Here are the materials in the matter of Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources v. Timber and Wood Products Located in Sawyer County et al, 2017AP181 (Dec. 19, 2017):
taxation
Update in Comenout Litigation II
Here are updated materials in Comenout v. Pittman (formerly Comenout v. Pierce County Superior Court) (W.D. Wash.):
70 DCT order dismissing complaint
77 DCT order granting motion to file amended complaint
103 state official motion to dismiss
Prior posts here.
Update in KBIC Suit against Michigan Treasury Dept.
Here are the materials in Keweenaw Bay Indian Community v. Khouri (W.D. Mich.):
99 state motion re state prosecutions
115 kb motion for protective order
Federal Court Dismisses Seminole Challenge to Florida Utilities Tax
Here are the materials in Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Biegalski (S.D. Fla.):
Federal Court Issues Split Decision in Flandrea Santee Sioux — South Dakota Tax Dispute
Here are the materials in Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe v. Gerlach (D. S.D.):
117 Flandreau Motion for Summary J
An excerpt:
1. The Tribe’s Motion for Summary Judgment, Doc. 115, is GRANTED to the extent that:
a. The State cannot impose a use tax on nonmember purchases of goods and services as to the Casino’s slots, table games, food and beverage services, hotel, RV park, live entertainment events, and gift shop (claim one).
2. The Tribe’s Motion for Summary Judgment, Doc. 115, is DENIED as to the following:
a. The State can impose a use tax on nonmember purchases of goods and services at the Store (claims one and three).
b. The State’s use tax on nonmember purchases of goods and services at the Store is not discriminatory (claim four)
3. The Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, Doc. 78, is GRANTED to the extent that:
a. The State’s use tax on nonmember purchases of goods and services at the Store is not preempted by IGRA (claim one).
b. The State’s use tax on nonmember purchases of goods and services at the Store is not discriminatory (claim four).
c. The collection and remittance of taxes on nonmember consumer purchases at the Store are not preempted by federal law and do not infringe on tribal sovereignty (claims two and five).
4. The Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, Doc. 78, is DENIED as to the following:
a. The State cannot impose a use tax on nonmember purchases of goods and services as to the Casino’s slots, table games, food and beverage services, hotel, RV park, live entertainment events, and gift shop (claim one).
b. The State cannot condition renewal of the Tribe’s beverage license on the collection and remittance of a use tax on nonmember consumer purchases (claims six and eight).
5. The State does not have jurisdiction to assess a use tax on nonmember purchases at the Casino’s slots, table games, food and beverage services, hotel, RV park, live entertainment events, and gift shop. However, the State does have jurisdiction to assess a use tax on nonmember purchases at the Store (claim seven).
6. Each party requested declaratory relief. Tribal sovereign immunity is jurisdictional in nature. This Court has no jurisdiction due to tribal sovereign immunity to order the ‘payment to the State from the escrow funds held pursuant to the Deposit Agreement. The Tribe, however, agreed in the Deposit Agreement that those funds would be held by the escrow agent pending the outcome of this lawsuit. Accordingly, the escrow agent may now, subject to any stay granted pursuant to an appeal, pay the funds held in escrow to the Tribe and to the State in their respective shares under the guidance provided by this declaratory judgment.
Ninth Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Counterclaims against Quinault Tribe
Here are the materials in Quinault Indian Nation v. Pearson.
The court’s syllabus:
In an action brought by the Quinault Indian Nation alleging a scheme to defraud the Nation of cigarette taxes, the panel affirmed the district court’s dismissal of counterclaims as barred by the Nation’s sovereign immunity.
The panel held that if brought in a separate suit against the Nation, the counterclaims would be barred by sovereign immunity. Asserting the claims as counterclaims did not change the sovereign-immunity analysis. The panel concluded that the Nation did not waive its sovereign immunity because it filed the underlying suit but took no further action that unequivocally waived its immunity to the counterclaims, and the counterclaims did not qualify as claims for recoupment.
National Intertribal Tax Alliance Conference (Sept. 12-14, 2017)
Here.
Federal Court Holds Feds Cannot Tax Proceeds Derived Directly from Indian Lands
Here are the materials in Perkins v. United States (W.D.N.Y.):
- 9-1 Motion to Dismiss
- 12 Opposition
- 13 Reply
- 14 Magistrate R&R
- 15 US Objections
- 16 Perkins Objections
- 19 US Response
- 20 Perkins Response
- 21 US Reply
- 22 Perkins Reply
- 24 DCT Order
An excerpt:
This case presents what appears to be an issue of first impression: whether a treaty between the United States and Native Americans ensuring the free use and enjoyment of tribal land bars taxes on income derived directly from the land—here, the sale of gravel mined on the land. Although at least two circuit courts have suggested in dicta that “income derived directly from the land” might be exempt from taxation under such treaties, they did so to distinguish that scenario from cases where an exemption was sought for income earned in ways that do not relate to the land itself. See Lazore v. Comm’r, 11 F.3d 1180 (3d Cir. 1993); Hoptowit v. Comm’r, 709 F.2d 564 (9th Cir. 1983). This case presents the very issue about which those courts speculated. And for the reasons that follow, this Court agrees with their speculation and finds that the plaintiffs have plausibly stated a claim for relief under two treaties with the Native American Seneca Nation.
Ninth Circuit Briefs in United States v. King Mountain Tobacco Co. (No. 16-35956)
Keweenaw Bay Indian Community Tobacco Tax Claims against State to Proceed
Here are the materials in Keweenaw Bay Indian Community v. Khouri (W.D. Mich.):
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.