taxation – Page 7 – Turtle Talk

Pippa Browde on State Taxation in Indian Country in a Pandemic Economy

February 17, 2022February 17, 2022Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Pippa Browde has published “From Zero-Sum to Economic Partners: Reframing State Tax Policies in Indian Country in the Post-COVID Economy” in the New Mexico Law Review.

Here is the abstract:

The disparate impact COVID-19 has had on Indian Country reveals problems centuries in the making from the legacy of colonialism. One of those problems is state encroachment in Indian Country, including attempts to assert taxing authority within Indian Country. The issue of the reaches of state taxing authority in Indian Country has resulted in law that is both uncertain and highly complex, chilling both outside investment and economic development for tribes. As the United States emerges from COVID-19, to focus only on the toll exacted on tribes and their peoples ignores the tremendous opportunities for states to right these historical wrongs. Buoyed by federal COVID-relief funds, state and local governments are in a financial position to reframe their tax policies to promote tribal sovereignty and support economic development in Indian Country. This article argues for states to make diplomatic, responsible state and local tax policies that will create healthier intergovernmental relationships and an environment that in turn creates broader economic growth for tribes and states alike. Through policies requiring state governments to consult with tribes to make joint decisions on tax policy and by refraining from exercising taxing authority in Indian Country, states can move from a zero-sum game. Instead of competing for precious tax revenue, state and local governments can partner with tribes to expand the total amount of available revenue streams. Doing so will not just right the historical wrongs of colonialism—it could also help prevent future crises, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, from having such a disparate impact on tribes again.

Washington Federal Court Sentences Men Who Used Tribal Tax Agreement to Launder Money

December 17, 2021Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in United States v. Paul (W.D. Wash.):

1 Indictment.pdf Download

66 Silva Plea Agreement.pdf Download

79 Paul Plea Agreement.pdf Download

98 Sentencing Memorandum.pdf Download

105 DCT Judgment — Paul.pdf Download

Big Sandy Cert Petition in Tax Case

November 12, 2021January 31, 2022Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the petition in Big Sandy Rancheria Enterprises v. Bonta:

Petition Download

Questions presented:

1. Whether an Indian tribe incorporated by federal charter under section 17 of the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 (25 U.S.C. § 5124) is an “Indian tribe or band with a governing body duly recognized by the Secretary of the Interior” authorized to bring suit under 28 U.S.C. § 1362.

2. Whether the Indian Trader Statutes (25 U.S.C. §§ 261-263) or the Bracker balancing test (see White Mountain Apache Tribe v. Bracker, 448 U.S. 136 (1980)) preempts the State of California’s regulation of intertribal cigarette sales, where an Indian tribe sells tribally manufactured cigarettes to Indian tribal buyers on their home reservations.

Lower court materials here.

Update:

California BIO

SCOTUS Denies Cert in Miccosukee Member’s Challenge to Federal Income Taxes on Per Capita Payments

October 12, 2021Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is today’s order list.

Here are the cert stage materials in Clay v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue.

SCOTUS Denies Cert in in Perkins v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

October 4, 2021Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is today’s order list.

Here are the cert stage materials.

Seventh Circuit Materials in Lac Courte Oreilles Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians v. Evers

September 15, 2021September 29, 2021Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

Tribe Brief

State Brief

Lower court materials here.

California COA (again) Permits Tax on Leased Allotments

September 13, 2021Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in Albrecht v. County of Riverside (Cal. Ct. App.):

Opinion

Opening Brief

Desert Water Agency Brief

County of Riverside Brief

Coachella Water District Brief

Related decision (and why we said “again”) here.

Grand River Six Nations Enterprises Ltd. v. Boughton Cert Petition

August 30, 2021January 7, 2022Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

GRE Six Nations Cert Petition

Questions presented:

1. Whether Connecticut impermissibly regulates or controls conduct beyond the boundaries of the State in violation of the dormant Commerce Clause when, as a condition of allowing a manufacturer’s products to be sold in the state, Connecticut forces the manufacturer to obtain and provide private sales and shipping information possessed by non-Connecticut distributors doing no business in Connecticut and having no nexus with Connecticut.

2. Whether Connecticut violates Due Process protections when it bans a manufacturer’s products from being sold in the state, if the manufacturer fails to obtain and provide to Connecticut private sales and shipping information possessed by non-Connecticut distributors relating to their distribution of products in jurisdictions other than Connecticut.

3. Whether Connecticut violates the Supremacy Clause when, as a condition of allowing a manufacturer’s products to be sold in the state, Connecticut forces the manufacturer to obtain and provide private sales and shipping information possessed by non-Connecticut distributors who conduct no business in Connecticut nor distribute the manufacturer’s products to, or in, Connecticut.

Lower court materials here.

Update:

Boughton BIO

Clay v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue [Federal Taxes on Gaming Per Capita Payments]

August 23, 2021Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

Cert Petition

Question presented:

The question presented is: Whether the clear language of Title 25 of the Code of Federal Regulations, and the exclusive authority over federally recognized Indian Tribes granted to the Secretary of Interior under 25 U.S.C. § 2, controls the determination of how the Miccosukee Tribe compensates its members for the use of their lands, to the exclusion of any other federal agency, including the Internal Revenue Service.

Lower court materials here.