Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Kouvolan HO 17.02.1983 968/82 AI generated

Court dismisses appeal against conviction for tax fraud and aiding tax evasion in Finnish tax case.

Case Number Kouvolan HO 17.02.1983 968/82
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The court dismissed the appeal against the defendant's conviction for continued tax fraud and aiding tax evasion. The defendant intentionally concealed the true transaction price from tax authorities to evade income tax and failed to declare the 'black transaction price' on stamp duty calculations. The court upheld the conviction because the defendant's actions directly facilitated the seller's tax evasion and constituted a separate offense of aiding tax evasion.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Verolaki 1999; Veropetola 1999: Intentional concealment of true transaction prices to evade income tax constitutes tax fraud, while knowingly assisting such evasion by failing to declare the black price constitutes aiding tax evasion.

Keywords

AI generated
tax fraud conviction aiding tax evasion black transaction price income tax evasion stamp duty declaration criminal appeal dismissal Finnish tax law

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Verolaki 1999
Veropetola 1999
AI generated
appeal_1979_turku__2911
Court dismisses appeal against conviction for aiding tax fraud and triple tax penalty in Finland.
ECLI:FI:KKO:2019:105
Supreme Court upholds gross fraud conviction where tax evasion prevented reliable margin verification, requiring tax based on sales prices.
kho-precedent_1997_73
Supreme Administrative Court dismissed tax appeal regarding shareholder liability for company debts under Finnish Tax Act.
kko-precedent_2004_134
Supreme Court allows separate VAT fraud conviction for personal income tax evasion of company funds.
kko-precedent_2003_9
Supreme Court allows prosecution for concealment crime despite victim's initial theft charge only.

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

Ostaja oli yhdessä myyjän kanssa sopinut "mustasta kauppahinnasta" asunto-osakeyhtiön osakkeiden kaupassa. Ostajan oli pitänyt mieltää, että myyjä jättäisi omassa tulojaan koskevassa veroilmoituksessa tuloinaan ilmoittamatta todellisen kauppahinnan ja kauppakirjaan merkityn kauppahinnan erotuksen. Ostaja oli siten tahallaan edistänyt myyjän tuloveroa koskevaa veropetosta. Lisäksi ostaja oli itse syyllistynyt veropetokseen jättämällä leimaverolaskelmassa ilmoittamatta "mustan kauppahinnan". Ostaja tuomittiin rangaistukseen jatketusta rikoksesta, joka käsittää veropetoksen ja avunannon veropetokseen. (Ään.)

Lainvoimainen