UNDT/2023/021

UNDT/2023/021, Jackson

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

The Tribunal held that tax reimbursement is governed by a specific and unique legal regime carefully deliberated upon by the General Assembly. Staff regulation 3.3(f) cannot be read into “other payments” in staff rule 3.17(ii).

The Tribunal agreed with the Applicant’s understanding that payments under staff rule 3.17(ii) relate to all staff and all nationalities of the United Nations and are not restricted only to USA citizens as in the case for reimbursement of income tax under staff regulation 3.3(f). Hence, the two cannot be read together or have same application.

The Tribunal also agreed with the Applicant that unlike allowances and payments in staff rule 3.17(ii) which are made to and “received” by a staff member as a benefit, the tax reimbursement is paid to a third party, the State or Federal Government of the USA. It is not a benefit that a staff member receives as an entitlement. On the contrary, the Tribunal held that it is a burden on the staff member because it comes from staff assessment.

The Tribunal held that the Respondent’s argument that the scope of staff rule 3.17(ii) includes a payment to a staff member in reimbursement for national income taxation in respect of their United Nations salaries and emoluments was without legal basis.

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

The Applicant contested a decision by the Assistant Secretary-General Office of Human Resources (“ASG/OHR”) refusing to grant an approval of an exception to then applicable staff rule 3.7(ii) to allow for a retroactive reimbursement of his claimed tax payments.

Legal Principle(s)

A basic tenet of statutory construction prohibits courts and administrative tribunals from interpreting rules in a manner that conflicts with the statutory scheme; rather, rules must be interpreted to be consistent with their enabling statutes.

Tax reimbursement is governed by a specific and unique legal regime carefully deliberated upon by the General Assembly.

Outcome
Judgment entered for Applicant in full or in part
Outcome Extra Text

 The decision to deny the Applicant retroactive reimbursement of 2015-2018 State tax on the ground that he filed his claim late was rescinded. The application was allowed.

The Respondent was ordered to pay the Applicant's 2015-2018 State tax and to also reimburse to the Applicant any penalty and interest accrued on unpaid taxes for 2015-2018 from 27 January 2022. All other claims were dismissed.

 

OAJ prepared this case law summary for informational purposes only. It is no official record and should not be relied upon as an authoritative interpretation of the Tribunals' rulings. For the authoritative texts, please refer to the judgment or order rendered by the respective Tribunal. The Tribunals are the only bodies competent to interpret their respective judgments, as provided under Article 12(3) of the UNDT Statute and Article 11(3) of the UNAT Statute. Any inaccuracies in the publication are the sole responsibility of OAJ, which should be contacted directly for any correction requests. To provide comments, don't hesitate to get in touch with OAJ at oaj@un.org.

The judgment summaries were generally prepared in English. They were translated into French and are being reviewed for accuracy of the translation.

Applicants/ Appellants
Jackson
Entity
Case Number(s)
Tribunal
Registry Location :
Date of Judgment
Judge(s)
Language of Judgment
Appeal Status
Appealed
Issuance Type