Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
KHO:2000:3 Generato dall'IA

Court dismissed tax deduction claim for mortgage on property bought for investment purposes by elderly parents.

Numero d'incarto KHO:2000:3
Autorità giudiziaria
Giurisdizione Finlandia (FI)
Data della decisione
Esito del giudizio Respinto (Dismissed)
Apri la fonte ufficiale Versione Markdown leggibile dalle macchine (.md)

Sintesi Legislator

Generato dall'IA

The Supreme Administrative Court dismissed the taxpayer's claim to deduct a mortgage interest payment for a property purchased in 1988. The taxpayer argued the loan was for income generation, but the court found the primary purpose was investment rather than acquiring a residence for the elderly parents. Consequently, the deduction was rejected because the statutory requirement for income-generating intent was not met.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

Tuloverolaki 58 § 1 mom. 3 k.: A mortgage interest payment is deductible only if the primary purpose of the acquisition is income generation; purchases made primarily for investment purposes do not qualify for the deduction.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
income tax deduction mortgage interest investment purpose residential property tax liability Supreme Administrative Court Finland tax law costi d'alloggio

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
Tuloverolaki 58 § 1 mom. 3 k.
Tuloverolaki 58 § 1 mom. 3 k.
Generato dall'IA
admin_1991_oulu-county__118
Court denies mortgage interest deduction for vacant land before house completion and occupancy.
admin_2016_helsinki__1074
Court denies tax deduction for apartment renovation costs as the unit was not used for family residence.
admin_1996_hame-county__8
Finland's Supreme Administrative Court allowed interest deduction for a home loan where the house was sold before occupancy.
admin_1988_uusimaa-county__523
Court rules that selling shares in a property company constitutes business income when done regularly.
kho-precedent_2015_1
Finnish Supreme Administrative Court allows tax-free gain from selling half a plot where the taxpayer lived for years, despite a new building existing. The court ruled that the original residence's location qualifies for tax exemption under the Income Tax Act. The decision clarifies that the existence of a replacement building does not negate the tax-free status of the land portion sold.

Ti chiedi come si applica questa sentenza alla tua fattispecie?

Analizza questa decisione insieme alla legislazione federale e cantonale, ai commentari e alla giurisprudenza successiva in Legislator AI.

Apri in Legislator →

Testo completo

A oli vuonna 1988 ostanut asuinhuoneiston hallintaan oikeuttavat osakkeet iäkkäiltä appivanhemmiltaan, jotka saivat jäädä huoneistoon asumaan yhtiövastiketta vastaan. Appivanhempien jouduttua vuosina 1996 ja 1997 hoitokotiin A vaihtoi huoneiston vuonna 1997 pienempään huoneistoon saaden lisäksi rahaa 150 000 markkaa. Vuonna 1988 ostetun huoneiston hankintaan otettua lainaa ei pidetty tulonhankkimisvelkana, koska huoneiston hankkimisen ensisijaisena tarkoituksena oli muu kuin sijoitustarkoitus. Verovuosi 1996. Äänestys 4-1.

Tuloverolaki 58 § 1 mom. 3 k.