Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Vaasan HAO 18.9.2001 01/0170/5 AI generated

Merged municipality employee's secondary workplace status rejected; primary workplace rule applies to all locations.

Case Number Vaasan HAO 18.9.2001 01/0170/5
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Administrative Court dismissed the taxpayer's claim regarding the status of their secondary workplace after a municipality merger. The employee argued that specific locations in the new municipality should not be considered secondary workplaces under Income Tax Act Section 71, while the tax authority maintained they were secondary. The court ruled that the merger did not alter the primary workplace status, rejecting the argument for special treatment of the new locations.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

EnnakkoperintäL 13 §; EnnakkoperintäL 15 §; EnnakkoperintäL 45 §; EnnakkolperintäA 17 § 1 mom; Tuloverolaki 71 § 1 mom; Tuloverolaki 72 § 1 mom; Tuloverolaki 73 § 3 mom: A merger of municipalities does not automatically change the status of a workplace to secondary merely because it is located within the new municipality's boundaries if the employee has a genuine primary workplace elsewhere.

Keywords

AI generated
municipal merger secondary workplace income tax law primary workplace status taxable income calculation administrative court ruling employee residence

Cited Legislation

AI generated
EnnakkoperintäL 13 §
EnnakkoperintäL 15 §
EnnakkoperintäL 45 §
EnnakkolperintäA 17 § 1 mom
EnnakkolperintäA 17 § 1 mom
Tuloverolaki 71 § 1 mom
Tuloverolaki 72 § 1 mom
Tuloverolaki 73 § 3 mom

Cited Case Law

AI generated
Vaasan LO A:16.4.1998 T:97/II
Vaasan LO A:16.4.1998 T:97/II
VeroHp verovapaista matkakustannusten korvauksista vuonna 2001 (8.12.2000/1269)
VeroHp verovapaista matkakustannusten korvauksista vuonna 2001 (8.12.2000/1269)
AI generated
kho-precedent_2015_121
Supreme Administrative Court allows tax deduction for commuting costs when permanent residence is registered elsewhere despite actual living situation.
admin_1991_turku-and-pori-county__637
Daily commute costs for special industry workers are deductible expenses under TVL 25 § 1.
labour_2011_102
Labour Court dismisses claim that dual workplace counts as two official posts under collective agreement.
admin_2010_turku__568
Administrative Court allows tax-free daily allowances for special area workers staying in temporary employer housing.
admin_2000_hameenlinna__189
Permanent employee commuting to employer-owned buildings must deduct costs as home-to-work travel, not special work trips.

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

Kunta oli muodostunut kolmesta aikaisemmin itsenäisestä kunnasta. Kunnan työntekijällä oli varsinainen työpaikka näissä kolmessa nyt saman kunnan alueella sijaitsevassa taajamassa. Saman kunnan alueella sijaitsevia työpaikkoja ei pidetty tuloverolain 71 §:n 1 momentissa tarkoitettuina toissijaisina työpaikkoina.

Ennakkoratkaisu vuosille 2001 ja 2002.

EnnakkoperintäL 13 §

EnnakkoperintäL 15 §

EnnakkoperintäL 45 §

EnnakkolperintäA 17 § 1 mom

Tuloverolaki 71 § 1 mom

Tuloverolaki 72 § 1 mom

Tuloverolaki 73 § 3 mom

VeroHp verovapaista matkakustannusten korvauksista vuonna 2001 (8.12.2000/1269)

Vrt. Vaasan LO A:16.4.1998 T:97/II