Hannes Snellman’s Tax Team has a proven track record of representing clients in demanding high-profile tax cases. Our team has the expertise to defend the taxpayer’s position in audits and disputes related to, for instance, corporate taxation, transfer taxation, personal income taxation, VAT and other indirect taxation, and transfer pricing. With our substantial experience, we assist clients in every step of the process.

We represent our clients in pre-emptive discussions with the Tax Administration and in applying for advance rulings from the Tax Administration and the Central Tax Board. In addition to representing clients in appeals before the Tax Board of Adjustment, administrative courts, and the Supreme Administrative Court, we leave no stone unturned in protecting taxpayers’ rights. We also have experience assisting clients in more exceptional processes, such as alternative dispute resolution, extraordinary appeals, complaints to the Chancellor of Justice, the Parliamentary Ombudsman and the European Commission as well as in appeals to the European Court of Human Rights.

Hannes Snellman’s Tax Team has acted as counsel for taxpayers in several significant cases that have resulted in important case law precedents in Finnish tax law.

Be it passing on wealth to the next generation or finding a more tax-efficient way of managing your income and assets, private wealth tax matters can be highly complex. Individuals and families all have their unique needs and circumstances that require a personalised approach from expert legal advisers. Hannes Snellman offers a first-class client experience built on trust and long-term relationships.

Our Tax Team supports high-net-worth individuals and family businesses in a variety of matters, including tax matters of family offices and investment companies, succession, generation shifts, relocation, trusts, and investment structures. The team is experienced in handling complex cross-border matters, where needed, in seamless collaboration with our networks of foreign lawyers.

We also assist our private clients in tax controversy, in which frequent topics include, among other things, tax residency and insurance products. At the worst, tax controversy concerning private persons may lead to criminal proceedings. Should this happen, Hannes Snellman’s criminal law experts are ready to assist our clients.

Incentivising key individuals and employees has an important impact on the success of a company. In this respect, it is crucial to build the incentives so that they give the desired outcomes. The Tax Team regularly advises clients on tax and social security consequences of incentive plans, such as bonus programmes, employee offerings, share awards, and options. Hannes Snellman also assists clients in obtaining rulings on tax and social security treatment as well as drafting plan documentation.

Businesses operating in any industry can, and likely will, encounter questions concerning value added taxation and other indirect taxation. Our indirect tax team offers personalised, first-class solutions tailored to address the client’s needs.

Our tax professionals have extensive expertise in VAT, customs, and excise duties with special proficiency in VAT questions concerning the real estate business, real estate transactions, and VAT exempt sectors such as financing. Our indirect tax experts are also well-versed in assisting clients operating in new, ground-breaking sectors where the tax questions are unchartered territory.

Our indirect tax team assists clients within a broad variety of industries with, for instance, transactional VAT advisory, deductibility of VAT, and detecting VAT risks. We also advise clients in excise duty, customs, and other indirect tax related matters.

Our indirect tax experts Piia Ahonen and Marika Sorsa have published a hardcover book on value added taxation in the real estate business.

Transfer pricing is not an exact science but nevertheless requires exact expertise. The Finnish transfer pricing landscape requires businesses to navigate through a complex combination of obligatory requirements and flexible procedures to obtain tax certainty.

Our transfer pricing team has broad experience of, for instance, transfer pricing audits, pre-emptive discussion processes, TP model planning, APA, MAP, cross-border dialogue processes, and cooperative compliance programmes. We assist clients in business reorganisations, transfer pricing litigation, and various domestic and cross-border procedures.

Hannes Snellman’s Tax Team provides advice in major public and private M&A, capital markets, real estate, infrastructure, and renewable energy transactions, and fund structures. Our experienced and dedicated tax practitioners help clients with, for instance, tax structuring, advance tax ruling proceedings, and tax due diligence.

Our Tax Team regularly advises clients in the largest and most high-profile transactions on the Finnish market. Hannes Snellman’s tax specialists are highly accomplished in advising taxpayers in cases involving complex cross-border tax elements. The team is trusted by clients to navigate new legal phenomena and find solutions to complex issues. With excellent understanding of our clients’ business, the team has great ability to provide practical, tailored solutions.

Hannes Snellman assisted the client in an advance ruling process to confirm that certain services acquired regarding the target investment were considered VAT exempt management services of special investment funds and that the client did not have to pay VAT under the reverse charge mechanism. The matter was important to the client, as in practice it may vary what kind of services are needed to be acquired when acting as a lead investor or co-investor joining an investment at a later stage. The services in question formed a sufficient bundle of services qualifying for the criteria of VAT exempt financial services necessary for the client to be able to make the investment decision and similar investments in a more efficient way in the future as well. The Finnish tax authorities’ first opinion was that the services were VATable, but Hannes Snellman’s VAT team was able to change the outcome during the advance ruling process. The ruling is now final.

Advised taxpayers who were subject to punitive tax increases due to non-deductible interest expenses not being disclosed on the primary sheet of their tax returns. The amounts of non-deductible interests were disclosed on appendix sheets to the tax return. The tax authorities and the court of first instance held that the purpose of the punitive tax increase rules, which were reformed in 2018, was to acknowledge the summary nature of taxation processes and therefore these rules laid specific emphasis on the accuracy of the information provided by the taxpayers on their mandatory tax disclosures and, as a consequence thereof, the punitive tax increases had to be levied with the applicable maximum rate of 2% of added income although correct information was filed on appendix sheets to the tax returns.

Our clients sought a leave to appeal to these decisions from the Supreme Administrative Court and argued that in the legal praxis of the European Court of Human Rights punitive tax increases have been deemed to be analogous with punishments under the penal code and, as such, the general human rights principles are applicable to them. As a consequence of this, punitive tax increases should not be levied merely based on objective errors on tax returns without regard to the subjective negligence of the taxpayer (or the lack thereof).

The Supreme Administrative Court’s majority reasoned that the subjective ratio legis of the 2018 reform of punitive tax increases was indeed intended to protect the summary procedure of tax assessment and to lay a strict responsibility on taxpayers for the information disclosed on their tax filings. However, taking into account the Finnish Constitution (which has implemented the aforesaid principles of the Human Rights Convention), punishments cannot be imposed without regard to the subjective negligence of the taxpayer. The Court held that our clients had reasonably established that the non-disclosure on the primary sheet of their tax return was a product of human error without an intent to make a wrongful representation. The Court continued that, although the subjective ratio legis would impose a penalty without regard to subjective negligence, the rules also provided a possibility for the tax authority to refrain from levying the tax increase in full where such increase would be unreasonable because of specific reasons. The Court held that, taking into account the total content of the law, a human error, such as the one at hand in these cases, may constitute a situation where it is unreasonable to levy a punitive tax increase in full, although strictly speaking it is against the subjective ratio legis,  and the amount of tax increases was mitigated to half of the original amount. The outcome of the decision thus constituted what in Finnish jurisprudence is determined as application of law in accordance with the objective ratio legis, i.e. what the legislator would have intended had it known the context of the situation and the interaction of the total legal system in the situation. One of the justices voted against the majority and would have overturned the tax increase totally instead of halving it with similar reasoning and also by paying attention to the significant investments that the tax authority has made to automated IT systems within the past decade with a publicly announced purpose to, among other things, better analyse information on tax disclosures and reduce the burden of tax compliance from taxpayers.

Parties

Sampo plc and Topdanmark A/S

Transaction

Sampo plc's recommended public exchange offer for the shares in Topdanmark A/S

Deal Value

DKK 33 billion

Role

Counsel to Sampo plc

Parties

Cargotec Corporation and Kalmar Corporation

Transaction

Cargotec’s partial demerger and separation of Kalmar

Deal Value

Approx. EUR 2.0 billion (illustrative carve-out sales)

Role

Counsel to Cargotec Corporation and Kalmar Corporation

Counsel to a Finnish listed company in a dispute concerning Finnish withholding tax on dividends paid abroad between 2014 and 2016.

The matter concerned dividend payments to a foreign financial institution. In accordance with the applicable tax treaty, the company had applied a withholding tax (WHT) of 0% at source on the dividends.

The Tax Administration conducted a tax audit and claimed that the company had failed their investigation duty, that the financial institution was not the beneficial owner of the dividend income due to the shares being subject to a share lending agreement, and that the company should have thus withheld a WHT of 20% on the dividends. The Tax Administration issued a new tax assessment decision, imposing not only a WHT of 20% but also a tax increase on the company. The circumstances were peculiar in the sense that the dividends had already been paid to the foreign dividend recipient, and now the Tax Administration approached the Finnish listed company (unable to recall the dividend payments made) with a claim to settle the foreign dividend recipient’s tax from the company’s own funds. The Tax Administration alleged that the dividend payer would, under law, have a duty to investigate whether each dividend recipient is entitled to tax treaty benefits in accordance with their respective tax treaties (including “beneficial owner” concepts of such treaties, if any). The Tax Administration made this allegation even though the wording of the relevant Finnish law clearly stated that the dividend payer shall only obtain the name, address, and ID number of each dividend recipient to be able to apply tax treaty WHT rates on dividends paid abroad.

The company applied for adjustment and received a unanimously positive decision from the Tax Adjustment Board, who found that the company had fulfilled its duties under law when applying the WHT 0% on the dividends. However, the state’s representative appealed the adjustment decision to the Administrative Court.

The Administrative Court, similarly, unanimously found that the company had fulfilled its investigation duties under Section 10 of the Finnish WHT Act by obtaining the information exhaustively listed in the law (name, address, and ID number of dividend recipient) and that the tax auditors’ interpretation of the law (i.e. wider investigation duty, including interpretation of the “beneficial owner” concept in tax treaties) was found to be without merit. With these arguments, no WHT or tax increase was to be imposed on the company. The Court, thus, abided by the very basic source of law doctrine, whereby taxes can only be levied based on Finnish law, as enacted by the Finnish Parliament, and international tax treaties can only limit the taxing rights of a country, not create them. As the ruling was based directly on domestic law, the Administrative Court did not examine or rule on the tax treaty concept of “beneficial owner”. The Administrative Court also ordered the Tax Administration to compensate the company’s legal costs of the Administrative Court proceedings to the full amount claimed. The state’s representative did not seek a leave of appeal from the Supreme Administrative Court and the decision of the Administrative Court is now binding.

The whole process began in 2018, which yields an overall duration of six years for the dispute. A material overhanging tax risk (for what were ultimately the taxes of another tax subject) was present for the client for the lengthy duration of the process, but the matter was finally resolved with the positive outcome by the Administrative Court.

This Administrative Court ruling is an important landmark on the application of the principle of legality. Interpretations made based on tax treaties cannot supersede the domestic law as basis for taxation (the so-called “golden rule” of tax treaty law).

Parties

Accel-KKR, Aico Group, Juuri Partners

Transaction

Accel-KKR’s majority equity investment in Aico Group

Deal Value

Value not public

Role

Counsel to Accel-KKR, a global technology-focused investment firm

Counsel in a Supreme Administrative Court Yearbook case on taxation of dividend paid on merger consideration shares.

Counsel a real estate company in a case regarding the VAT deduction of real estate investments. The Finnish Tax Administration had not accepted the VAT deductions made by the company because it had found that the premises were used for both VAT taxable and VAT exempt activities. In the case, it was evaluated from the VAT perspective how the leasing area can be determined per floor of the building while also considering how the premises are described in the articles of association.

Assisted by Hannes Snellman's tax team, the company appealed the Tax Administration’s decision to the Administrative Court and was able to prove that the premises were mostly used for purposes entitling to a VAT deduction, wherefore the company had had the right to deduct the VAT of the costs related to these premises that were used for VATable purposes. The company won the case in the Administrative Court, after which Hannes Snellman assisted the company with the preparation of corrective VAT returns and the refund of VAT that had been groundlessly left unrefunded.

Hannes Snellman acted as counsel to Finnish state enterprise Metsähallitus in the negotiation of contractual arrangements with Vattenfall for the expansion of the Korsnäs offshore wind farm development project.

Hannes Snellman advises NYAB Plc on its re-domiciliation and transfer of listing from Finland to Sweden. The re-domiciliation to Sweden is planned to be executed as a cross-border conversion, pursuant to the so-called EU Mobility Directive, whereby NYAB Plc, without being dissolved or liquidated, would be converted from a Finnish to a Swedish public limited liability company with its registered office in Sweden.

Parties:

SULO Group, (Buyer), Molok Group Oy (Target)

Transaction:

Hannes Snellman counsel to SULO Group, a global waste management leader, in its acquisition of Molok Group Oy from Vaaka Partners.

Deal value: 

Value not public

Role:

Counsel to SULO Group

Parties:

OP Suomi Infra Ky, (investor), Aurora Infrastructure (target), Equitix (majority owner)

Transaction:

Hannes Snellman acted as counsel to OP Suomi Infra Ky in their minority investment in Aurora Infrastructure

Deal value: 

Value not public

Role:

Counsel to OP Suomi Infra Ky

Parties:

Uponor Corporation (target), Georg Fischer Ltd (buyer)

Transaction: 

Counsel to Uponor Corporation in the recommended public cash tender offer by Georg Fischer Ltd to purchase all of the issued and outstanding shares of Uponor Corporation. 

Value:

EUR 2.1 billion

Role:

Counsel to Uponor Corporation

Counsel to Beneq, a leading developer and manufacturer of atomic layer disposition (ALD) technology and provider of R&D services in restructuring the group’s intellectual property holding to correspond to the requirements of the group’s business.

Parties: 

Rebellion, Vihtan Oy

Transaction:

The acquisition of Vihtan Oy, a leading manufacturer of shower screens and glass doors, marked Rebellion’s establishment in Finland.

Deal Value:

Value not public

Role:

Counsel to Rebellion

Parties

Citycon Oyj

Transaction

Counsel to Citycon Oyj in its tender offers of outstanding notes due 2024 of Citycon Treasury B.V. and capital securities issued by it in November 2019 and June 2021.

Deal value

Over EUR 40 million

Role

Counsel to Citycon Oyj

Parties

A consortium consisting of Security Trading, Fennogens Investments, Corbis, and Bain Capital (buyer), Caverion Oyj (Target)

Transaction 

Counsel to the offeror consortium consisting of Security Trading, Fennogens Investments, Corbis, and Bain Capital in the recommended public cash tender offer for all shares in Caverion Oyj.

Deal value 

EUR 955 million

Role 

Counsel to the offeror consortium consisting of Security Trading, Fennogens Investments, Corbis, and Bain Capital

Parties

Orange Capital Partners (Buyer), Starwood Capital Group and Avara Oy (Sellers)

Transaction

Hannes Snellman acted as counsel to Orange Capital Partners in the acquisition of a residential portfolio of 2,200 apartments located across 16 cities from Starwood Capital Group and Avara Oy

Deal Value

Value not public

Role

Counsel to Orange Capital Partners

Parties:

Esperi Care (target), Danske Bank, SEB, and Ilmarinen (majority owners), Triton (buyer)

Transaction:

Counsel to Esperi Care and its majority owners Danske Bank, SEB, and Ilmarinen in the acquisition of the majority of Esperi Care’s shares by Triton Smaller Mid Cap Fund II advised by Triton.

Deal Value:

Value not public.

Role:

Counsel to Esperi Care and its majority owners

Counsel to Finnish Customs in the public procurement of bitcoin brokerage services. The assignment is related to the Finnish Government’s decision to sell the Bitcoins and other cryptocurrencies seized by Finnish Customs and allocate a significant share of the additional revenue to support Ukraine in the current war.

Parties

Basware Corporation (target), a consortium consisting of Accel-KKR, Long Path Partners, and Briarwood Chase Management (buyer)

Transaction

Counsel to the offeror consortium of Accel-KKR, Long Path Partners, and Briarwood Chase Management in the tender offer for all outstanding securities in Basware Corporation.

Deal Value

EUR 620 million

Role

Counsel to the consortium

Parties

Paulig Group (seller), Valio (buyer), Gold&Green brand, intellectual property and R&D function (target)

Transaction

The divestment of Paulig’s Gold&Green brand, intellectual property and R&D function to Valio

Deal Value

Value not public

Role

Counsel to Paulig Group

Parties

Orange Capital Partners and another global investor (Buyers), Morgan Stanley (Seller)

Transaction

Orange Capital Partners' and another global investor's acquisition of a residential portfolio with 37 assets and 1,900 apartments from Morgan Stanley

Deal Value

Value not public

Role

Counsel to Orange Capital Partners and another global investor

Parties

Smartly.io (Buyer), Ad-Lib.io (Target) and various sellers

Transaction

Acquisition of Ad-Lib.io, the next-generation creative optimization platform, by Smartly.io, the leading social advertising SaaS platform for creative and performance marketers.

Deal Value

Value not public

Role

Finnish counsel to Smartly.io

Parties

Anora Group Plc (Altia Plc, Arcus ASA) and Galatea AB

Transaction

Required pre-closing divestment of Altia’s brands Skåne Akvavit, Hallands Fläder, and Brøndums and cognac brand Grönstedts (along with Arcus’s aquavit brand Akevitt Spesial and spirits brands S.P.R.T. and Dworek) to Galatea AB. The divestment to a suitable buyer was required by the Finnish, Norwegian, and Swedish competition authorities as a condition to their approval of the merger between Altia and Arcus to form Anora Group.

Deal value

Not public

Role

Lead counsel to Altia Plc (Anora Group Plc)

Counsel to a Finnish private equity fund in a Supreme Administrative Court Yearbook case confirming the correct application of equity ratio exemption in interest deduction limitations.

Parties 

Virala Acquisition Company Plc, Purmo Group Ltd

Transaction 

Virala Acquisition Company Plc's merger with Purmo Group Ltd.

Deal Value 

EUR 685 million

Role

Counsel to Virala Acquisition Company Plc

Parties 

LähiTapiola Yhteiskuntakiinteistöt Suomi Ky

Transaction 

The acquisition of two properties providing community services in Oulu, Finland. 

Deal Value 

Value not public

Role

Counsel to LähiTapiola

Parties 

Quadoro Investment GmbH, EKE-Construction Ltd.

Transaction 

Counsel to a fund managed by Quadoro Investment GmbH in an acquisition of an office property located in Espoo with a lettable area of approximately 4,200 square metres from the constructor EKE-Construction Ltd.

Deal Value 

Value not public

Role

Counsel to Quadoro Investment GmbH

Parties 

Quadoro Investment GmbH, YIT Construction Ltd.

Transaction 

Counsel to a fund managed by Quadoro Investment GmbH in an acquisition of a MEUR 32 office property located in Järvenpää with a lettable area of approximately 6,500 square metres from YIT Construction Ltd

Deal Value 

EUR 32 million

Role

Counsel to Quadoro Investment GmbH

Parties

Valmet, Neles

Transaction

Hannes Snellman acted as lead counsel to Valmet, a leading global developer and supplier of process technologies, automation, and services for the pulp, paper, and energy industries, in its merger with Neles, one of the leading providers of mission-critical flow control solutions and services for process industries in Finland. 

Deal Value

The combined value of the merging companies is approximately EUR 7 billion.

Role

Lead counsel to Valmet

Parties

Virala Acquisition Company Plc

Transaction

Hannes Snellman acted as legal counsel to Virala Acquisition Company Plc on its IPO and the listing of its Class C shares on the SPAC segment of the regulated market of Nasdaq Helsinki

Deal Value

EUR 107.5 million

Role

Counsel to Virala Acquisition Company Plc

Counsel to a tax payer in Supreme Administrative Court Yearbook case confirming US GAAP as acceptable basis for transfer pricing.

Parties
Vungle, Inc. (Buyer), GameRefinery Oy (Target)

Transaction
Vungle, Inc.’s acquisition of GameRefinery Oy

Deal Value
Value not public

Role
Counsel to Vungle, Inc.

Parties

Amazon (Buyer), Umbra (Target)

Transaction

The acquisition of Umbra by Amazon. 

Deal Value

Value not public

Role

Counsel to Umbra

Counsel in a Supreme Administrative Court Yearbook case clarifying taxation related to dividend in natura. 

Parties

Ahlstrom-Munksjö Oyj (target), a consortium consisting of Ahlström Capital, Bain Capital Private Equity, Viknum and Belgrano Inversiones (buyer)

Transaction

Recommended public cash tender offer for all shares in Ahlstrom-Munksjö Oyj by Spa Holdings 3 Oy

Deal value

Approximately EUR 2.1 billion

Role

Counsel to the consortium

Counsel to a taxpayer in the Supreme Administrative Court Yearbook case outlining VAT treatment of coworking services.

Parties

A fund managed by Quadoro Investment GmbH

Transaction

Acquisition of Hermia 5 and Hermia 6 office properties located in the Hermia Science Park in Tampere with a lettable area of approximately 30,000 square metres

Deal value

Value not public

Hannes role

Counsel to a fund managed by Quadoro Investment GmbH

Hannes team

Tapio Teräkivi, Heikki Vesikansa, Markus Bremer, Marjaana Martikainen, Jenni Parviainen, Piia Ahonen, Meeri Karlsson, Ella Rinne, Panu Vikberg, Linda Launonen, and Viivi Rousku.

Parties

City of Espoo, Kumppanuuskoulut Oy, YIT Oyj, Meridiam Investments II

Transaction

The City of Espoo signed a service agreement with Kumppanuuskoulut Oy on the implementation of five schools and three daycare centres

Deal Value

Approx. EUR 300 million

Role

Counsel to City of Espoo

Team

Rabbe Sittnikow, Jussi Ekonen, Janna Pihanurmi, Janne Veneranta, Roosa Väre, Markus Bremer, Maria Landtman, Samuli Pirinen, Heikki Vesikansa, Harri Vehviläinen, Piia Ahonen, Joakim Lavér

Counsel in Administrative Court case confirming mutual real estate company’s taxation under Business Income Tax Act.

Parties 

DWS (buyer), Regenero (Seller)

Transaction

DWS's acquisition of the Accountor Tower, a 24,000 sq. m. office development in Keilaniemi, Espoo, from YIT and HGR Property Partners’ joint venture Regenero

Deal Value

Value not public

Role

Counsel to DWS

Parties

Optomed Plc

Transaction

Optomed’s IPO and listing on the Nasdaq Helsinki stock exchange

Deal Value

The offering by the company and its shareholders amounted to approximately EUR 44 million

Role

Counsel to Optomed Plc 

Parties

FSN Capital, eCraft, Orango, Fellowmind

Transaction

Fellowmind, eCraft and Orango merge to create European Microsoft Business Applications platform

Deal Value

Value not public

Role

Counsel to eCraft and its owners

Counsel in Supreme Administrative Court case confirming equal treatment of a Swedish real estate investor in Finnish taxation

Parties

Outotec Oyj, Metso Corporation

Transaction

The combination of Outotec and Metso Minerals through a demerger

Deal Value

EUR 3.9 billion (illustrative combined sales)

Role

Counsel to Outotec Oyj

Counsel in Supreme Administrative Court case confirming that Refinancing of real estate company’s bank loans is not subject to transfer tax.

Counsel in Supreme Administrative Court case confirming real estate investor’s right to deduct VAT on transaction expenses

Counsel in Supreme Administrative Court case confirming that share transfer tax is not due on purchase price of shareholder loans

Parties

Peab AB (Buyer), YIT Corporation (Seller), YIT’s Nordic paving and mineral aggregates businesses (Targets)

Transaction

YIT’s sale of its Nordic paving and mineral aggregates businesses in Finland, Sweden, Norway and Denmark to Peab

Deal Value

EUR 280 million

Role

Counsel to YIT Corporation

Parties

Tieto Corporation, EVRY ASA

Transaction

The combination of Tieto and EVRY through a cross-border merger

Deal Value

Value not public

Role

Counsel to EVRY ASA

Counsel to a taxpayer receiving confirmation that a transfer of a business at an early stage qualifies as a transfer of a going concern for VAT purposes.

Counsel in legal proceedings before the Helsinki Administrative Court confirming an earlier Supreme Administrative Court decision that transfer taxes are not payable on the termination of share options.

Parties

Ilmarinen Mutual Pension Insurance Company, Kesko Corporation, Kesko Pension Fund, Kruunuvuoren Satama Oy

Transaction

A series of transactions, whereby Ilmarinen, Kesko, and Kesko Pension Fund, among other things, dissolve their joint ownership of Kruunuvuoren Satama and Ilmarinen acquires all 3,438,885 Kesko A shares held by Kruunuvuoren Satama.

Deal Value

EUR 164 million

Role

Counsel to Ilmarinen Mutual Pension Insurance Company, Kesko Corporation, Kesko Pension Fund, and Kruunuvuoren Satama Oy

Parties

Funds managed by Sentica Partners Oy (Buyer), Mikael Swanljung and his family (Sellers), Picnic Finland Oy, Europicnic Oy and La Torrefazione Oy (Targets)

Transaction

Sentica Partners’ acquisition of majority ownership in Picnic Company Group from Mikael Swanljung and his family

Deal Value

Value not public

Role

Counsel to Mikael Swanljung and his family

The Finnish Supreme Administrative Court issued a resolution concerning the VAT treatment of intermediary services to Finnish students aiming to study abroad in the U.S. Piia Ahonen successfully defended the client’s position through instances, and the resolution issued by the Supreme Administrative Court as a yearbook decision finally confirms that the client’s position is right and that the tax assessments were unlawful. The intermediary services are not subject to Finnish VAT due to the fact that the client acted as an intermediary between U.S. schools and Finnish students in relation to U.S.-based education and accommodation services that are not taxed in Finland.

Parties

Nordic Healthcare Group Oy, Vaaka Partners Oy

Transaction

Vaaka Partner's investment in Nordic Healthcare Group

Deal Value

Value not public

Role

Counsel to Vaaka Partners

Parties

Nexit Ventures (Seller), Ekahau, Inc. (Target), Ookla (Buyer)

Transaction

Nexit Ventures' sale of shares of Ekahau to Ookla

Deal Value

Value not public

Role

Counsel for Nexit Ventures and Ekahau, Inc.

Parties

Areim Fund III (Buyer), Avant Capital Partners, Varma Mutual Pension Insurance Company, EPISO 4 fund (Sellers)

Transaction

Areim Fund's acquisition of a portfolio of eight office properties from Avant Capital Partners, Varma Mutual Pension Insurance Company and EPISO 4 fund advised by Tristan Capital Partners

Deal Value

Value not public

Role

Counsel to Areim Fund III