Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VakO 9.5.2001/2353:2000 AI generated

Family ownership of minority shares prevents treating undistributed corporate profits as family income.

Case Number VakO 9.5.2001/2353:2000
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The tax court dismissed the taxpayer's claim to treat undistributed corporate profits as family income. The family owned only 7 of 15 shares, with the spouse serving as managing director, but the family lacked a majority stake. The court ruled that without majority ownership, the undistributed profits could not be attributed to the family's taxable income.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Section 10 of the Income Tax Act; Section 10 of the Income Tax Act: Undistributed corporate profits are not taxable family income when the family holds only a minority shareholding in the company.

Keywords

AI generated
minority shareholding undistributed profits family income tax majority ownership corporate profits attribution

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Section 10 of the Income Tax Act
AI generated
insurance_2001_2175-2000
Insurance court denied partner's claim for profit share inclusion in social security income calculation.
admin_1988_uusimaa-county__1047
Court allows tax authority to use asset value for inheritance tax when company shares continue business.
kho-precedent_2000_1
Supreme Administrative Court ruled that income from a company continuing a farmer's business is taxable to the individual if no rent or wages were paid.
kko-precedent_1995_185
Supreme Court dismisses appeal as lower court panel lacked impartiality due to members' dual roles.
insurance_1994_8247-1993
Unrelated shareholder deemed employee for unemployment benefits due to salary receipt and company role.

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:n ruokakunta omisti seitsemän (7) osakeyhtiön viidestätoista (15) osakkeesta ja hänen puolisonsa toimi osakeyhtiön toimitusjohtajana. Koska ruokakunta ei omistanut osakeyhtiön osake-enemmistöä, osakeyhtiön osinkona jakamatonta voittoa ei voitu katsoa ruokakunnan tuloksi.

Tarkastuslautakunnan päätös kumottiin.

Jaosto

III