Den skatterättsliga gränsdragningen mellan spel- och tävlingsvinster - En analys med grund i skatteförmåge- och intresseprincipen
(2019) LAGF03 20192Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Gränsen mellan spel- och tävlingsvinster kan vara svår att dra, men det är ack så viktigt att den dras korrekt. Skatterättsligt skiljer sig nämligen behandlingen av de båda vinstformerna åt markant, där tävlingsvinster som huvudregel beskattas av vinnaren. Spelvinster medför däremot inte någon individbeskattning, utan här får istället arrangören vara den bidragande aktören. Avvägningen mellan spel och tävling har historiskt präglats av begränsad rättslig vägledning, där praxis och ställningstaganden från myndigheter fått ta stort utrymme. Storleken på eventuellt slumpmoment i förhållande till prestation har i mångt och mycket fått agera utgångspunkt, där man under senare år valt att se till ”en verksamhets allmänna karaktär” som den... (More)
- Gränsen mellan spel- och tävlingsvinster kan vara svår att dra, men det är ack så viktigt att den dras korrekt. Skatterättsligt skiljer sig nämligen behandlingen av de båda vinstformerna åt markant, där tävlingsvinster som huvudregel beskattas av vinnaren. Spelvinster medför däremot inte någon individbeskattning, utan här får istället arrangören vara den bidragande aktören. Avvägningen mellan spel och tävling har historiskt präglats av begränsad rättslig vägledning, där praxis och ställningstaganden från myndigheter fått ta stort utrymme. Storleken på eventuellt slumpmoment i förhållande till prestation har i mångt och mycket fått agera utgångspunkt, där man under senare år valt att se till ”en verksamhets allmänna karaktär” som den avgörande faktorn. I en sådan bedömning skall man enligt förarbeten till spellagen, vilken trädde i kraft 2019, se till ett helhetsperspektiv där deltagarens syfte bakom medverkandet skall spela en central roll.
Jämsides de regleringar vilka gemensamt format den svenska skatterätten finns även rättsliga principer, där Lodin m. fl. hävdat att skatteförmåge- samt intresseprincipen historiskt varit dominerande. Förstnämnda princip bygger på en tanke om att varje subjekt skall betala skatt utifrån förmåga, där intresseprincipen istället innebär att den nytta ett subjekt har av den offentliga verksamheten skall ligga till grund för beräkningen av skattetrycket.
Jag har i denna uppsats undersökt rimligheten i dagens gränsdragning mellan spel- och tävlingsvinster, där poker fått fungera exemplifierande. Framförallt framförs invändningar mot nuvarande marginalisering av förhållandet mellan deltagares skicklighet visavi slump, där istället deltagarens syfte bakom medverkandet fått en central roll i bedömningen. Vidare har även undersökts i vilken utsträckning bakomliggande tankar till ovan nämnda principer går att återspegla i den nya regleringen. I analysen redogörs att intresseprincipen i stort fått stå tillbaka, samtidigt som principen om skatteförmåga i mångt och mycket korrelerar med nuvarande lagstiftning. (Less) - Abstract
- The line between gambling and competition wins can be difficult to draw, but it is important that it is drawn correctly. In fact, tax law differs significantly in the treatment of the two forms of profit, where competition winnings are, as a general rule, taxed by the winner. Gambling winnings on the other hand, do not entail any individual taxation. Here, the organizer is instead the contributing part. The boundary between gambling and competition has historically been characterized by limited legal guidance, where practices and elucidation from authorities have been given a lot of space. The magnitude of fortuity in relation to performance has, to a great extent, been portrayed as a starting point, where in recent years it has been... (More)
- The line between gambling and competition wins can be difficult to draw, but it is important that it is drawn correctly. In fact, tax law differs significantly in the treatment of the two forms of profit, where competition winnings are, as a general rule, taxed by the winner. Gambling winnings on the other hand, do not entail any individual taxation. Here, the organizer is instead the contributing part. The boundary between gambling and competition has historically been characterized by limited legal guidance, where practices and elucidation from authorities have been given a lot of space. The magnitude of fortuity in relation to performance has, to a great extent, been portrayed as a starting point, where in recent years it has been decided to consider “the general character of an operation” as the decisive factor. In such an assessment, according to the legislative history from the new gambling act which came into force in 2019, an overall view should be taken into account, where the participant’s purpose behind the participation should play a central role.
Alongside the regulations which have shaped Swedish tax law, there are also legal principles. Lodin et al. has argued that the ability to pay principle and the benefit principle has been historically dominant. The aforementioned principle is based on the idea that each subject must pay tax on the basis of ability, where the benefit principle means that the benefit a subject has of the public sector must form the basis for the calculation of the tax burden.
In this paper, I have investigated the reasonableness of today’s boundary between gambling and competition winnings, where poker has been used as an example. Above all, objections have been raised regarding the marginalization of the relationship between participant’s skills vis-á-vis fortuity, where instead the purpose behind the participation now has a central role in the assessment. Furthermore, it has also been investigated to what extent underlying thoughts to the principles mentioned above can be reflected in the new legislation. The analysis shows that the benefit principle has been largely held back, while the ability to pay principle in many ways correlates with the current legislation. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/8999568
- author
- Ferreira Malta Hallström, Alex LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- LAGF03 20192
- year
- 2019
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- Skatterätt, Spelvinster, Tävlingsvinster
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 8999568
- date added to LUP
- 2020-03-28 10:49:10
- date last changed
- 2020-03-28 10:49:10
@misc{8999568,
abstract = {{The line between gambling and competition wins can be difficult to draw, but it is important that it is drawn correctly. In fact, tax law differs significantly in the treatment of the two forms of profit, where competition winnings are, as a general rule, taxed by the winner. Gambling winnings on the other hand, do not entail any individual taxation. Here, the organizer is instead the contributing part. The boundary between gambling and competition has historically been characterized by limited legal guidance, where practices and elucidation from authorities have been given a lot of space. The magnitude of fortuity in relation to performance has, to a great extent, been portrayed as a starting point, where in recent years it has been decided to consider “the general character of an operation” as the decisive factor. In such an assessment, according to the legislative history from the new gambling act which came into force in 2019, an overall view should be taken into account, where the participant’s purpose behind the participation should play a central role.
Alongside the regulations which have shaped Swedish tax law, there are also legal principles. Lodin et al. has argued that the ability to pay principle and the benefit principle has been historically dominant. The aforementioned principle is based on the idea that each subject must pay tax on the basis of ability, where the benefit principle means that the benefit a subject has of the public sector must form the basis for the calculation of the tax burden.
In this paper, I have investigated the reasonableness of today’s boundary between gambling and competition winnings, where poker has been used as an example. Above all, objections have been raised regarding the marginalization of the relationship between participant’s skills vis-á-vis fortuity, where instead the purpose behind the participation now has a central role in the assessment. Furthermore, it has also been investigated to what extent underlying thoughts to the principles mentioned above can be reflected in the new legislation. The analysis shows that the benefit principle has been largely held back, while the ability to pay principle in many ways correlates with the current legislation.}},
author = {{Ferreira Malta Hallström, Alex}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Den skatterättsliga gränsdragningen mellan spel- och tävlingsvinster - En analys med grund i skatteförmåge- och intresseprincipen}},
year = {{2019}},
}