taxation – Page 35 – Turtle Talk

Tomorrow — Webinar on IRS General Welfare Guidance

May 8, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher

NCAI & Partner Organizations Host Webinar on Comments to IRS General Welfare Guidance
this Thursday, May 9th

Join NCAI and our partners on a webinar this Thursday, May 9, 2013 at 2:00 p.m. eastern time to review draft comments and provide input on the IRS’ General Welfare Exclusion.

During the 2012 White House Tribal Nations Summit, the IRS released Proposed Guidance in Notice 2012-75 for how its Office of Indian Tribal Governments will examine certain programs administered by tribal governments, including programs for housing, education, elder and travel assistance, as well as cultural programs. In that notice, the IRS designated a June 3 comment deadline for tribes to submit suggestions and comments on the proposed guidelines.

NCAI, in partnership with the United South and Eastern Tribes (USET), the Affiliated Tribes of Northwest Indians (ATNI), the California Association of Tribal Governments (CATG), the United Indian Nations of Oklahoma, Kansas and Texas (UINOKT), the Midwest Alliance of Sovereign Tribes (MAST) and the Native American Finance Officers Association (NAFOA), has developed Draft Joint Comments on behalf of tribal nations.

Please join us as we discuss the Draft comments and seek additional views from tribal nations on the content of these collective draft comments.

After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the webinar.

D.C. Circuit Decides “Old Section 81” Case

April 30, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here is the opinion in Quantum Entertainment Limited v. Department of the Interior:

Quantum Entertainment v Dept of Interior

Briefs are here.

Lower court materials are here.

Guest Post: Indian Country Completely Shut Out of New Markets

April 30, 2013August 9, 2018ilpc6 Comments

INDIAN COUNTRY COMPLETELY SHUT OUT OF NEW MARKETS TAX CREDITS

Gavin Clarkson

Not a single Native Community Development Enterprise (NCDE) was selected for an award in the most recent round of New Markets Tax Credit (NMTC) allocations (just announced by the CDFI Fund of the US Department of the Treasury) despite at least one Native-sponsored applicant and one non-Native applicant totally dedicated to Indian Country deployment. These two CDEs’ allocation requests were peer reviewed and ranked ‘highly qualified’ to be eligible for an allocation.

The NMTC program, which annually allocates about $3 Billion in Federal Tax credits that are sold to private investors for investing in low income communities’ economic development projects, has allocated over a $100 Billion in tax credit authority since the program’s inception in 2003. Indian Country NCDEs have only just started to receive a small portion of the annual allocations, in recent years. In total, Native CDEs have received about $250 Million in tax credit authority, or about 0.25% of total investment authority. While small in proportion to total NMTC allocation, this amount has made the NMTC program a significant source of Indian Country investment capital in only a few short years. Until this year, that is.

The failure to allocate ANY NMTC to Native CDEs in the most recent competition puts hundreds of millions of dollars of Indian Country pipeline projects at risk and highlights the need for the Federal Government to more directly address Indian Country’s rapidly expanding capacity to utilize NMTC. There is precedence at the CDFI Fund to solve this problem: Carve Out a portion of each NMTC allocation for competitive allocation just among Native CDEs similar to the already existing carve out that exists in the Native American CDFI Assistance (NACA) program, which reserves other elements of the CDFI Fund’s programs just for Indian Country. Without such a carve out, Indian Country will continue, in any given year, to be at risk of being crowded out of the intense competition for NMTC by other low income communities, whose larger populations support the formation of more CDEs that can enter, and potentially, win in the annual NMTC competition.

Continue reading →

Miller v. Wright Cert Petition

April 15, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here:

Miller v Wright Cert Petition

Questions presented:

The questions presented in this case are:

1. Whether Indian tribal immunity from suit allows the Indian tribe, a price fixing competitor, to be immune from federal anti-trust laws?

2. Whether the officials of an Indian tribe, acting beyond their authority, can be protected by tribal immunity when prospective relief is sought?

Lower court materials here.

Federal Court Finds Unkechauge Reservation Smoke Shops Liable for Violations of Federal Law in City of New York v. Golden Feather Smoke Shop

April 8, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher4 Comments

Here are the materials:

DCT Memorandum & Order

NYC Motion

Remaining Defendants’ Cross-Motion

An excerpt:

For the reasons below, the Court grants the City summary judgment as to defendants’ liability under the CCTA and the CMSA. With respect to relief, the Court (1) grants the requested permanent injunction against defendants’ “purchase, receipt, possession, sale, distribution, offer and advertisement of unstamped cigarettes-even to tribe members for personal use”; (2) awards damages as against the Peace Pipe and TDM defendants; (3) awards civil penalties as against the Red Dot defendants, the amount of which will be determined at a later hearing; and (4) awards the City attorney’s fees, the amount of which will be determined in the first instance by Magistrate Judge Vera Scanlon by report and recommendation.

And the bad news (liability):

For the reasons stated, the Court concludes the following: As to defendant Phillips, the City is directed to clarify whether it is still seeking monetary relief against him, and if so, to submit further damages briefing that identifies the amounts the City is seeking against Phillips only. As to the Peace Pipe, TDM, and Red Dot defendants, the Court finds that the City is entitled to summary judgment on (1) defendants’ liability under the CCTA and the CMSA, and (2) its requested permanent injunction against defendants’ “purchase, receipt, possession, sale, distribution, offer and advertisement of unstamped cigarettes-even to tribe members for personal use.” In addition, the Court awards to the City (1) damages in the amount of $10,041,075 as against the Peace Pipe defendants and $450,000 as against the TDM defendants; (2) civil penalties as against the Red Dot defendants, the amount of which will be determined at a later hearing; and (3) attorney’s fees, the amount of which will be determined in the first instance by Magistrate Judge Scanlon by report and recommendation.

Prior posts here and here.

Federal Court Rules Against King Mountain Tobacco in Dispute with Washington State

April 8, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here are the materials in King Mt. Tobacco Co. v. McKenna (E.D. Wash.):

DCT Order

Washington AG Motion for Summary J

King Mountain Opposition

Washington AG Reply

King Mountain Tobacco Motion for Summary J

Washington AG Opposition

King Mountain Reply

An excerpt:

Based on the finding above that the finished cigarettes and roll-your-own tobacco [24] are not directly derived from trust land, King Mountain can prove no set of facts in support of the claim that Washington’s escrow statutes are in conflict with the Treaty or federal law which would entitle Plaintiffs to relief. Escrow is required for all non-exempt sales subject to the State’s cigarette taxes, regardless whether those sales occur on or off the reservation. Escrow isnotrequired for tax exempt King Mountain sales of cigarettes purchased directly by enrolled members of federally recognized Indian tribes from an Indian tribal jurisdiction of the member’s tribe for the member’s own use. If there were any past sales that were exempt from state excise tax, but for which King Mountain has deposited money into escrow anyway, King Mountain has failed to offer evidence in support of a refund claim and the court expresses no opinion concerning the same. Accordingly, King Mountain, a NPM, is required to comply with the escrow statute for all past and future sales deemed “units sold.”