False Advertising Claim against Tribal Smokeshop

In Gristede Foods v. Unkechauge Nation/Shinnecock Trading Post, the district court refused to dismiss a Lanham Act claim against a tribal retailer. The plaintiff alleges that the retailer promised tax-free sales, but didn’t deliver. This is the second motion to dismiss denied by the court.

gristede-v-unkechauge-dct-opinion

gristede-v-unkechauge-dct-opinion-nov-2007

Kemp v. Osage Nation Cert Opposition Brief

This case, which I suspect has a fairly good chance of being granted, involves the Osage Nation’s successful suit against the Oklahoma Tax Commission to declare its Indian Country boundaries. The cert petition post is here, which includes the lower court decision and the relevant briefs. Here is the opposition brief.

osage-cert-opp-brief

Senate Finance Committee Hearing — Witness Statements

From the Senate Finance Committee:

Witness Statements:

Dante Desiderio, Certified Financial Planner, Economic Development Policy Specialist, National Congress of American Indians, Washington, DC

Donald (Del) Laverdure, Chief Legal Counsel, Crow Nation Executive Branch, Crow Agency, MT

Wayne A. Shammel, General Counsel, Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians, Roseburg, OR

Senate Finance Committee Hearing on Tribal Tax Policy

Go Del!

From Indianz:

The Senate Finance Committee will hold a hearing on Tuesday, July 22, to address tax policy in Indian Country.

Sen. Max Baucus (D-Montana), the chairman of the committee, said the hearing will address three specific issues: the Indian Employment Tax Credit, the tax-exempt bonds for tribal governments and accelerated depreciation for tribes. Witnesses at the hearing include Dante Desiderio, an economic development specialist for the National Congress of American Indians; Del Laverdure, the chief counsel for the Crow Tribe of Montana; and Wayne A. Shammel, the general counsel of Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians in Oregon. The hearing takes place at 10am in Room 215 of the : Senate Dirksen Office Building.

Committee Notice:
Indian Governments and the Tax Code: Maximizing Tax Incentives for Economic Development (July 22, 2008 )

Matheson v. Gregoire Cert Petition

The questions presented are:

Whether the State of Washington Cigarette Tax laws are federally preempted and inapplicable to an American Indian motor carrier hauling cigarettes between Indian reservations in Interstate and Indian Commerce.

Whether the laws of the State of Washington can regulate an enrolled tribal Indian shipping goods between a federally recognized Indian Reservation in Idaho to his business on the reservation of his membership located in the State of Washington.

matheson-cert-petition

matheson-wash-app-decision

Kemp v. Osage Nation Cert Petition

Here, the Oklahoma Tax Commission is seeking review of a CA10 decision allowing a suit brought by the Osage Nation to proceed over sovereign immunity objections. Here is our post about the CA10 decision, with briefs and other materials. And here is the cert petition.

Here are the questions presented (from the petition):

1. May federal courts employ the doctrine of Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908), to permit suits by Indian tribes, otherwise barred by state sovereign immunity, that seek to establish sovereignty and jurisdiction over historical reservations, without taking into consideration the substantial impact of the relief on the sovereignty and jurisdiction long-exercised over such lands by states?

2. In view of this Court’s ruling in Idaho v. Coeur d’Alene Tribe of Idaho, 521 U.S. 261 (1997), and other decisions, may a federal court allow an Indian tribe’s suit – otherwise barred by the Eleventh Amendment – to proceed against state officers under the so-called “straightforward inquiry” used to determine the application of the Ex parte Young exception, when the relief would divest a state of substantial and long-exercised civil and criminal jurisdiction over its largest county?

3. Does a suit by an Indian tribe seeking a judicial determination that its historical reservation “remains” a present-day reservation involve the type of retrospective relief that cannot be pursued against state officers under the Ex parte Young exception to state sovereign immunity?

City of New York v. Milhelm Attea — City Tobacco Tax on Indian Country Sales

From the opinion:

The City of New York has brought an Amended Complaint against the above-captioned defendants, a group of cigarette wholesalers who are state-licensed cigarette stamping agents. The principal  [*2] contention of the City is that the wholesalers violate the Contraband Cigarette Trafficking Act (“CCTA”), 18 U.S.C. § 2341 et seq., by shipping in excess of 10,000 unstamped cigarettes to reservation retailers who re-sell the cigarettes to the public. According to the City, New York Tax Law § 471 requires that cigarettes sold to Native Americans for re-sale to the public must be taxed, and that the defendant agents are responsible for collecting the tax by purchasing tax stamps from the New York State Tax Commission and affixing them to cigarette packages. The City brings additional state law claims under New York Tax Law § 484, the Cigarette Marketing Standards Act, as well as a public nuisance claim. Defendants have moved to dismiss the Amended Complaint pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), 12(b)(6) and 12(b)(7). For the reasons set forth below, defendants’ motions to dismiss are denied.

Here are the materials:

day-wholesale-motion-to-dismiss

joint-motion-to-dismiss

city-opposition-to-motion

city-of-new-york-dct-order

KBIC v. Kleine — Michigan Sales and Use Tax Upheld

This case, decided by Judge Quist, out of the Western District of Michigan is the latest in a long string of Indian tax cases arising out of the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community’s reservation in the past few years, including Chippewa Trading v. Cox (CA6) and KBIC v. Rising (CA6). Here are the very lengthy materials in this case:

DCT Order Granting Michigan’s Motion for Summary Judgment – KBIC v. Kleine

Continue reading

Angelique Eaglewoman: The Philosophy of Colonization Underlying Taxation Imposed Upon Tribal Nations within the United States

Angelique Eagelwoman (soon to be at Idaho Law) has posted “The Philosophy of Colonization Underlying Taxation Imposed Upon Tribal Nations within the United States” on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

Tribal Nations are inherently sovereign by internal definition as well as by classic European political science theory. Voluntary wealth distribution was the basis for the functioning of tribal government rather than externally imposed demands for pro rata shares of individual tribal member income. Through treaty-making with Tribal Nations, the United States expanded and asserted its ability to govern the influx of European immigrants and captive Africans by recognizing tribal territorial boundaries and seeking peaceful relations. Within the United States Constitution, Tribal Nations are mentioned in terms of not being taxed and as engaged with Congress in terms of commerce. Despite this history, U.S. relations shifted on one of military dominance over Tribal Nations skewing the sovereign-to-sovereign relationship set forth in treaty agreements.

Continue reading

County of Seneca v. Eristoff — NY State Tax Enforcement in Indian Country

The New York Appellate Division (3rd Dept.) held in this case that the county did not have standing to sue to force the New York finance department to collect taxes in Indian Country.

Here’s the short opinion.