Judgment 2257
95th Session, 2003
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 20
Extract:
"The principle of tax exemption does not apply to former staff members."
Keywords:
pension; privileges and immunities; retirement; tax;
Judgment 2256
95th Session, 2003
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 14-16
Extract:
"With regard to the role of a tax reimbursement agreement, the Tribunal stated the following [in judgment 2032]: "It would be strange indeed if the absence of [a tax reimbursement agreement (TRA)] could be invoked by an international organisation or its member states to deprive some staff members and not others of their tax-exempt status. If a member state in breach of its international obligations taxes the exempt income of a staff member, the reimbursement of that tax cannot be made to depend upon the grace and favour of that state."[T]he evident corollary of that statement is that it would similarly be strange if the existence of an agreement could be invoked by an international organisation to deprive some staff members and not others of their tax-exempt status. Such an agreement is meant to set the terms of a member state's commitment to refund an organisation for tax reimbursements. It must, however, conform with international law and cannot be used to undermine the fundamental principles of tax exemption recalled by the Tribunal. Thus, even if the text of the TRA had the reach which the organisation contends for it, which may be doubted, it would simply be unenforceable as being contrary to law. [...] It is likewise with the provisions of the Staff Regulations which, in the organisation's submissions, would limit the complainant's right to tax reimbursement to the amounts actually paid to the organisation by the United States under the TRA. Like the TRA itself, the Staff Regulations must be in conformity with the requirements of the law and where they are not, they are simply unenforceable."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2032
Keywords:
equal treatment; international civil service principles; member state; no provision; privileges and immunities; refund; salary; staff regulations and rules; tax;
Judgment 2214
95th Session, 2003
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3(B) and (C)
Extract:
The complainant asked for the payment of the expatriation allowance provided for in Article 72 of the EPO's Service Regulations. The Tribunal gave "a definition of permanent or continuous residence". While this requires actual long-term presence in the country concerned, it does not necessarily exclude another residence. In judgment 1099 the Tribunal held that in order to establish whether the complainant met the condition of 'continuous residence' in the country of his duty station for at least three years prior to being recruited by the Office, it was necessary to determine whether there were "objective and factual links with that country". It added that: "what matters is that the complainant had to live, and did live [in that country]". It was not important to know whether the complainant had paid taxes there or whether, at the same time, he kept a home address at his former place of residence (see Judgment 1099, under 8). The status of the residence is not relevant either (see Judgment 1150). It is clear from the case law when residence must be deemed to have been interrupted, within the meaning of Article 72 of the Service Regulations. It is not sufficient for the person concerned to have stopped living in a particular country; he must in addition have intended to leave the country for some length of time."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 72 OF THE SERVICE REGULATIONS FOR PERMANENT EMPLOYEES OF THE EUROPEAN PATENT OFFICE
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1099, 1150
Keywords:
appointment; assignment; case law; condition; definition; duty station; iloat; judgment of the tribunal; non-resident allowance; period; place of origin; provision; request by a party; residence; staff member's duties; staff regulations and rules; tax;
Judgment 2178
94th Session, 2003
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
In its judgment on the complainant's first complaint the Tribunal ordered that he be compensated because he had been wrongfully terminated. In his application for review of that judgment "the complainant seeks compensation in respect of the loss of the tax immunities he enjoyed by virtue of the agreement between the [...] authorities [of the host country] and the [organisation]. Since the complainant has not been reinstated in his post, he is no longer entitled to those immunities. Nor is he entitled to compensation for the loss thereof: the tax regime governing the exemptions he may claim is solely a matter for the competent authorities of the host state, and the [organisation] cannot be held liable for direct or indirect taxes owed by the complainant."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2090
Keywords:
allowance; application for execution; domestic law; headquarters agreement; judgment of the tribunal; privileges and immunities; reconstruction of career; reinstatement; request by a party; tax;
Judgment 2032
90th Session, 2001
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 17
Extract:
"Exemption from national taxes is an essential condition of employment in the international civil service and is an important guarantee of independence and objectivity. It cannot be made to depend upon the whim of national taxing authorities [...]."
Keywords:
independence; member state; official; privileges and immunities; safeguard; salary; tax;
Consideration 14
Extract:
"Where a State imposes tax upon its nationals who are international civil servants in receipt of income some of which is tax exempt and some of which is not the only proper method of determining how much tax should actually be paid is to calculate the hypothetical amount which would be due if the exempt income had not been received."
Keywords:
member state; official; privileges and immunities; reckoning; salary; tax;
Consideration 15
Extract:
"If a Member State in breach of its international obligations taxes the exempt income of a staff member, the reimbursement of that tax cannot be made to depend upon the grace and favour of that State."
Keywords:
member state; official; organisation's duties; privileges and immunities; refund; refusal; salary; tax;
Consideration 16
Extract:
"One of the purposes of staff assessment is surely to put the organisation in funds to protect its employees against States which refuse to recognise their tax-exempt status."
Keywords:
member state; official; privileges and immunities; purpose; refund; refusal; salary; staff assessment; tax;
Consideration 17
Extract:
"If the organisation does not [...] contest the exempt status of the complainant, it is its duty to protect him against the claims of the authorities of a Member State, to reimburse him the amount of tax he has paid to the State, and to employ its own considerable power, authority and influence to have the [...] authorities [of that state] change their position. [...] By requiring him to appeal against his [...] tax assessment while conceding the tax-exempt status of his [...] income the organisation has failed in its duty to the complainant."
Keywords:
member state; official; organisation's duties; privileges and immunities; refund; refusal; salary; tax;
Judgment 1491
80th Session, 1996
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"CERN has but one obligation under R IV 2.02: to refund taxes paid by officials 'on remuneration and benefits received from the organization'. [...] CERN is not to blame for the resulting increase in the rates of taxation of the complainants' total income. All it can do is pay back to French citizens on its staff the amounts they have paid in tax on their international earnings: it exerts control neither over the tax brackets and rates set by French law, nor over the method of reckoning their total income, which is just a feature of the French manner of processing income tax."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: CERN STAFF REGULATION R IV 2.02
Keywords:
domestic law; organisation's duties; privileges and immunities; rate; refund; salary; staff regulations and rules; tax;
Consideration 8
Extract:
The rule against discrimination "holds good only where staff who are in like case both in law and in fact have not been treated alike. Under CERN's agreement with France its staff are exempt in that country from direct taxation on their earnings from the organization. But the provision does not apply to French citizens, who do not enjoy exemption from tax on their earnings from CERN and are therefore, by reason of the terms of an agreement that CERN is bound by, not in the same position in law as staff of other nationalities."
Keywords:
domestic law; equal treatment; general principle; nationality; privileges and immunities; tax;
Consideration 8
Extract:
In respect of earnings from other sources than CERN, "the staff who are not French do fare better because only their other income counts for the purpose of reckoning rates of income tax and it therefore falls within lower tax brackets, whereas for the French citizens the whole of their income counts for that purpose. But the difference in treatment is not of the organization's making: it is due solely to the working of French tax law."
Keywords:
domestic law; equal treatment; nationality; rate; refund; tax;
Judgment 1224
74th Session, 1993
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 7-8
Extract:
The complainant is challenging the Agency's refusal to refund her taxes according to a specific method. She alleges discriminatory treatment inasmuch as officials of the United Nations Organisation and other international organisations have the benefit of that method. "In this particular area there is no common-system method which the Agency is in law obliged to apply. The principle of equal treatment therefore does not necessarily mean equal treatment for the staff of the various international organisations, each of which is autonomous and applies its own rules and regulations to its staff."
Keywords:
coordinated organisations; equal treatment; refund; rule of another organisation; tax;
Judgment 1182
73rd Session, 1992
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
Under Articles R IV 2.01 and 2.02 of CERN's Staff Regulations staff members must comply with national tax law. CERN, however, refunds any direct taxation on pay upon receiving proof of payment. The complainant, a Frenchman, met his obligations toward his home country. Owing to a peculiar feature of French tax law, part of the amount he had paid did not appear on the supporting documents which he had submitted to CERN with his claim for refund. The organization's decision must be set aside because it is at odds with the principle "that all the staff of an organisation shall enjoy equal treatment".
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE R IV 2.01 OF THE CERN STAFF REGULATIONS;
ARTICLE R IV 2.02 OF THE CERN STAFF REGULATIONS
Keywords:
equal treatment; privileges and immunities; refund; staff regulations and rules; tax;
Judgment 1053
69th Session, 1990
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7, Summary
Extract:
When the complainants retired in 1988 they chose to take partial lump-sum payment of their pensions in the belief that United States taxes levied on those amounts would be reimbursed in keeping with a practice that remained in force until 1989. But they were denied reimbursement. As the complainants all believed the practice to be applicable when they made their choice, both the principle of non-retroactivity and that of good faith apply.
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; date; good faith; lump-sum; non-retroactivity; pension; pension entitlements; practice; refund; retirement; tax;
Summary
Extract:
In respect of tax reimbursement the IAEA took the reference in Provisional Staff Regulation 5.02(a) to "salaries or allowances paid by the Agency" to cover lump-sum payments from the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund between 1980 and 1989. The Tribunal holds that, "having been followed over several years,the interpretation became part of the Agency's personnel policy and had to be applied to all departing staff members who found themselves in similar circumstances. If the Agency chose to take a different view of the interpretation at a later stage, it could not in doing so break with the general principle of good faith which it is required to observe in dealings with its staff members."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: IAEA PROVISIONAL STAFF REGULATION 5.02(A)
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; good faith; interpretation; lump-sum; pension; practice; refund; staff regulations and rules; tax;
Judgment 959
66th Session, 1989
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"The complainant maintains that he is entitled to have refunded to him any tax that was levied on his ilo salary and made over to the Indonesian government. [...] The ILO explained to him that if he could satisfy it that he himself had paid tax to the government it would reimburse the sum, and indeed that offer holds good. But the complainant has never offered any evidence of such payment, and his claim must therefore fail."
Keywords:
burden of proof; complainant; evidence; lack of evidence; payment; refund; right; tax;
Judgment 832
62nd Session, 1987
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 15
Extract:
"The reckoning of the pension depends on such factors as the cost of living, currency rates and rates of tax in the country of the pensioner's residence. Those are variables that may preclude the creation of acquired rights. The financial plight of the fund has over the years become alarming."
Keywords:
acquired right; cost-of-living increase; effect; exchange rate; pension; pension entitlements; reckoning; tax; unjspf;
Judgment 726
58th Session, 1986
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
The complainants are impugning the decision by the Administrative Council of the EPO to impose a temporary levy of 1.5 per cent on staff members' salaries. The Tribunal holds that the Council's decision falls within the scope of its powers. Inasmuch as the levy is temporary and very small and there is a guarantee of nominal basic salary, the Tribunal concludes that there was no breach of the complainants' acquired rights.
Keywords:
acquired right; competence; decision; decision-maker; deduction; executive body; general decision; judicial review; reduction of salary; salary; tax;
Judgment 609
52nd Session, 1984
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 1, 2 and 4
Extract:
"By [its] judgment, the Tribunal ordered the organization to pay to the complainant $40,000 as 'compensation for the unlawful termination of his contract' and also $6,000 as costs." The organization paid that sum to the complainant in execution of the said judgment. The complainant seeks reimbursement for any taxes he might have to pay on the sum. "No obscurity in the judgment is alleged or identified. [...] The argument does not attempt to bring the case within the very limited grounds on which the tribunal permits reconsideration or review." The complaint is dismissed.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 523
Keywords:
application for interpretation; application for review; execution of judgment; inadmissible grounds for review; judgment of the tribunal; material damages; refund; tax;
Judgment 514
49th Session, 1982
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"The Tribunal in Judgment no. 426 decided that a practice by the United Nations to reimburse tax on lump-sum communications was irrelevant." The United Nations introduced a transitional measure to protect the acquired rights of serving officials when it discontinued the practice. The organisation in question did not do likewise. The point raised is not within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 426
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; commutation; competence of tribunal; lump-sum; practice; refund; tax; transitional measures;
Consideration 4
Extract:
"It is unnecessary here to consider to what extent [an administration] directive can confer on the staff member a contractual right capable of being enforced by the Tribunal. Assuming that it can, and that in this case it does, the reasoning in paragraph 7 of Judgment No. 426 would apply to prevent it from being an acquired right." Judgment 426 states that an official is given an acquired right to fundamental benefits only. Reimbursement of tax on lump-sum payments from the pension fund may not be construed as a fundamental benefit.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 426
Keywords:
acquired right; administrative instruction; contract; lump-sum; pension; refund; tax;
Judgment 454
46th Session, 1981
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
The question is whether a citizen of the United States who has been employed by an international organisation and who on retirement has elected to take part of the pension due to him in the form of a lump sum is entitled to be reimbursed by the organisation for the tax levied by the government of the United States on the lump-sum payment. He is not so entitled; see Judgment No. 426.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 426
Keywords:
commutation; lump-sum; pension; refund; tax;
Judgment 426
45th Session, 1980
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"The pension is not of course subject to a staff assessment(*), neither is it under the Convention [on the privileges and immunities of specialised agencies] exempted from national taxes."
(*) which is deducted from pay in lieu of tax
Keywords:
pension; staff assessment; tax;
Consideration 9
Extract:
The complainant claims reimbursement of the tax payable on a lump-sum payment from the pension fund. He relies on the principle of equality of treatment with two officials who had opted for a repayment of their own contributions and to whom the organisation reimbursed taxation payable in respect of those contributions. "The Tribunal considers that there is a categorical distinction between persons who elect to take a repayment of contributions and those who elect to take a lump-sum payment in part commutation of a pension; and that the principle of equality does not require the two categories to be treated in the same way."
Keywords:
commutation; contributions; equal treatment; lump-sum; pension; refund; tax;
Considerations 4-5
Extract:
The complainant's contract stated: "Income tax reimbursable on PAHO/WHO earnings only". There is not in the contract nor in statutory provisions a comprehensive definition of "earnings". In its natural meaning the word covers all the emoluments and benefits paid by the employer to the staff member. "In the opinion of the Tribunal 'earnings' do not, in the absence of an express provision to the contrary, include a lump-sum payment, payable not by the employer but by the Fund in which the staff member has in effect invested a part of his earnings."
Keywords:
condition; lump-sum; refund; tax;
Judgment 177
26th Session, 1971
United International Bureaux for the Protection of Intellectual Property
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4(C)
Extract:
It appears from the inquiries which the Tribunal has made of the intergovernmental organisations that the complainants cannot rely upon established "practice". Complainants would be entitled to the reimbursement of the taxes paid only if their families' residence in a place other than that of their activity, and consequently their liability to taxation in that place were justified by special reasons. "The complainants must therefore take the consequences of a situation which was not forced upon them."
Keywords:
condition; duty station; refund; residence; tax;
Consideration 4(A)
Extract:
The practice of other organisations amounts to a rule, "that is, the officials of the organisation are entitled to reimbursement as provided [of national taxes], to the extent that it accords with the practice of the other organisations. Alternatively, the [other] organisations [...] have no relevant 'practice' or may have adopted a 'practice' in cases which are not identical with or even similar to those of officials of the respondent organisation. On this hypothesis it cannot be asserted either that the officials of the organisation are always entitled or that they are never entitled to the reimbursement of the taxes paid by them."
Keywords:
binding character; practice; refund; rule of another organisation; tax;
Consideration 4(A)
Extract:
If an official or his family resides in a locality other than that where he works, "and if on that account he is liable to tax, he cannot as a rule insist on reimbursement. Exceptions to this rule are allowable only in special circumstances, for example where the [...] official is appointed on a temporary contract or is unable to find suitable accommodation in the locality where he works."
Keywords:
condition; consequence; difference; duty station; refund; residence; right; tax;
Preamble
Extract:
The President of the Tribunal issued an order to the Registrar instructing him "to make inquiries of the intergovernmental organisations with headquarters at Geneva concerning the practice followed by them in respect of reimbursement of tax paid on earned income by members of their staff".
Keywords:
inquiry; investigation; order; practice; refund; rule of another organisation; tax;
Consideration 4(B)
Extract:
"[I]nternational officials who are United States nationals and do not fulfil certain special conditions laid down by the legislation of their own country are liable for certain United States taxes which have been reimbursed by several of the intergovernmental organisations. Although there may be a 'practice' with regard to such officials, the complainants cannot, however, rely on it since their position is entirely different."
Keywords:
equal treatment; practice; refund; tax;
Consideration 3
Extract:
"The term 'national income taxes' [...] should be interpreted according to the law of the country in which the taxes whose reimbursement is claimed are levied. It will not therefore necessarily have the same meaning in respect of taxes levied in unitary and in federal States." In the present case, the interpretation should be based on the usual terminology of Swiss tax law: national taxes in Switzerland include cantonal and local taxes as well as federal taxes. The cantonal and local taxes paid by complainants in the Canton of Bern where their families continue to reside must be regarded as 'national income taxes' and in principle be reimbursed.
Keywords:
definition; domestic law; enforcement; refund; tax;
