Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
KHO:1998:70 AI generated

Supreme Administrative Court allowed deduction for office space purchase based on 98.3% shareholding in non-mutual property company.

Case Number KHO:1998:70
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 deduction for office space purchase by a cooperative holding 98.3% of a non-mutual property company. The minority argued that the tax law provision applied only to mutual property companies, excluding this scenario. The court ruled that the statutory language did not restrict the deduction to mutual entities, permitting the claim based on the cooperative's dominant ownership and usage.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Laki elinkeinotulon verottamisesta 43 § 2 mom.; The deduction for office space purchase is available to a cooperative holding the majority of shares in a non-mutual property company, as the statute does not limit eligibility to mutual property companies.

Keywords

AI generated
income tax deduction property company shares office space purchase mutual property company cooperative ownership rights tax law interpretation majority shareholding

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Laki elinkeinotulon verottamisesta 43 § 2 mom.
Laki elinkeinotulon verottamisesta 43 § 2 mom.
AI generated
kho-precedent_2016_18
Supreme Administrative Court dismissed tax appeal regarding 'naked in naked out' share purchase valuation. Court upheld tax authority's adjustment of income based on market value. Court rejected taxpayer's claim for full market value adjustment. Court dismissed taxpayer's appeal against tax authority's income adjustment. Court upheld tax authority's decision on share valuation. Court dismissed taxpayer's appeal regarding share purchase tax. Court rejected taxpayer's claim for full market value. Court dismissed taxpayer's appeal on share valuation. Court upheld tax authority's decision on share purchase. Court dismissed taxpayer's appeal regarding share valuation.
admin_1992_kuopio-county__72
Private shareholders in a mixed-use building complex prevent it from being a public-benefit organization exempt from discretionary taxation.
kho-precedent_2017_78
Supreme Administrative Court allows tax-free share swap, rejecting tax avoidance claim due to lack of concrete benefits.
kho-precedent_1997_136
Shareholder tax credit allowed despite transfer price tax rules when company distributed all profits.
admin_2022_helsinki__3150
Court rules that a company acting as a managing partner for a real estate fund is deemed to hold shares indirectly, triggering the 2% transfer tax rate.

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

Osuuskunta oli 98,3 prosentin osakeomistuksensa perusteella hallinnut kiinteistöosakeyhtiön omistamia tiloja ja käyttänyt niitä yksin toimitiloinaan. Vaikka kiinteistöosakeyhtiö ei ollut keskinäinen kiinteistöosakeyhtiö, osuuskunnalla oli mainitun osakeomistuksensa ja kiinteistöosakeyhtiön omistamien tilojen hallinnan perusteella oikeus tehdä toimitilan jälleenhankintavaraus kiinteistöosakeyhtiön osakkeiden myynnistä saamastaan luovutusvoitosta. Verovuosi 1995. äänestys 4-1. Vähemmistöön jäänyt jäsen katsoi, että elinkeinotulon verottamisesta annetun lain 43 §:n 2 momentissa tarkoitettiin ainoastaan keskinäisen kiinteistöosakeyhtiön eikä tavallisen kiinteistöosakeyhtiön osakkeita, minkä vuoksi osuuskunnalla ei ollut oikeutta toimitilan jälleenhankintavarauksen muodostamiseen.

Laki elinkeinotulon verottamisesta 43 § 2 mom.