Ad
related to: tax exemption on tribal lands in kentucky county linetax.thomsonreuters.com has been visited by 10K+ users in the past month
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
This is a list of U.S. Supreme Court cases involving Native American Tribes.Included in the list are Supreme Court cases that have a major component that deals with the relationship between tribes, between a governmental entity and tribes, tribal sovereignty, tribal rights (including property, hunting, fishing, religion, etc.) and actions involving members of tribes.
Apr. 23—Proposed legislation that would keep towns from taxing personal property on tribal land would cost Ledyard and Montville hundreds of thousands of dollars a year and could put one of the ...
All tribal plates in South Dakota are issued by the state. There are nine tribes recognized. All nine have non-graphic, tax exempt plates beginning with a tribe-specific prefix, for use on official vehicles. Seven of the nine tribes also have graphic plates available for private vehicles.
The Klamath tribe had for years been living off timber and revenue from leasing tribal lands. When termination occurred, tribal land was sold and most of the Klamath tribe was considered above the poverty line, because each tribal member gained $40,000 from the sale.
Oklahoma Tax Commission v. Sac & Fox Nation, 508 U.S. 114 (1993), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that absent explicit congressional direction to the contrary, it must be presumed that a State does not have jurisdiction to tax tribal members who live and work in Indian country, whether the particular territory consists of a formal or informal reservation ...
Some tribes take that money and use it to create casinos and other gaming establishments. Certain citizens reject the idea of using tax payer money to build tax-exempt tribal casinos which generate tax-exempt revenues. [30] Another complaint from other U.S. citizens is the negative effects casinos have on nearby neighborhoods.
Bryan v. Itasca County, 426 U.S. 373 (1976), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that a state did not have the right to assess a tax on the property of a Native American (Indian) living on tribal land absent a specific Congressional grant of authority to do so.
Eligibility depends on combined disposable income, which must fall below 70% of the county median household income. Fortunato’s bill would expand this to exempt all property taxes for those ...