Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
KHO:1997:21 AI generated

Vacation land with forest classification cannot be deemed forest under tax law if used for leisure.

Case Number KHO:1997:21
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Administrative Court allowed the imposition of property tax on a vacation property classified partly as forest. The court found that despite the land's official classification, its actual use for leisure and physical limitations prevented it from qualifying as a forest under the Property Tax Act. Consequently, the court ruled that no portion of the land could be considered a forest for tax purposes.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

KiinteistöveroL 3 § 1 mom; If a property classified as forest is used primarily for leisure and lacks capacity for sustainable forestry, it cannot be deemed a forest under the Property Tax Act.

Keywords

AI generated
property tax classification vacation land use forest definition taxable area determination actual use vs classification

Cited Legislation

AI generated
KiinteistöveroL 3 § 1 mom
KiinteistöveroL 3 § 1 mom
AI generated
admin_2002_oulu__282
Administrative court ruled a forested plot near a lake is tax-exempt forest land under Finnish law.
admin_1996_turku-and-pori-county__128
Court rules that a cabin used for logging is a vacation home for property tax purposes regardless of actual occupancy.
admin_1995_uusimaa-county__1229
Administrative court partially allows waste transport exemption for vacation homes based on low usage and waste volume.
admin_1999_kuopio-county__535
Transfer tax exemption applies only to the forest portion financed by rural land purchase loan.
admin_2001_hameenlinna__147
Administrative court dismissed appeal; city provided waste transport via contract or nearby collection point under Waste Act.

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

Verovelvollisten vapaa-ajan asunto sijaitsi tilalla, jossa oli rantaviivaa noin 300 metriä ja jonka kokonaispintaalasta 2,43 hehtaarista oli luokiteltu metsämaaksi 1,6 hehtaaria, joutomaaksi 0,6 hehtaaria ja tonttimaaksi 2 000 neliömetriä. Kun otettiin huomioon tilan tosiasiallinen käyttö vapaa-ajankiinteistönä sekä sen sijaintiin ja muotoon nähden rajoitetut mahdollisuudet kestävään metsätalouden harjoittamiseen, korkein hallinto-oikeus katsoi, ettei tilasta osaakaan voitu pitää kiinteistöverolain 3 §:n 1 momentin 1 kohdassa tarkoitettuna metsänä. Tilasta oli niin ollen tullut määrätä kiinteistövero.

Äänestys 6-2.

Verovuosi_1994

KiinteistöveroL 3 § 1 mom