25.1.2017

2017: A Year of Changes – What’s in Store for Corporate Taxation?

Related services

The year 2017 brings with it significant changes to corporate taxation. Rectification and appeal procedures are being reformed in all tax categories. Other reforms concern the reporting and payment of unprompted taxes, such as VAT and employer contributions.

Inheritance and gift taxation and the tax rules for corporate changes of generation are also changing. Private undertakings and partnerships will be given the opportunity to make a special entrepreneur deduction in their taxes.

UNIFICATION OF TAX PROCEDURE

Uniform Three-Year Appeal Period

Changes to tax decision in all tax categories will now have to be sought from the Assessment Adjustment Board. The appeal period will be reduced from the current five years to three years in income taxation, inheritance and gift taxation and real estate taxation. The appeal period for VAT is already three years.

The three-year period is calculated from the start of the calendar year following the end of the tax year in question. However, a request for rectification can always be made within 60 days of the taxpayer being informed of the tax decision. Correspondingly, a decision of the Assessment Adjustment Board must be appealed to the Administrative Court within 60 days of the taxpayer being informed of the board’s decision.

Tax Authorities Get Freer Hands to Rectify Taxation

The new act gives the Finnish Tax Administration the right to rectify errors it finds to the benefit or to the detriment of the taxpayer regardless of the nature or cause of the error. However, rectification cannot be carried out to the detriment of the taxpayer if the Tax Administration has investigated and expressly decided the matter unless new relevant information later comes up in the matter.

The deadline for rectification carried out on the Tax Administration’s initiative is three years from the beginning of the calendar year following the tax year in question. However, the rectification period can, in some cases, be extended to four years if, for example, the Tax Administration receives information required for tax supervision exceptionally late. In certain tax matters (e.g. transfer pricing and intra-group structuring and financing arrangements), a longer six-year rectification period will be applied directly on the basis of the law.

The new rectification periods under the new law are applicable from the start of 2017. Taxation for 2016 and previous years will be subject to the old rectification periods and rules.

For more on the tax authority’s ability to rectify taxation after the fact, read our blog post Will the New Year Deal the Tax Man the Best Hand?

UNPROMPTED TAXES

Electronic Notifications to Become Mandatory

Unprompted taxes are taxes that the Tax Administration does not separately impose, but the company in question calculates, reports and pays on its own. These include VAT, employer contributions and withholdings from dividends. For the tax years beginning on 1 January 2017 and thereafter, tax returns concerning unprompted taxes must be filed electronically, whereas it used to be possible to file a paper form. In future, it will only be possible to file paper returns for a special reason, such as a technical obstacle. Electronic returns can be filed in the Tax Administration’s OmaVero service, which replaces the Tax Account service. The return can also be filed using some types of accounting software.

More Freedom to Choose Tax Period for Unprompted Taxes

The default tax period for unprompted taxes, i.e. the period for which the tax is reported and paid, will continue to be the calendar month. However, companies will have more freedom to choose an extended three- or twelve-month tax period, as the maximum annual turnover thresholds for the extended periods are being raised to 100,000 euros for the three-month period and to 30,000 euros for the twelve-month period.

The right to apply extended tax periods will continue to be granted based on separate application if the turnover thresholds are not exceeded. The chosen tax period is only binding on the company for a year at a time, and the tax periods for VAT and employer contributions can be of different length.

Use of Payment-Based VAT to Expand – Accrual Basis to Remain Main Rule

The main rule in VAT will remain the same, i.e. an accrual procedure in which VAT is paid on sales and deducted from purchases at the time of invoicing.

However, small companies with a turnover of no more than 500,000 euros can pay the VAT on sales and deduct the VAT on purchases on a payment basis. In the payment-based system, a company allocates VAT to the month in which it receives payment for its sales or pays for goods or services it has purchased. If a company opts for the payment-based system, it must be applied to both purchases and sales.

Correction of Tax Filings Made Easier

Companies that have to correct their reported unprompted taxes or annual filings no longer have to file a separate supplementary return. The corrections can now be made by filing a new return replacing the original in which the information in the section being corrected is restated at the correct amounts.

In the new procedure, the taxpayer can correct minor errors in the return for the next tax period without filing a new replacement return for the original tax period. An error is considered minor if the amount of the misstatement (either positive or negative) is no more than 500 euros. This threshold is assessed separately for each tax category.

Changes to Punitive Tax Increases and Late Fees for Unprompted Taxes

Punitive tax increases for unprompted taxes will be unified. From now on, the punitive increase is a maximum of 50% of the amount of the tax imposed to the detriment of the taxpayer. The level of the punitive increase is determined formulaically, with the base level being 10% of the imposed tax. The grounds for imposing punitive increases will remain the same. An increase can be imposed if the taxpayer has neglected its obligation to file a tax return or filed an incomplete or inaccurate tax return.

The method for the calculation of and the amounts of punitive tax increases for unprompted taxes are also changing. Following the reform, information on the tax period can be rectified during a 45-day period without penalties for delay. However, late fees are calculated for the first tax return of the tax period for the first 45 days (three euros per day) and after that at a rate of two per cent of the amount of tax reported late.

RELIEFS AND INCENTIVES

Entrepreneur Deduction

The state is seeking to support entrepreneurship with a new special deduction. Private undertakings and partnerships can make this deduction from their business taxation once a year, and the amount is five per cent of the taxable net income in the business source of taxation.

Changes to Inheritance and Gift Taxes

Inheritance and gift taxes have been cut on every level of the tax scales. The cuts are mainly focused on the first tax bracket, which is applied, among others, to the spouses or the immediate heirs in the direct line of ascent or descent of the deceased or person giving a gift.

The capital gains tax on a farm or company received as inheritance or a gift has also changed. When the person who received the inheritance or gift sells a farm or company subject to change of generation tax reduction provided for in the Inheritance and Gift Tax Act, the acquisition cost deductible from the sales price will be considered to be the reduced amount that inheritance or gift tax was paid on at the time. Prior to this amendment, the full unreduced acquisition cost of the property could be deducted from the sales price when calculating the capital gains tax.

The tax exemption for payments made to the next of kin or to the estate of the deceased on the basis of life insurance is being withdrawn. However, this amendment will not enter into force until the start of 2018.

New Act on Employer Health Insurance Contributions

The terminology for indirect employer costs has changed: instead of employer social security contributions, the new term is employer health insurance contribution. The basis for the contribution remains the same, but the amount has been reduced to 1.08% of the paid remuneration. This means that the amount of indirect costs payable by employer companies will be reduced.

Latest references

We advised WithSecure Oyj in the sale of its open source data collection product and business to Patria Oyj. The divested business combining software and services falls outside WithSecure’s current strategy. Through the sale, WithSecure sharpens its focus on the Elements portfolio. WithSecure is a global cyber security company (listed on NASDAQ OMX Helsinki) with more than 35 years of industry experience. WithSecure offers partners flexible commercial models, ensuring mutual success across the dynamic cyber security landscape. Patria is an international company in the defence and security industry offering defence, security and aviation life cycle support services and technology solutions. As a result of the transaction, Patria will open a new office in Oulu and 10 WithSecure experts currently working in the business area will join Patria. 
Case published 30.9.2024
We advised A. Ahlström in establishing a corporate sustainability due diligence process plan which incorporates best practices and tailored solutions based on our expertise within relevant business sectors. Our comprehensive ESG offering also included tailored training for members of the investment team and management team and the board of directors of several portfolio companies. ‘The ESG team at Castrén & Snellman provided us with legal and practical advice around the ESG regulatory tsunami that we need to incorporate in our ESG work,’ comments Camilla Sågbom, Director, Sustainability and Communications, at A. Ahlström Oy. A. Ahlström is a family-owned industrial company, developing leading global specialist positions in Forest & Fiber and Environmental technology sectors.
Case published 5.9.2024
We represented Vapaus Bikes Finland Oy, a company offering employee benefit bikes, in its international EUR 10 million Series A funding round. The investors behind the funding are private equity investors Shift4Good and Superhero Capital Ltd as well as Tesi together with the European Guarantee Fund of the European Investment Bank. The equity-based funding will support the company’s international expansion, software development, platform automation, and the growth of its concept for the second-hand market of bikes. Vapaus Bikes Finland is at the forefront of sustainable mobility services and has been a pioneer in the Employee Benefit Bikes sector since late 2020. It has been ranked among Finland’s fastest growing companies. Shift4Good is an impact venture capital fund focused on the decarbonisation of the transportation sector. Tesi (officially Finnish Industry Investment Ltd) is a state-owned, market-driven investment company that invests in venture capital and private equity funds and directly in Finnish startups and growth companies.
Case published 21.8.2024
We successfully acted for the City of Rovaniemi in a matter concerning offence in public office and damages claims in relation to a significant investment decision made by the city. The defendants were the city’s former municipal corporate officer, who was in an employment relationship, and a city treasurer, who was in a public-service employment relationship and acted as the supervisor of the municipal corporate officer. The criminal matter related to the City Board’s decision to invest EUR 2 million of the city’s funds in bonds offered by a newly established investment company in accordance with a decision prepared by the defendants. A significant part of the company’s operations involved quick loan business. The main legal question in the matter was whether the investment of public funds constitutes an exercise of public authority and whether regulation on offences in public office therefore becomes applicable even to a person in an employment relationship. The municipal corporate officer in an employment relationship was charged with aggravated abuse of public office based on her negligence in the preparation and presentation of the investment decision as well as based on a conflict of interest due to the fact that she had invested her own money in a company that received funding from the investment target presented to the City Board. The charges of an offence in public office against the city treasurer concerned his position as the supervisor and reporter of the city’s investment activities. He was also involved in the preparation and presentation of the City Board’s decision. The processing of the matter started in the District Court of Lapland in June 2022. In its judgment given in August 2022, the District Court stated, based among other things on our argumentation, that the investment of public funds constitutes an exercise of public authority and that regulation on offences in public office can therefore be applied to the municipal corporate officer. The District Court deemed that the conduct of the former municipal corporate officer fulfils the characteristics of abuse of public office and that the conduct of the former city treasurer fulfils the characteristics of violation of official duty with respect to the preparation of the investment decision, but the right to bring charges had become time-barred. Punishments could therefore not be imposed on the defendants, but the defendants were ordered to jointly and severally pay the city approximately EUR 114,000 in damages plus interest for late payment. The city treasurer’s share of the amount was 10%. The prosecutor accepted the judgment but the other parties appealed it to the Court of Appeal. Acting for the city, we pursued claims for both punishment and damages in the Court of Appeal. The Rovaniemi Court of Appeal processed the matter in November and December 2023. In its judgment given in June 2024, the Court of Appeal upheld the District Court’s judgment with respect to the abuse of public office and violation of official duty. The Court of Appeal deemed that the municipal corporate officer had failed in her duty to declare the conflict of interest. In addition, she had failed in her duty to ensure that the prepared decision was in compliance with the city’s investment guidelines and that it had been properly put out to tender. The Court of Appeal also found that the text of the investment proposal was insufficient and misleading and that the municipal corporate officer’s conduct was intentional. As regards the city treasurer, the Court of Appeal held that he had failed in his duty to ensure that the investment proposal to the City Board complied with the investment guidelines, that the presentation was not misleading and that risks were taken into account as required by the investment guidelines. With the judgement, the Court of Appeal took a clear position that abuse in public offices and when exercising public authority is not acceptable. The judgment is also significant as it declares that investing public funds constitutes an exercise of public authority and that the liability for acts in office therefore becomes applicable even to persons in employment relationships. In addition, a key question for the Court of Appeal to assess was defining the amount of economic damage in a matter related to investment activities. The Court of Appeal held based on our arguments that the conduct of the municipal corporate officer and the city treasurer had caused damage to the city. The Court of Appeal increased the amount of damages to EUR 210,000 with the city treasurer’s share limited to 10%. The amount was increased because the Court of Appeal deemed that the city had suffered damage not only in terms of the loss of capital but also in terms of the loss of estimated return on investment. The judgement is not final.
Case published 21.8.2024