Due to negligence in unit work, he did not pay Mr. Lee's personal income tax in 2009 or 2010.

Although the latter unit was paid back, in 2014, when Mr. Li applied for the index of individual passenger cars, he was told that the examination was not approved because he had not paid his personal income tax for nearly 5 years in Beijing.

Due to the negligence of the unit, it is unable to obtain.

Mr. Li took the unit to court and asked the unit to compensate for its economic losses of over 20 yuan.

Recently, the Haidian court dismissed Mr. Li's claim.

Mr. Li claimed that he worked in the unit in 2007.

In 2014, he took part in the qualification examination of Yaohao and Yaohao of Beijing city passenger car. The result showed that he had paid his personal income tax for less than 5 years and failed to pass the qualification examination.

But Mr. Li's payroll shows that it has been deducted in full in 2009 and 2010.

。

Later, Mr. Li realized that the unit did not pay personal income tax for him.

Mr. Li is unable to obtain a car qualification in Beijing, so he filed a claim for compensation.

In this regard, the unit argued that the fact that it withheld but did not replace Mr. Li's personal income tax existed, but it violated the state's tax regulations and did not cause direct losses to Mr. Lee.

The unit indicated that it had paid a personal tax and paid a corresponding fine afterwards.

In addition, the unit thinks that the purchase index is not a kind of itself.

It is not a personal or property right, so the unit does not constitute infringement.

According to the trial, the passenger car Yaohao is a means of administrative management of the Beijing municipal government. The qualification to participate in the Yaohao is stipulated that the personal income tax should be paid for 5 consecutive years. However, even if Mr. Li satisfies the above conditions, he can only get the qualification to participate in the Yaohao. Therefore, Mr. Li, in the light of his unit's failure to pay his personal income tax on his personal income tax and the infringement of his rights and interests, requires the unit to compensate for his losses, which does not have the factual basis and legal basis, and the court will not support it.

The judge said that even if Mr. Li got the Yaohao qualification, he could not directly lead to his substantive rights and interests.

On the contrary, Mr. Li failed to get the Yaohao qualification for buying cars, and was not necessarily directly related to the interests of money. Therefore, the claim for compensation for pecuniary loss lacks legal basis.