United States Tax Court Holds Income Earned from Seneca Lands is Taxable

Here is the opinion in Perkins v. Commissioner:

Opinion

IRS Advance Notices for Indian Taxpayers and Alaska Native Settlement Funds

Here:

IRS Advance Notices

D.C. Circuit Briefs in Ho-Chunk Inc. v. Sessions

Here:

Opening Brief

Answer Brief

Reply Brief

Ninth Circuit Briefs in Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians v. Riverside County

Here:

Opening Brief 

NCAI  Amicus Brief 

NITA Brief of Amicus Curiae

county answer brief

desert water agency answer brief

county association amicus brief

reply

Oral argument video here.

Lower court materials here.

Wisc. Court of Appeals Affirms Dismissal of DNR Claims

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):

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

105 opposition

108 reply

110 DCT order

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

126 kb motion for summary j re sales and use taxes

143 magistrate order granting 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.):

10 Motion to Dismiss

18 Response

21 Reply

41 DCT Order

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.):

79 State Motion for Summary J

117 Flandreau Motion for Summary J

124 State Opposition

130 Flandreau Opposition

136 Flandreau Reply

154 DCT Order

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.

Opinion

Opening Brief

Answer Brief

Reply

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.