1.12.2021

Are You Planning to Keep Working Part-Time from Home? Take These Taxation and Employment Issues into Account

Many workplaces have transitioned from remote work to hybrid work over the course of this year. Expert work, in particular, is generally no longer tied to the office, but can be done flexibly with respect to time and place.

We put together a list of things to keep in mind about taxation and employment law when engaging in hybrid work in Finland.

Taxation Checklist for Employees

Automatic EUR 750 deduction for the production of income:

All wage and salary earners automatically receive a EUR 750 deduction for the production of income (for the 2021 tax year). If your expenses are higher than this, you can claim them in your tax return as expenses for the production of income.

Workspace deduction:

If you work remotely, you are entitled to a workspace deduction: The workspace deduction can be made either based on a formula or based on actual expenses.

The formula-based workspace deduction is determined based on remote work days and was EUR 225–900 in the taxation for 2020. 

It is worth making the deduction based on actual expenses if you work from home a great deal. If so, you can deduct, for example, the expenses from the furnishings and rental, lighting and heating of your workspace. When deducting actual expenses, you need to be able to present the Finnish Tax Administration with a description of the expenses and the related receipts on demand.

Work tools:

The tax treatment of work tool purchases depends on whether you bought the tools yourself or whether your employer bought them and either gifted or loaned them to you.

If you bought work tools, you can deduct the purchase, maintenance and repair costs as expenses for the production of income if the tools you bought are primarily used for work. You can deduct the expenses as a single deduction during the year of purchase if the purchase price does not exceed EUR 1,200/tool (2021 tax year) or as annual 25% depreciations if the purchase price of the tool is over EUR 1,200.   

If you are loaning work tools from your employer, in other words the tools remain owned by your employer, they are a taxable benefit for you.

If you employer purchases work tools and gives ownership of them to you, the fair value of the tools is considered pay and your employer must notify the benefit to the income register.

Reimbursement of travel expenses:

If you are working from home part of the time, you can deduct your travel expenses between home and your workplace for the days on which you go to the workplace. There is a EUR 750 deductible for travel expenses between home and work. You can only claim travel expenses in your tax return to the extent they exceed EUR 750. Remember to deduct travel expenses according to the least expensive mode of transport.

Data Connection:

The right to deduct the cost of a data connection depends on whether you or your employer has purchased the connection.

If you purchased the connection, you can deduct the connection as expenses for the production of income. If the connection is partially in work use, you can deduct 50% of the cost, and if it is used primarily for work, you can deduct the cost in full.

If your employer reimburses you for the cost of a data connection you have purchased, the compensation is taxable income both with respect to work and private use. In this situation, your employer will deduct withholding tax from the compensation.

If your employer purchases the data connection, the benefit is tax free for you both with respect to work and private use.

Employment Law Checklist for Employees

Agreeing on hybrid work with your employer:

Hybrid work is subject to the same rules as work performed at the workplace. Voluntary hybrid work does not necessarily require a separate employment agreement. Always follow the instructions your employer gives you regarding hybrid work.

Obligatory hybrid work:

As a rule, the place of employment agreed in the employment agreement is binding on the employer with respect to hybrid work, too. This means that the employer cannot in normal circumstances unilaterally make hybrid work an obligation for employees unless this has been agreed in the employment agreement.

Hybrid work and equal treatment:

Employees must be treated equally unless there is an acceptable cause for different treatment based on the duties and position of the employees. Thus, hybrid work instructions can be different in different positions as long as there is a clear reason for it. Such reasons can include the nature and contents of tasks as well as the type of work.

It is also possible to set limits for hybrid work. For example, your employer can require that there must always be a certain number of employees at the workplace or forbid hybrid work if an employee refuses to comply with instructions.

Working abroad:

It is always recommended to negotiate and make a written agreement with your employer on working abroad. It important for both you and your employer to confirm in advance how social security is determined while working abroad, i.e. which country’s social security provisions apply to the remote work.

Occupational safety and health and coping with work:

Hybrid work highlights the employee’s own responsibility to ensure, for example, sufficient rest time. The employer should also have discussions with employees to remind them to look after their wellbeing.

The employment accidents insurance taken out by your employer also applies to work performed outside the workplace, but in remote work it is more tied to the work space than at the actual workplace. If necessary, you or your employer should supplement the statutory accident insurance with a voluntary insurance policy.

Latest references

We advised Aurevia Oy, a portfolio company of French private equity sponsor Mérieux Equity Partners, in a strategic reorganisation that involved splitting Aurevia and its parent companies into two independent groups of companies and reorganisation of its existing debt-financing arrangements. Following the reorganisation, the newly formed Aurevia continues as a leading provider of Contract Research Organization (CRO) and Quality Assurance and Regulatory Affairs (QARA) services, while the newly formed Labquality focuses on delivering External Quality Assessment (EQA) services. Aurevia serves operators in the medical devices, in vitro diagnostics and pharmaceutical sectors. Labquality’s customers include clinical laboratories and social and healthcare organisations. The reorganisation positions Aurevia and Labquality to allocate investments more effectively, accelerate growth within their respective customer segments, and respond to evolving market and client needs. The transaction was implemented through multiple parallel demergers and required comprehensive legal and tax structuring across several jurisdictions. Our team supported Aurevia throughout the planning and implementation phases, covering corporate, tax, employment law, and regulatory matters, as well as the optimisation of each group’s financing structure.
Case published 7.4.2026
We successfully represented VR Group before the Supreme Court in a case concerning the meal break practice of commuter train drivers. On 6 February 2026, the Supreme Court ruled in VR’s favour (decision KKO:2026:12), confirming that VR had the right to amend the commuter train drivers’ meal break practice in 2021 by rendering the break unpaid in accordance with the applicable collective agreement. This decision clarifies the interpretation of collective agreements and employment legislation as well as the limits of the employer’s right to direct work. Over 250 commuter train drivers challenged the unpaid meal break practice which VR introduced in April 2021. Before the change, meal breaks had a long history of being paid. The change was based on the train drivers’ collective agreement, which allows for meal breaks to be organised either as paid or unpaid time. The Supreme Court ruled that the scheduling and managing of breaks falls within the core area of the employer’s right to direct work. This increases the threshold for an established practice becoming a binding condition for the parties. Merely following a practice consistently and over a long period of time does not make the practice binding; instead, the employer’s intent to commit to the practice must be clearly evident from the employer’s conduct or other circumstances. As both alternatives – paid and unpaid – for organising meal breaks had been retained in the collective agreement despite other amendments over the years, it could not be considered that VR had intended to commit to the paid break practice and waive its right to direct work as regards break scheduling. It was also significant that the employment contracts explicitly referred only to the collective agreement as regards working time. The Supreme Court deemed that the employees’ paid meal break was not an established term of employment and that VR was entitled to change the practice based on the collective agreement. The employer had the right, by virtue of its right to direct work, to unilaterally change the meal break practice by choosing to apply the other arrangement permitted by the collective agreement.
Case published 3.3.2026
Life Finland Oy, a retailer of natural products, other health-related products and cosmetics, filed for bankruptcy on its own initiative in June 2025, and our attorney, counsel Elina Pesonen was appointed administrator of the bankruptcy estate. Life Finland Oy was part of the international Life Group, and its parent company Life Europe AB was declared bankrupt in Sweden in June 2025. When declared bankrupt, Life Finland Oy had over 30 operational stores and almost 170 employees across Finland. In addition to the premises of the operational stores, the company had several other leased premises, such as retail premises it was vacating as well as office and warehouse spaces. The bankruptcy estate organised clearance sales in all of the company’s stores. The shutdown of the stores and the clearance sales were efficiently carried out in approximately two weeks in cooperation with the company’s country manager, regional managers and sales staff. The clearance sales yielded a significant liquidation result, and consumers bought nearly the entire inventory. The administration of the bankruptcy estate has required expertise in many areas. The proceedings have dealt with specialised issues such as cash pooling arrangements, intellectual property, franchising agreements, employment relationships and consumer creditors. In addition, the proceedings are notably international, as the estate administrator has organised the shutdown of operations and the liquidation of assets in close cooperation with the estate administrators of the Swedish Group companies. The cooperation has included, among other things, exploring opportunities for selling the business, the sale of intangible rights and the coordination of intra-group agreements.
Case published 9.12.2025
We are acting as the joint legal advisor to Oomi Oy and Lumme Energia Oy in a transaction whereby Lumme Energia will merge with Oomi. As from the completion of the merger, the combined entity will be the largest electricity retail and service company in the Finnish market. In 2024, Oomi reported a turnover of EUR 373.9 million and had approximately 110 employees. Lumme Energia’s turnover for the same year was approximately EUR 314.6 million and it had approximately 50 employees. The transaction is primarily driven by the recent developments in the electricity market and the strategic goal to develop competitive products and services. Another key objective is to further enhance the customer experience, which is a shared value between the two companies. As a result of the merger, Lumme Energia’s customers will transfer to Oomi, and Lumme Energia will become one of Oomi’s shareholders. The completion of the transaction is subject to an approval by the Finnish Competition and Consumer Authority.
Case published 29.8.2025