Swedish: delägarens del av fastighetens taxeringsvärde

[MattiasNYC]

I have, however, hoped that somebody would react to the (in my opinion mistaken) proposal tu multiplicate the two values of T and M, which gives an absurd result. Reading the original text, however, makes me believe, that this is what is to be understood from the text: "fastighetens taxeringsvärde multiplicerat med 1,33 av marknadsvärdet fastställt av värderingsman."
What is your proposal of solving this?

Did you read my posts?

I agree that it gives an absurd result, so it can be dismissed simply because of that. But further more I already explained in my first post, the first answer, how I think it should be parsed:

hembjudande delägarens del av fastighetens taxeringsvärde multiplicerat med 1,33 av marknadsvärdet

later clarified as:

hembjudande delägarens (an)del av fastighetens taxeringsvärde multiplicerat med 1,33 av (multiplicerat med) marknadsvärdet


The part that may be confusing is that first "del av". That use of "av" is not denoting multiplication, and since it isn't it means it belongs to "del", and that in turn means that "del av" is basically just a colloquial version of "andel", which in turn means that the part that comes before belongs 'with' what comes after and together form the part in blue.

Please note: without the slashes and formatting of the original document and without knowledge of how that's to be used normally the above is to me the most reasonable conclusion. With what Segorian provided it all changes of course.

 

[Gavril]

hembjudande delägarens (an)del av fastighetens taxeringsvärde multiplicerat med 1,33 av (multiplicerat med) marknadsvärdet


The part that may be confusing is that first "del av". That use of "av" is not denoting multiplication, and since it isn't it means it belongs to "del", and that in turn means that "del av" is basically just a colloquial version of "andel", which in turn means that the part that comes before belongs 'with' what comes after and together form the part in blue.

Right, but I understood the blue part of the phrase to mean "[the shareholder's share of the property] * [the property's taxation value]".

So regardless of whether the shareholder owns 1%, 25%, or some other percentage of the property, we are still just doing simple multiplication.

Granted, it's possible that "the shareholder's share of the property's taxation value" could be calculated through a more complex formula than what I described above. Is this a common practice in Sweden?

 

[MattiasNYC]

Right, but I understood the blue part of the phrase to mean "[the shareholder's share of the property] * [the property's taxation value]".

So regardless of whether the shareholder owns 1%, 25%, or some other percentage of the property, we are still just doing simple multiplication.

Yes, but:

delägarens del av
the shareholders's share of

fastighetens taxeringsvärde
the property's taxation value

There is no multiplication within that section. The word "av" I assume is used for multiplication in the latter part of the sentence but here it forms one component with "del av" (again taking the sentence at face value). I basically am not sure if we would ever use a regular word followed by "av" with "av" meaning multiplication. Numbers yes, and certainly a percentage followed by "av", but I'm not sure about a regular word like this. So in the section we're talking about multiplication is either encapsulated by the word "av" or it is implied.

I'm saying that "delägarens del av" ends up only making sense as a fraction or percentage, not the result of a multiplication. I understand why it seems odd to use taxation value in the first place since we could simply have said "share of the property" or similar, but as Ben pointed out if you take it to literally mean the result of actually calculating the dollar amount of that share the resulting final calculation makes zero sense (in other words you end up with at least 100,000 x (1.33 x 500,000)=66.5Bn.)

Granted, it's possible that "the shareholder's share of the property's taxation value" could be calculated through a more complex formula than what I described above. Is this a common practice in Sweden?

If you're just asking about the actual formula in real life then I would imagine you're correct: The share multiplied by the taxation value, just like you implied.

 

[MattiasNYC]

Look at it like this:

Q: What's your share of the rent?
A1: $800
A2: 25%

Both viable.

 

[Gavril]

I don't follow.

del/andel av = part of, portion of, share of

This is a division operation.

And division can be restated as multiplication by a fraction/percentage.

Though the quoted sentence doesn't explicitly state what this percentage is (I assumed that it's the % of the property that the shareholder owns), we're still talking about multiplication by a percentage, whatever it may be.

 

[MattiasNYC]

Yes, I understand what you're saying. What I'm saying is that when I read the text I can't get to the point where we actually do math to get the share of the property as an actual amount of currency. To me the way it was written it implies the share as a percentage or fraction. Ben's calculation looks absurd because it uses an amount rather than a fraction, and I think you end up in the same place (?) in your most recent example. If we stick with TV = 400k and there being four people inheriting then your way of looking at it looks like this to me:

"[the shareholder's share of the property] * [the property's taxation value]"
is
0.25 * 400,000
is
100,000

----
(Edit: When re-reading the above I realized that maybe you made an error (?) in your translation into English: The word "property" appears only once in this section of the sentence, yet in your translation it appears twice. I didn't catch that in post #20, so if you re-read that maybe you'll see what I mean.)
----

But what then follows (multiplicerat med 1,33 av marknadsvärdet fastställt av värderingsman.) gives us an astronomical value. So from a practical standpoint it can't be correct. Now, it just so happens that it's all incorrectly formatted anyway, but given the way it's written and the topic matter it can't be correct at face value.

So my way of going about it is basically looking at "the property's taxation value" as another way of saying "the property". So what is your share of the property? 0.25x. So that whole string becomes 0.25x, followed by "multiplicerat med 1,33 av marknadsvärdet".

So rather than "What's your share of the taxation value?", "My share is 100,000", the answer would be "My share is 25%". The shareholder's share of the property's taxation value is 25%.

 

[Gavril]

Yes, I understand what you're saying. What I'm saying is that when I read the text I can't get to the point where we actually do math to get the share of the property as an actual amount of currency.

I'm sorry, I am completely bewildered as to how you arrive at this position.

The math described in the sentence seems quite straightforward apart from the confusing use of "av" after 1.33.

Of course, if we apply the math to the values in question, it results in absurdly large amounts, but that's a separate issue.

----
(Edit: When re-reading the above I realized that maybe you made an error (?) in your translation into English: The word "property" appears only once in this section of the sentence, yet in your translation it appears twice. I didn't catch that in post #20, so if you re-read that maybe you'll see what I mean.)
----

I'm not entirely sure what you're referring to, but if you're talking about the phrase "the shareholder's share of the property":

"... of the property" is not explicitly stated in the Swedish sentence, but I added it because I assumed that this was the implicit meaning, and it makes the math much clearer.

Theoretically this assumption could be wrong, and there could be some other way of determining "the shareholder's share of the property's taxation value".

But either way, the phrase is a description of a straightforward multiplication operation wherein a percentage (whatever that may be) is multiplied by the property's taxation value (whatever that may be).

So my way of going about it is basically looking at "the property's taxation value" as another way of saying "the property".

Again, I'm afraid I don't have the foggiest idea how you're arriving at this interpretation.

I would like to request that we put an end to this discussion, as I don't think it is adding anything useful to the original topic of the thread.

If you wish, the discussion can be continued through private messages or some other channel, but as far as I'm concerned, the useful part of the thread ended with Segorian's contribution in post #10.

 

[MattiasNYC]

But either way, the phrase is a description of a straightforward multiplication operation wherein a percentage (whatever that may be) is multiplied by the property's taxation value (whatever that may be).

But it isn't necessarily so:

Min del av hyran... är 2000 sek
Min del av hyran... är 25%

The structure is the same. Then just add something moderately relevant, such as utilities plus an added surcharge by the person in charge of taking care of actually paying the bills in our shared apartment:

Min del av hyran multiplicerat med 1.05 av den totala hyran.

There's one way to make that make sense, and another to not make it make sense. If you choose to do math to that first part the resulting number is again absurd, and if you instead don't assume as you did that there are hidden words there and just substitute "min del av" with the fraction/percentage then it does make sense:

2000 x 1.05 x 8000 = 16.8m
25% of 1.05 x 8000 = 2,100

Again, I'm afraid I don't have the foggiest idea how you're arriving at this interpretation.

Well now I've explained in reasonable detail multiple times how so if it's still unclear I really don't know how to improve on it. You're getting stuck on adding a word and assuming there's a multiplication operation in that first part and I think that's wrong. The key phrase is "del av" / "andel" which can imply that or something else. The question is if it's more reasonable to assume that there's a hidden word there which then makes it imply multiplication resulting in an absurd value or instead take "del av" to mean a percentage or fraction and end up with a reasonable value.

Occam's razor.

 

[Gavril]

Update:

I deleted the previous post because I think I now understand the point being made.

In the deleted post, I wrote:

In the phrase delägarens del av fastighetens taxeringsvärde, we are dealing with two terms: the "taxation value" (= X), and the "shareholder's share" of that value (= Y).

X is a monetary amount, and Y is a percentage of that amount. The phrase describes a multiplication of X*Y

But MattiasNYC's suggestion is that the phrase only means "Y" in the stated context, not "X*Y".

This inference seems more reasonable if the shareholder's percentage of the taxation value is not simply the shareholder's percentage of ownership of the property, but is calculated through some different formula instead.

(If a person's percentage of the taxation value is identical to his/her percentage of the property itself – and if this equivalency is the normal practice in this sort of context – then why would this percentage be expressed as "(an)del av fastighetens taxeringsvärde" rather than simply "(an)del av fastigheten"?)

In any case, I continue to think that this discussion has little relevance to the original question, so I requested that the posts from #17 onward be separated into their own thread.

 

[Gavril]

I think that part of why I had difficulty understanding the aforementioned point is that the relevant English terms (share/fraction/etc.) tend to be very ambiguous in this respect.

Phrases such as

"Your share of X"
"Your portion of X"
"Your fraction of X"

can refer either to the whole quantity pX (where "p" = the relevant percentage), or merely to the coefficient "p".

percentage is the only term I can think of right now that might somewhat reliably convey the "coefficient" meaning, but there's probably a lot of potential for ambiguity even then.