Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
KHO:1999:24 AI generated

Shareholder dividend taxed on total shares including non-dividend B-class shares for capital income calculation.

Case Number KHO:1999:24
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 tax authority's claim that dividends were taxable capital income based on the total value of all shares held. The taxpayer owned 30 shares, with 24 in a non-dividend B-class and 3 in an A-class that received dividends. The court ruled that the 15% annual return calculation for capital income must include the B-class shares' value despite no dividend distribution. Consequently, the tax assessment was upheld because the legal definition of capital income applied to the entire shareholding portfolio.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Tuloverolaki 42 § 1 mom; s. 100 varallisuusverolaki: Dividends are taxable capital income up to the amount corresponding to the mathematical value of all shares held, including those in classes receiving no dividend.

Keywords

AI generated
capital income calculation share class distinction dividend taxation mathematical value taxable base determination

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Tuloverolaki 42 § 1 mom
AI generated
admin_2016_helsinki__1320
Administrative Court allows tax deduction based on share ownership at dividend payment time, rejecting prior transfer calculations.
admin_1997_central-finland-county__325
Court held capital gains portion must include all shares owned by taxpayer, not just those receiving dividends.
ECLI:FI:KHO:2019:57
Supreme Administrative Court dismissed appeal on dividend capital income calculation when share ownership changed between dividend payments.
kho-precedent_1998_48
Supreme Administrative Court dismissed tax appeal regarding incorrect calculation of share value and dividend income tax in Finland.
admin_1989_uusimaa-county__970
Court ruled that rental income must be allocated to owners according to their shareholding percentages when no separate agreement exists.

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

Pörssissä noteeraamattoman osakeyhtiön osakas omisti yhtiön 30 osakkeen osakekannasta 27 osaketta, joista kolme kuului A-sarjaan ja 24 B-sarjaan. Osakeyhtiö jakoi osinkoa vain A-sarjan osakkeille. Osingot ja yhtiöveron hyvitys katsottiin pääomatuloksi siihen määrään saakka, joka vastasi osakkaan omistamien kaikkien osakkeiden varallisuusverolaissa tarkoitetulle matemaattiselle arvolle laskettua 15 prosentin vuotuista tuottoa. Täten pääomatulo-osuuden laskentapohjaan oli luettava myös B-sarjan osakkeet, vaikka niille ei jaettu osinkoa. Verovuosi 1993.

Tuloverolaki 42 § 1 mom