Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Bevisprövning i taxeringsmål
Stockholm University, Faculty of Law.
1995 (Swedish)Doctoral thesis, monograph (Other academic)Alternative title
Examination of evidence in the tax procedure (English)
Abstract [en]

In Sweden, as well as in the other Nordic countries, the principle of free examination of evidence prevails in the court procedure. However, in the tax procedure the situation is more complicated owing to the fact that the taxation system contains numerous specific rules of evidence, such as legal presumptions and standard rules. While such rules of evidence to a certain extent encroach upon and limit the basic freedom of examination of evidence, they are regarded as necessary by reason of efficiency. There are no general rules on burden of proof or assessment of evidence in the Swedish tax system. Consequently, a substantial responsibility rests on the authorities and courts (administrative courts) to objectively evaluate and assess the evidence on the basis of competence and experience. The purpose of the rules on burden of proof should be to generate materially correct decisions and judgements, as well as to motivate the litigating parties and others to secure evidence in advance. The system regarding assessment of evidence is controversial as such for many reasons. The terminology is inconsistent and the legislature seldom appreciates such issues. At the same time, the legal writers are in dispute over which method for assessment of evidence is most well-founded.

In regular discretionary taxation cases, the burden of proof lies with the tax authorities in respect of the fact that the tax payer’s income tax return and the statements therein, as well as in the documents attached thereto, are insufficient. The reverse is the case as regards the distribution of income between spouses, the taxation of fringe benefits in respect of automobiles and – probably acquisitions and sales in close corporations. In additional taxation cases, the burden of proof lies with the tax authorities with regard both to income and costs, the exception being claims concerning set off by the tax payer accepted in the county administrative court. In regular taxation cases, the rules of evidence requires that a certain fact is made probable, while in additional taxation cases the requirement is that the fact is proved or made certain. It is notable, that the Supreme Administrative Court, in regular taxation cases as well as in additional taxation cases, at times has accepted the principle of the least possible preponderance of probability. The reason for this seems to be the lack of guidance in the tax legislation in regard to the fact that both litigating parties have equal opportunities to secure proof and evidence. When assessing evidence in taxation cases, the so called method on the evidentiary value is normally applied. The significance of this matter is briefly that the reason for a certain theme of evidence, having been caused by one or several alleged evidentiary facts, is analysed.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Stockholm: Norstedts Juridik AB, 1995. , p. 461
Series
Norstedts juridik, 99-1864390-0
Keywords [sv]
Taxering, Processrätt, Skatteprocess
National Category
Law
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:su:diva-154327Libris ID: 7267599ISBN: 91-38-50286-0 (print)OAI: oai:DiVA.org:su-154327DiVA, id: diva2:1198659
Public defence
1995-10-06, Reinholdsalen, Juristernas hus, Frescati, Stockholm, 10:00
Note

Med samanfattning på engelska

Available from: 2018-04-18 Created: 2018-04-18 Last updated: 2019-08-19Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

PDF (Not accessible to users outside Sweden)
By organisation
Faculty of Law
Law

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

isbn
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

isbn
urn-nbn
Total: 46 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf