it All started late August to early September. Unknown tax client had contact with the tax administration headquarters in Helsinki, vallila to. He requires a name removal because high earners on the list, which the irs ways to deliver the media.
the appellant had read carefully the EU data protection regulation, article number 21 (you move to another service): "the data subject shall have the right to personal specific situation-related basis at any time oppose him concerning the processing of personal data..."
the tax administration of the five lawyers met to consider the claim. The next two weeks leading lawyer Matti Merisalo and publicity and data protection specialist lawyers are deliberating the matter several more times.Towels from the professor
Merisalo, according to the general Staff and legal unit was understood at once that this is a significant decision desk.
the Tax and the public welfare society of the hardest core. In finland, the income of the highest income and tax information is published at the beginning of November for years. Open data is the raw material for jealousy and voyeuristic, but also a deeper social debate.Matti Merisalo.Yle
– we are Aware that this is a significant change. A couple of weeks to think about it was hard. This was not a botched job done solution, Merisalo gusty of.
Administrative law professor Olli Mäenpää said the Finnish image magazine (you move to another service) interview, that the irs does not do things in a "very thorough preparation", when the decision is not even a protocol.
It's his opinion. I have no idea whether Mäenpää more accurately aware of how the decision is the tax administration weighed in, Merisalo acknowledge and wish to comment on the professor's thoughts on it more.Why not ask?
the irs could reject the "registered" a complaint. It would have followed the administrative court in processing and in time decision - positive or negative. In any case, tax administration should be probably avoided kohulta, which has taken its already the attorney general's office in the loop below.
Merisalo, decision Ylellekin commented superintendent Related Controls and other lawyers had read the same article, as valittajakin: "the data subject shall have the right to object...". The lawyers in the middle there is a consensus that even if the tax information has been ordered in finland, the public, the tax, the operator does not have a statutory obligation to compile information for the media. Therefore, the data subject shall have the right to object to their information listing.
the Outside view is not started to ask questions.
It was above all the fact that come the initiation stage, where the requirements should start to solve.
Merisalo say now that "can not be denied, that the decision to join open to interpretation". He expects the attorney general for an opinion on how the new data protection regulation should be interpreted.
This is left traffic, and if we can get clarification, so act accordingly.the Supreme guardians of the law to find out
tax information publicity is that much a significant thing, that also the supreme guardians of the law, the attorney general's office to take your selvitykseensä irs decision to remove the part of high earners name of the media saamalta list. Merisalo does not seem to regret, on the contrary.
in the New data protection regulation in the collide with great principles: society, transparency, freedom of expression, privacy protection. The new limits are not yet specified to define in practice.
Settings while viewing, so there isn't a law of preparatory work, which would tell how this approach to tax information disclosure. Pretty good, that will be authoritative positions to take, what is it the correct interpretation.
Also Journalists and media companies lobby the media alliance have appealed the tax decision to the attorney general. Yle is considering an appeal of the administrative court that the irs did not agree to surrender large income from the list of the deleted data.Store in an impossible chore
after Offering the opportunity to remove your information high-income list, the tax dropped down to 233 requirement to have the data removed. What followed was "quite a job", when each application should evaluate whether the background sufficiently to press their personal causes. Many of the items in the application was asked to yet more detailed arguments.
so How's it going, if the number of applications for ten - or a hundred times?
– let's Say, that such a number is quite a lot. Now need to think about. And depends on what solutions could get a legal degree or legal control of.
Part of the high-income deleted from the list of data find out your tax office requested information on the basis of:
at Least these names were missing high earners on the list – among a number of more than 10 million earned inSubscribe Yle newsletters!
Get Overeating the best content straight to your inbox! Order as many letters as you want!Proceed to order