Enlarge image
Symbolic image tax return: 1250 euros for the flight attendant as a deductible income-related expense
Photo:
Annette Riedl / dpa
Teachers, among others, who frequently correct classwork at home, often use the opportunity to deduct the cost of a study at home from their taxes.
According to a recent ruling by the Federal Fiscal Court (BFH), however, this is still conceivable in many other cases - as the court has now decided in the case of a flight attendant.
In order to be able to deduct the study, this does not necessarily have to be necessary for the work.
It is sufficient if it is used entirely or almost exclusively for professional purposes, the BFH in Munich ruled in a judgment that has now been published.
After that, the tax office was not allowed to tell the flight attendant that she could also do her flight preparations at the kitchen table.
Not at home 134 travel days a year anyway
The flight attendant used a 13.5 square meter room in her apartment as a study.
There she called up her duty rosters and, before every flight, the associated service instructions and other information – for example on passengers with special care needs or customs and security regulations in the respective destination countries.
In her tax return she put the room at 1250 euros in the income-related expenses.
The tax office did not recognize this.
It pointed out that the flight attendant was not at home on a total of 134 travel days a year anyway.
The preparations, which are minor compared to this, can also be done at your kitchen table or in the dining room.
The BFH now agreed with the flight attendant in the dispute.
The prerequisite for deducting a home office is that it is used exclusively or almost exclusively for professional activities and that the employer does not provide a workplace for these activities.
This is final.
"The law does not regulate any other requirements regarding the deductibility of expenses for a home office," it says.
Whether the work in question can also be done elsewhere in the apartment is therefore irrelevant.
File number: VI R 46/17
Apr/AFP
