to the diversion of funds by the owners of a fund company is not deductible as a counterpart to a capital gain if the transfer agreement does not demonstrate that the control of the assets was a necessary prerequisite for the transfer.

Keywords

AI generated
investment agreement capital gains tax loss deduction asset control necessity taxpayer diversion administrative court Finland tax law

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Tuloverolaki 50 § 3 mom 3 kohta
Tuloverolaki 50 § 3 mom 3 kohta

Cited Case Law

AI generated
KHO:n päätös 7.1.2003 taltionumero 2
KHO:n päätös 7.1.2003 taltionumero 2.
AI generated
ECLI:FI:KHO:2019:94
Court dismisses VAT exemption claim for pension company's property leasing and management services within a tax group.
admin_1994_uusimaa-county__2030
Holding company's currency gain on sale not treated as asset transfer profit for tax purposes.
kko-precedent_1988_44
Shareholder liable for company losses despite capital repayment agreement exempting company from liquidation. Court upholds director's duty to liquidate over private settlement.
kko-precedent_2011_5
Supreme Court dismisses appeal; prior personal disclosures of investment risk satisfied insurer's duty of disclosure.
kko-precedent_1988_137
Shareholder bound by knowledge of defects cannot claim contract termination for company.

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

A oli tehnyt varainhoitoyhtiön kanssa sijoitussopimuksen (Investment agreement), jonka mukaisesti hän oli luovuttanut yhtiölle varoja käytettäväksi hänen lukuunsa tehtävissä arvopaperikaupoissa. A vaati omaisuuden luovutusvoitosta vähennettäväksi arvopaperin arvonmenetyksenä tappion, joka oli syntynyt varainhoitoyhtiön omistajien kavallettua A:n yhtiöön sijoittamia varoja.

A:n kirjallisesti tekemä sopimus varojen luovuttamisesta ei ole sellainen asiakirja, jonka hallinta on luovutetuista varoista määräämisen välttämätön edellytys. Tuo sopimus ei siten ole arvopaperi, jonka arvonmenetys olisi luovutustappioon rinnastettavana omaisuuden luovutusvoitosta vähennyskelpoinen.

Tuloverolaki 50 § 3 mom 3 kohta

KHO:n päätös 7.1.2003 taltionumero 2. Valituslupahakemus hylätään