Here are the materials in Matheson v. Smith (W.D. Wash.):
indian taxation
News Coverage of “Chaos” Created by Local Impoundment of Akwesasne Tribal Smokes Destined for Out-of-State
Here.
An excerpt:
An odd thing about the seizures, which have affected several native manufacturers that are paying licensing fees to the federal government and to the Mohawk tribal government, is that it is in conflict with a state tax department memo. The memo comes up frequently in the HCI litigation and was placed into the record in a separate tobacco arrest case. Written in July 2011 by the leader of the tax department’s criminal division, it specifically says that untaxed native-made cigarettes bound for reservations in New York or outside of New York should not be seized.
The memo is irrelevant, according to an assistant to Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, who is defending the State Police in the case. “All cigarettes within New York State are presumed to be subject to tax until the contrary is established,” said Aaron M. Baldwin, in a brief. He said that only a licensed cigarette agent can possess untaxed cigarettes in New York and that agent must show proof of a legal sale exempt from taxes. The brief suggests that HCI could resell the Signals to customers in New York, thereby denying New York required taxes. The driver of the seized Signals shipment told State Police that he often delivers cigarettes from the Winnebago reservation in Nebraska to the Poospatuck reservation on Long Island, according to court documents.
HCI Distribution Sues New York State to Recover Confiscated Truck Loaded with Native-Manufactured Smokes
Here are the materials in HCI Distribution v. New York State Police (N.Y. Sup. Ct.):
2012-02-28 Order to show cause
2012-02-28 Final Verified Petition
2012-02-27 Tarbell Affidavit (Executed)
2012-02-28 Guerrero Affidavit (Executed)
4 State Police – Memorandum of Law
5 State Police – Appendix Unreported Cases
Mashantucket Pequot Prevails in Tax Dispute with Town of Ledyard et al.
Cert Petition in Comenout v. Washington — Tax Case
Here.
Here are the questions presented:
1. Did the court below err by holding that the State of Washington has jurisdiction to charge a state cigarette tax crime against a Quinault Indian and other Indians allegedly selling untaxed cigarettes at the Quinault Indian’s trust allotment located outside the Quinault Indian Reservation boundaries?
2. Did the court below err in refusing to apply the federal law definition of Indian country, 18 U.S.C. § 1151(c)?
3. Did the court below err in holding that the State of Washington, an optional Public Law 280 state, had state tax crime criminal jurisdiction of enrolled Indians on trust lands?
4. Did the court below err in holding that Washington law, Wash.Rev.Code 37.12.010 through 060, was exempt from the Quinault Tribe’s retrocession of state jurisdiction?
SCOTUSblog: Ute Mountain Ute v. Padilla a Petition to Watch
Here (along with briefs).
Available Materials in the Mashantucket Pequot–Town of Ledyard Tax Dispute
Mashantucket Pequot Slot Tax Decision Expected Soon
Here are two news articles on the question. The first (here) details the Town of Ledyard’s crusade to collect taxes on the non-Indian owners of the slot machines used at Foxwoods. An excerpt:
Other grievances, not surprisingly, involve money – particularly the sovereign nation’s deal to pay the state a quarter of its slot machine revenues instead of local taxes on reservation property in the northeastern corner of Ledyard.
Though the town grudgingly concedes it can’t collect these revenues, it has for years been trying to levy taxes on personal property owned by non-Indians on reservation lands – specifically slot machines that a New Jersey company leases to the tribe.
Six years ago the tribe and Atlantic City Coin & Slot Service sued Ledyard to block these taxes, claiming such municipal action disregards well-established principles of federal Indian law and interferes with the tribe’s gaming operations, self-determination and sovereign immunity.
So far, the town has spent $900,000 fighting the litigation – a whopping sum that could have been used to hire teachers, repave miles of roads or buy thousands of new library books.
The second (here) includes a quote on the Indian law implications of the case:
Bethany Berger, a professor of Indian law at the University of Connecticut School of Law, said that taxation of non-Indians and their property on tribal lands is complicated. Berger, co-author and member of the editorial board of Felix S. Cohen’s Handbook of Federal Indian Law, the pre-eminent treatise in the field, does not think Ledyard’s case is a strong one.
“The machines are leased by the tribe as part of this federally regulated business that the tribe has a big interest in,” she said, adding that the interests of the state of Connecticut in the matter may not be as strong as Ledyard officials hope.
“With respect to state interest, it can’t just be revenue-raising interest,” Berger said. “Ledyard wants to make money by taxing the machines, and that’s not the kind of interest that’s really important. The federal interest is very strong because of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act and the tribal interest is also strong because this is the business that provides most of the tribe’s revenue.”
Amicus Briefs Supporting Ute Mountain Ute Tribe Supreme Court Petition
New Mexico Cert Opp in Ute Mountain Ute Case
Here:
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.