| | SLO | ENG | Cookies and privacy

Bigger font | Smaller font
First page > Show document

Show document Help

Title:Davčni vidik stavbne pravice v Sloveniji in nekaterih drugih evropskih državah
Authors:ID Ternik, Sonja (Author)
ID Škof, Bojan (Mentor) More about this mentor... New window
ID Vrenčur, Renato (Comentor)
Files:.pdf MAG_Ternik_Sonja_2016.pdf (1,17 MB)
MD5: 478482415021D7C68FF06D0EAE25D3F3
 
Language:Slovenian
Work type:Master's thesis
Typology:2.09 - Master's Thesis
Organization:PF - Faculty of Law
Abstract:Stavbna pravica je omejena stvarna pravica, ki je bila v slovenski pravni red umeščena z uveljavitvijo Stvarnopravnega zakonika, zato še vedno velja za relativno nov institut, ki za njegovo učinkovitost in uporabnost v praksi zahteva temeljito obravnavo z vidika več pravnih področij. Narava te pravice uporabnikom ponuja mnogo prednosti, zato so zavedanje o obstoju in pomenu te pravice, njena prepoznavnost, zlasti pa jasni odgovori na temeljna vprašanja tega instituta, bistveni za njeno obravnavanje v (sodni) praksi, s tem pa za odgovor na vprašanje, zakaj stavbna pravica in ne morebiti nakup oziroma prodaja zemljišča. Na podlagi poglobljene teoretične in praktične analize so predstavljene temeljne značilnosti stavbne pravice, njen pomen, prednosti in uporaba v praksi. Natančen in nazoren prikaz stvarnopravnih vidikov stavbne pravice, ki so predstavljeni v prvem delu naloge ter orisani primerjalno pravno z nekaterimi drugimi pravnimi redi evropskih držav (Avstrija, Nemčija in Švica), so podlaga oziroma predpostavka za predstavitev davčnopravnega vidika tega instituta, v okviru katerega bo predstavljena njegova davčna obravnava v Sloveniji, problematika, ki je aktualna na tem področju ter njen vpliv na uporabnost tega instituta v praksi. Predstavljena bo tudi davčna obravnava te pravice in transakcij v zvezi z njo v pravnih redih Avstrije, Nemčije in Švice, zlasti pa ugotovljene razlike v tej obravnavi v primerjavi z zakonsko podlago v Sloveniji. Slovenski pravni red namreč stavbno pravico tako stvarnopravno kot davčnopravno obravnava po vzoru nemške in avstrijske ureditve, ključna za še vedno prisotne dileme na tem področju in ne nazadnje posledično tudi njeno manjšo razširjenost v praksi, kot je bilo z njeno umestitvijo v pravni red pričakovano, pa je njena skopa zakonska ureditev, ki ne daje jasnih odgovorov na vse situacije, ki se pojavljajo v praksi. Gledano stvarnopravno tako pomembno (omejeno) stvarno pravico kot je stavbna pravica obravnava le nekaj členov Stvarnopravnega zakonika, ki so v določenih delih celo vsebinsko nedosledni, že samo to pa v nekaterih pogledih vpliva na uporabnost tega instituta v praksi, saj sodna praksa kaže, da sodišča na podlagi obstoječe zakonske ureditve, nimajo manevrskega prostora za sprejem odločitve v smeri, ki jo drugače kot zakon, zagovarja in utemeljuje teorija z uporabnimi primeri v praksi in z zakonsko ureditvijo ter primeri iz primerljivih pravnih redov v tujini. Z zornega kota davčne obravnave pa stavbno pravico izrecno omenja le Zakon o davku na promet nepremičnin (ZDPN-2), čeprav transakcije v zvezi z njo zapadejo tudi pod Zakon o dohodnini (ZDoh-2) in Zakon o davku na dodano vrednost (ZDDV-1), slednji jo v razmerju do davčne obravnave lastninske pravice postavi celo v slabši položaj, na drugi strani pa pravni redi primerljivih držav tej pravici brez dvoma dajejo večjo težo in doslednost (tudi transparentnost) pri njeni zakonski obravnavi, kar povečuje njeno prepoznavnost oziroma prepoznavnost njenih učinkov in posledic med uporabniki, in prav to je bistveno za razširjenost te pravice v zasebni in poslovni praksi. Teorija in doslej znana (restriktivna) sodna praksa opozarjata na pomanjkljivosti zakonodajne ureditve stavbne pravice, pravne ureditve, po vzoru katerih smo institut stavbne dejansko vnesli v naš pravni red, pa ponujajo možnosti in izhodišča za njeno dopolnitev oziroma prenovitev, ki je potrebna in bo koristna za prakso.
Keywords:stavbna pravica, odstop od načela superficio solo cedit, nastanek stavbne pravice, prenos stavbne pravice, prenehanje stavbne pravice, obdavčitev stavbne pravice, stavbna pravica v praksi, stavbna pravica v tujini
Place of publishing:Maribor
Publisher:[S. Ternik]
Year of publishing:2016
PID:20.500.12556/DKUM-61058 New window
UDC:336.22(043.3)
COBISS.SI-ID:5178667 New window
NUK URN:URN:SI:UM:DK:I0BA3N0P
Publication date in DKUM:16.09.2016
Views:3230
Downloads:498
Metadata:XML DC-XML DC-RDF
Categories:PF
:
Copy citation
  
Average score:(0 votes)
Your score:Voting is allowed only for logged in users.
Share:Bookmark and Share



Hover the mouse pointer over a document title to show the abstract or click on the title to get all document metadata.

Secondary language

Language:English
Title:Tax-law aspect of building right in Slovenia and some other European countries
Abstract:Building right is a limited right in rem that was introduced into Slovenian legal system with the implementation of Law of Property code, and is still a relatively new institution, in practice demanding thorough proceedings from the perspective of many legal fields in order to be effective and applicable. The nature of the right offers its users many advantages, therefore the awareness of its existence and meaning, its recognisability, and foremost its clear answers to fundamental questions about this issue are essential for the examination if this right in (legal) practice, and therefore for the answer to the question why to exercise the building right and not consider a purchase or sale of the property. In this thesis, the fundamental characteristics of building right, its meaning, its advantages and its implementation in practice are presented based on the comprehensive theoretical and practical analysis. The thorough and illustrative display of in-rem aspects of the building right presented in the first part of the thesis and outlined and compared with other legal systems of European countries (Austria, Germany, and Switzerland) are the basis or assumption for the presentation of the tax-law aspect of this right within which the tax treatment of building right in Slovenia, the current problems in this field and their influence on the applicability of this right in practice are described. In comparison with the Slovenian arrangements, the Austrian, German and Swiss legal systems are presented regarding their tax treatment of this right and the associated transactions, and this is followed by the analysis of differences between them. The Slovenian legal system treats the building right as a right in rem, and taxes it based on the model of the German and Austrian system, and it is its sparse legal regulation that does not provide clear answers for all situations appearing in practice. This is causing numerous dilemmas in this field, and is consequently the reason for the smaller extent in practice than it was expected when implementing it into the legal system. The (limited) right in rem, meaning the building right, which, seen from the perspective of property law, is so important, is regulated by only a few articles in the Law of Property which, in some parts, are even inconsistent in terms of content, and this fact influences the applicability of this right in practice since the case law shows that, based on the existing legal regulation, the courts do not have any scope for decisions which are not according to law, but are urged and established by the theory of applicable examples in practice, and through the legal regulation and examples from comparable legal systems in other countries. From the perspective of tax treatment, the building right is only explicably mentioned in the Real Property Transaction Act (ZDPN-2), although transactions in relation to it also fall under the Personal Income Tax Act (ZDoh-2), and Value Added Tax Act (ZDDV-1). The latter puts it into a worse position in comparison to the tax treatment of ownership right. On the other hand legal systems in comparable countries give this right undeniably more weight and consistency (also transparency) with its legal treatment which makes this right and its effects and consequences more recognisable among its users, and this is why this right is more common in private and business practice. The theory and the so far known (restrictive) case law, as well as the legal regulations on which Slovenia based the institution of building right and introduced it into its legal system, offer more possibilities and a basis for its amendments and renewals which are needed and will be of benefit for the practice.
Keywords:building right, resignation from the principle superficies solo cedit, origins of building right, cessation of building right, taxation of building right, building right in practice, building right abroad


Comments

Leave comment

You must log in to leave a comment.

Comments (0)
0 - 0 / 0
 
There are no comments!

Back
Logos of partners University of Maribor University of Ljubljana University of Primorska University of Nova Gorica