Shareware Overload Trio 2/Shareware Overload Trio Volume 2 (Chestnut CD-ROM).ISO/dir33/cwru_ct.zip/89-1322.S

Text File | 1993-11-06 | 6KB | 102 lines

Subject: \,  OKLAHOMA TAX COMM'N v. POTAWATOMI TRIBE




Syllabus



    NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as
is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is
issued.  The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but
has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the
reader.  See United States v. Detroit Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES


Syllabus



OKLAHOMA TAX COMMISSION v. CITIZEN BAND
POTAWATOMI INDIAN TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA


certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the tenth circuit

No. 89-1322.  Argued January 7, 1991 -- Decided February 26, 1991

Although, for many years, respondent Indian Tribe has sold cigarettes at a
convenience store that it owns and operates in Oklahoma on land held in
trust for it by the Federal Government, it has never collected Oklahoma's
cigarette tax on these sales.  In 1987, petitioner, the Oklahoma Tax
Commission (Oklahoma or Commission), served the Tribe with an assessment
letter, demanding that it pay taxes on cigarette sales occurring between
1982 and 1986.  The Tribe filed suit in the District Court to enjoin the
assessment, and Oklahoma counterclaimed to enforce the assessment and to
enjoin the Tribe from making future sales without collecting and remitting
state taxes.  The court refused to dismiss the counterclaims on the Tribe's
motion, which was based on the assertion that the Tribe had not waived its
sovereign immunity from suit.  The court held on the merits that the
Commission lacked authority to tax onreservation sales to tribal members or
to tax the Tribe directly, and therefore that the Tribe was immune from
Oklahoma's suit to collect past unpaid taxes directly, but that the Tribe
could be required to collect taxes prospectively for on-reservation sales
to nonmembers.  The Court of Appeals reversed, holding, inter alia, that
the lower court erred in entertaining Oklahoma's counterclaims because the
Tribe enjoys absolute sovereign immunity from suit and had not waived that
immunity by filing its action for injunctive relief, and that Oklahoma
lacked authority to tax any on-reservation sales, whether to tribesmen or
nonmembers.

Held: Under the doctrine of tribal sovereign immunity, a State that has not
asserted jurisdiction over Indian lands under Public Law 280 may not tax
sales of goods to tribesmen occurring on land held in trust for a federally
recognized Indian tribe, but is free to collect taxes on such sales to
nonmembers of the tribe.  Pp. 3-8.

    (a) The Tribe did not waive its inherent sovereign immunity from suit
merely by seeking an injunction against the Commission's proposed tax
assessment.  United States v. United States Fidelity and Guaranty Co., 309
U. S. 506, 511-512, 513.  In light of this Court's reaffirmation, in a
number of cases, of its longstanding doctrine of tribal sovereign immunity,
and Congress' consistent reiteration of its approval of the doctrine in
order to promote Indian self-government, self-sufficiency, and economic
development, the Court is not disposed to modify or abandon the doctrine at
this time.  Nor is there merit to Oklahoma's contention that immunity
should not apply because the Tribe's cigarette sales do not occur on a
formally designated "reservation."  Trust land qualifies as a reservation
for tribal immunity purposes where, as here, it has been "validly set apart
for the use of the Indians as such, under the superintendence of the
Government."  United States v. John, 437 U. S. 634, 648-649.  Mescalero
Apache Tribe v. Jones, 411 U. S. 145, 148-149, which approved
nondiscriminatory state taxation of activities on non reservation, nontrust
Government land leased by Indians, is not to the contrary.  Pp. 3-5.

    (b) Nevertheless, the Tribe's sovereign immunity does not deprive
Oklahoma of the authority to tax cigarette sales to nonmembers of the Tribe
at the Tribe's store, and the Tribe has an obligation to assist in the
collection of validly imposed state taxes on such sales.  Moe v.
Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes, 425 U. S. 463, 482, 483;
Washington v. Confederated Tribes of Colville Reservation, 447 U. S. 134.
This case is not distinguishable from Moe and Colville on the ground that
Oklahoma disclaimed jurisdiction over Indian lands upon entering the Union
and did not reassert jurisdiction over civil causes of action in such lands
as permitted by Public Law 280.  Neither of those cases depended on the
assertion of such jurisdiction by the State in question, and it is simply
incorrect to conclude that the Public Law was the essential (yet unspoken)
basis for the Court's decision in Colville.  Although the Tribe's sovereign
immunity bars Oklahoma from pursuing its most efficient remedy -- a lawsuit
-- to enforce its rights, adequate alternatives may exist, since individual
Indians employed in "smoke-shops" may not share tribal immunity, and since
States are free to collect their sales taxes from cigarette wholesalers or
to enter into mutually satisfactory agreements with tribes for the
collection of taxes.  If these alternatives prove to be unsatisfactory,
States may seek appropriate legislation from Congress.  Pp. 6-8.

888 F. 2d 1303, affirmed in part and reversed in part.

Rehnquist, C. J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.  Stevens,
J., filed a concurring opinion.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------