2012-��AT-240

��AT Held or ��DT Pronouncements

��AT considered an appeal by the Secretary-General and a cross-appeal by Ms Johnson. ��AT agreed with ��DT��s analysis and held that the decision to deny the staff member a refund of the US income tax on her salary and emoluments was unlawful. ��AT recalled that the US grants foreign tax credits in respect of income tax paid by one of its nationals or permanent residents to another State to relieve the effects of double taxation. ��AT held that the exclusion of such credits as payment would not only contravene the principle of equality of treatment among staff members if staff members from the United States were deprived of the benefit of reimbursement for using such tax credits, but also the principle of equity among Member States irrespective of whether they choose to grant, or not to grant, an income tax exemption to their nationals, as these two principles form the basis for the staff assessment system in respect of taxation. ��AT dismissed the appeal and the cross-appeal and affirmed the ��DT judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

��DT Judgment: The Applicant contested the decision not to reimburse her for the staff assessment on her salary and emoluments. ��DT considered that the utilization of foreign tax credits by United States taxpayers constitutes ��a payment method�� to settle tax obligations and that the staff member, having discharged her tax obligation on income she earned by means of a foreign tax credit, ��must be regarded both as having been subject to US taxation on income received from the Organization, and as having discharged that tax obligation��. ��DT ordered the Secretary-General to refund the Applicant the amount of the staff assessment on her salaries and emoluments.

Legal Principle(s)

A staff member (who is a United States taxpayer) can discharge his/her US income tax liability on �� salary and emoluments by utilizing foreign tax credits. Accordingly, the Organization must grant a refund of the US income tax on his/her �� salary and emoluments.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed on merits

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 ��DT Statute and Article 11(3) of the ��AT 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

Johnson

Entity

Case Number(s)

Tribunal

Registry

Date of Judgement