Tax Question - Capital Losses

[harryc]

Can you?

One basically has a singlle 'capital' account - any costs in that account - if the net is negative for that year - can be carried over to the next year(s) and applied to any other property.

I've understood that from Vero - and USED that principle - and it has been applied on the returns I've sent in - maybe they erred but I'm not complaining. But seriously I think it is one account and there areno boundaries between individual 'properties.'

[Rosamunda]

...yeah and in places like Tampere & Helsinki there are queues of potential tenants for every flat that comes on the market. It would work, and it probably does in practice though not formally through a contract. If an agent has a flat on its books and is offering insurance for unpaid rent, it will probably find you a new tenant pretty quickly if the payments aren't coming through.

Don't think we are on the same wavelength about the tax implications for the Op though. He/she needs to paraphrase the question because I'm not sure there is any loss to carry forwards. He specifically mentioned that he was not insured against loss rental income. But lost rental income is not a "capital" loss as such.

[harryc]

Don't think we are on the same wavelength about the tax implications for the Op though. He/she needs to paraphrase the question because I'm not sure there is any loss to carry forwards. He specifically mentioned that he was not insured against loss rental income. But lost rental income is not a "capital" loss as such.

I think the wave length problem comes from the initial wording of the OP - as you suggest. I had put several drafts before I posted a reply. I'm not really sure how they are defining 'loss' - if they had repairs they can register those as 'costs' and then apply to later capital income - if no such income ever comes, they may not be able to be used (I'm not sure how repair costs can be baked into the profit/loss from an actual sale and the time restraints). They also have not come back and said how a ceiling collapsing was not tied to the structure of the building and covered by the 'house' insurance as seemingly this was not a self-standing building owned by the OP.

I'm letting this go until the OP clarifies.

yeah and in places like Tampere & Helsinki there are queues of potential tenants for every flat that come

btw - that is absolutely NOT the case with small shop rentals (large too in these days) - there would be a definite function for a guarantee and new renter system in that genre.

[betelgeuse]

Can you?

One basically has a singlle 'capital' account - any costs in that account - if the net is negative for that year - can be carried over to the next year(s) and applied to any other property.

I've understood that from Vero - and USED that principle - and it has been applied on the returns I've sent in - maybe they erred but I'm not complaining. But seriously I think it is one account and there areno boundaries between individual 'properties.'

There are no boundaries for between properties. However, there is a separate system for losses from transfer of properties (luovutustappio). In that system the time limit is five years:

http://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/ajantasa/1 ... 1535#L2P50

[Rosamunda]

yeah and in places like Tampere & Helsinki there are queues of potential tenants for every flat that come

btw - that is absolutely NOT the case with small shop rentals (large too in these days) - there would be a definite function for a guarantee and new renter system in that genre.

Yes, retail rentals have slumped and the fall is not over yet. What really annoys me is seeing companies like XXL build massive spanking new outlets when there are malls half empty. I've seen it all happen before (in the suburbs of Paris) and the malls quickly deteriorate and get taken over by gangs and squatters and... pondlife

[Upphew]

maybe you received 6 months rent instead of 12.

How come this is NOT loss? This is REAL loss as he couldn't receive what was supposed to be his regular source of income via rent.

If the tenant had left and op wouldn't have managed to get new one or had to lower the rent would that be loss too? How do you calculate the correct income? Could you claim loss if you got unemployed?

As far as I know, loss of income per se is not tax deductible. You just pay less tax, because you have less income. You don't get tax relief simply because your apartment is standing empty.

This is called Bureaucracy lost touch with Reality.

That is life. You work, you get paid. You don't, you get paid what your insurance pays or not at all. Vuokratuottokeskeytysvakuutus and työttömyysvakuutusmaksu are both insurances. Other is against unemployment, the other against the case of loss of income from rent.

[Rip]

maybe you received 6 months rent instead of 12.

How come this is NOT loss? This is REAL loss as he couldn't receive what was supposed to be his regular source of income via rent.

Do you get a tax deduction because you get unemployed and won't get what was "supposed to be your regular source of income"? No. You're basically suggesting extending unemployment benefits from persons to capital as well, where if you do not get your "supposed regular income" you not only (naturally) not need to pay taxes on income that did not materialize, but that you would actually be directly compensated for the income that was not realized.

[Upphew]

If the tenant had left and op wouldn't have managed to get new one or had to lower the rent would that be loss too? How do you calculate the correct income? Could you claim loss if you got unemployed?

you are playing assumptions here... what if the Roof had not fallen and he would have increased the Rent ? he'd receive more money.... so, the assumptions can go both ways.... but the fact is tenant moved due to fallen roof and its clear loss for the owner.

And owner should have insured oneself against it. Employees can't play with their own money, they are too stupid. But people who invest! Boy they know what to do and how to avoid losses. And they can gamble without insurances too.

[harryc]

Still wondering --

How can a roof (assume OP meant 'ceiling') fall in without it being a problem for the 'house corporation' - not the apt/flat owner?