Comments on: Do Finnish government bodies regard the High Administrative Court as a joke?

By: rr

rr — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 22:14:35 +0000

Hank W. nice to see you trolling again. Haven’t gotten any smarter, have you?

By: Norbert

Norbert — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 07:04:45 +0000

The Marxist state of Finland disrespecting the people again. (sigh)

By: Fat Bastard

Fat Bastard — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 02:15:58 +0000

Sirkuspelle, why don’t you flog that horse carcass a little bit more. Maybe it’ll come back to life and start pulling your whinecart once again. You never can tell…

By: Hank W.

Hank W. — Sat, 12 Dec 2009 10:44:52 +0000

I told you so when the decision came out it had nothing to do with your wishful thinking interpretation of what it was saying. It had nothing to do with the principle of the publicity of tax records – it was about handling and refining the data – especially offering a SMS service – again nothing to do with publishing the data in a printed paper. And the KHO had asked for the EU court ruling as well. It says there “Päätös ei koske verotustietojen julkisuutta eikä oikeutta julkaista niitä.” – which part of “ei” do you not understand?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 12:08:58 +0000

> I was told by an involved government official that I should file charges with the police. I am not sure who is guilty and who to file the charges against.

You file against unknown and the state attorney figures it out for you.

By: Martin-Éric

Martin-Éric — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 15:58:51 +0000

Given how both the government and the courts here are a joke, I’m not surprised that they’d end up disregarding each other.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 15:00:55 +0000

Well, both the court decision and the press release explicitely say that the case (and thus decision) was not about the publicity of tax records nor about the right to publish them.

The case is only about the handling of personal data by Satakunnan Markkinapörssi Oy, not about any wrong-doing of the Tax Authority (which may or may not be happening).

Also, according to the decision the case was handed back to Data Protection Board.

By: Winter (Go Protons, Cancer in remission, will soon be removed from "Dead Man Walking" video.)

Sat, 05 Dec 2009 22:55:17 +0000

gee, you live in a Nanny State, get over it

you have no rights, you gave them up, plus 60% of your income.

Its called SOCIALISM…….. geeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

By: hlehto

hlehto — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 20:50:11 +0000

You probably can’t deduce the church tax status unless the person in question does not have any tax deductible costs (for example, commuting, loan for apartment) and is paying the absolute maximum for that income level. Then you can figure that the person pays the church tax too. I’d say that is a rare case.

You can’t tell for certain that someone does not belong to a church that has taxation rights based on the tax percentage.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 20:42:37 +0000

Honestly,I don’t know who rules this country?