HEARTH Act Approval of Cowlitz Indian Tribe Regulations, 36573-36574 [2015-15590]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 122 / Thursday, June 25, 2015 / Notices
interests and activities applies with
equal force to leases entered into under
tribal leasing regulations approved by
the Federal government pursuant to the
HEARTH Act.
Section 5 of the Indian Reorganization
Act, 25 U.S.C 465, preempts State and
local taxation of permanent
improvements on trust land.
Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis
Reservation v. Thurston County, 724
F.3d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 2013) (citing
Mescalero Apache Tribe v. Jones, 411
U.S. 145 (1973)). In addition, as
explained in the preamble to the revised
leasing regulations at 25 CFR part 162,
Federal courts have applied a balancing
test to determine whether State and
local taxation of non-Indians on the
reservation is preempted. White
Mountain Apache Tribe v. Bracker, 448
U.S. 136, 143 (1980). The Bracker
balancing test, which is conducted
against a backdrop of ‘‘traditional
notions of Indian self-government,’’
requires a particularized examination of
the relevant State, Federal, and tribal
interests. We hereby adopt the Bracker
analysis from the preamble to the
surface leasing regulations, 77 FR
72,447–48, as supplemented by the
analysis below.
The strong Federal and tribal interests
against State and local taxation of
improvements, leaseholds, and
activities on land leased under the
Department’s leasing regulations apply
equally to improvements, leaseholds,
and activities on land leased pursuant to
tribal leasing regulations approved
under the HEARTH Act. Congress’s
overarching intent was to ‘‘allow tribes
to exercise greater control over their
own land, support self-determination,
and eliminate bureaucratic delays that
stand in the way of homeownership and
economic development in tribal
communities.’’ 158 Cong. Rec. H. 2682
(May 15, 2012). The HEARTH Act was
intended to afford tribes ‘‘flexibility to
adapt lease terms to suit [their] business
and cultural needs’’ and to ‘‘enable
[tribes] to approve leases quickly and
efficiently.’’ Id. at 5–6.
Assessment of State and local taxes
would obstruct these express Federal
policies supporting tribal economic
development and self-determination,
and also threaten substantial tribal
interests in effective tribal government,
economic self-sufficiency, and territorial
autonomy. See Michigan v. Bay Mills
Indian Community, 134 S. Ct. 2024,
2043 (2014) (Sotomayor, J., concurring)
(determining that ‘‘[a] key goal of the
Federal Government is to render Tribes
more self-sufficient, and better
positioned to fund their own sovereign
functions, rather than relying on Federal
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:37 Jun 24, 2015
Jkt 235001
funding’’). The additional costs of State
and local taxation have a chilling effect
on potential lessees, as well as on a tribe
that, as a result, might refrain from
exercising its own sovereign right to
impose a tribal tax to support its
infrastructure needs. See id. at 2043–44
(finding that State and local taxes
greatly discourage tribes from raising tax
revenue from the same sources because
the imposition of double taxation would
impede tribal economic growth).
Just like BIA’s surface leasing
regulations, tribal regulations under the
HEARTH Act pervasively cover all
aspects of leasing. See Guidance for the
Approval of Tribal Leasing Regulations
under the HEARTH Act, NPM–TRUS–
29 (effective Jan. 16, 2013) (providing
guidance on Federal review process to
ensure consistency of proposed tribal
regulations with Part 162 regulations
and listing required tribal regulatory
provisions). Furthermore, the Federal
government remains involved in the
tribal land leasing process by approving
the tribal leasing regulations in the first
instance and providing technical
assistance, upon request by a tribe, for
the development of an environmental
review process. The Secretary also
retains authority to take any necessary
actions to remedy violations of a lease
or of the tribal regulations, including
terminating the lease or rescinding
approval of the tribal regulations and
reassuming lease approval
responsibilities. Moreover, the Secretary
continues to review, approve, and
monitor individual Indian land leases
and other types of leases not covered
under the tribal regulations according to
the Part 162 regulations.
Accordingly, the Federal and tribal
interests weigh heavily in favor of
preemption of State and local taxes on
lease-related activities and interests,
regardless of whether the lease is
governed by tribal leasing regulations or
Part 162. Improvements, activities, and
leasehold or possessory interests may be
subject to taxation by the Ho-Chunk
Nation.
Dated: June 17, 2015.
Kevin K. Washburn,
Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2015–15593 Filed 6–24–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4337–15–P
PO 00000
36573
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Indian Affairs
[156A2100DD/AAKC001030/
A0A501010.999900 253G]
HEARTH Act Approval of Cowlitz
Indian Tribe Regulations
Bureau of Indian Affairs,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
On January 22, 2015, the
Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) approved
the Cowlitz Indian Tribe leasing
regulations under the HEARTH Act.
With this approval, the Tribe is
authorized to enter into the following
type of leases without BIA approval:
Business leases.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Cynthia Morales, Office of Trust
Services—Division of Realty, Bureau of
Indian Affairs; Telephone (202) 768–
4166; Email: cynthia.morales@bia.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
I. Summary of the HEARTH Act
The HEARTH (Helping Expedite and
Advance Responsible Tribal
Homeownership) Act of 2012 (the Act)
makes a voluntary, alternative land
leasing process available to tribes, by
amending the Indian Long-Term Leasing
Act of 1955, 25 U.S.C. 415. The Act
authorizes tribes to negotiate and enter
into agricultural and business leases of
tribal trust lands with a primary term of
25 years, and up to two renewal terms
of 25 years each, without the approval
of the Secretary of the Interior. The Act
also authorizes tribes to enter into leases
for residential, recreational, religious or
educational purposes for a primary term
of up to 75 years without the approval
of the Secretary. Participating tribes
develop tribal leasing regulations,
including an environmental review
process, and then must obtain the
Secretary’s approval of those regulations
prior to entering into leases. The Act
requires the Secretary to approve tribal
regulations if the tribal regulations are
consistent with the Department’s leasing
regulations at 25 CFR part 162 and
provide for an environmental review
process that meets requirements set
forth in the Act. This notice announces
that the Secretary, through the Assistant
Secretary—Indian Affairs, has approved
the tribal regulations for the Cowlitz
Indian Tribe.
II. Federal Preemption of State and
Local Taxes
The Department’s regulations
governing the surface leasing of trust
and restricted Indian lands specify that,
Frm 00074
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM
25JNN1
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
36574
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 122 / Thursday, June 25, 2015 / Notices
subject to applicable Federal law,
permanent improvements on leased
land, leasehold or possessory interests,
and activities under the lease are not
subject to State and local taxation and
may be subject to taxation by the Indian
tribe with jurisdiction. See 25 CFR
162.017. As explained further in the
preamble to the final regulations, the
Federal government has a strong interest
in promoting economic development,
self-determination, and tribal
sovereignty. 77 FR 72,440, 72447–48
(December 5, 2012). The principles
supporting the Federal preemption of
State law in the field of Indian leasing
and the taxation of lease-related
interests and activities applies with
equal force to leases entered into under
tribal leasing regulations approved by
the Federal government pursuant to the
HEARTH Act.
Section 5 of the Indian Reorganization
Act, 25 U.S.C 465, preempts State and
local taxation of permanent
improvements on trust land.
Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis
Reservation v. Thurston County, 724
F.3d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 2013) (citing
Mescalero Apache Tribe v. Jones, 411
U.S. 145 (1973)). In addition, as
explained in the preamble to the revised
leasing regulations at 25 CFR part 162,
Federal courts have applied a balancing
test to determine whether State and
local taxation of non-Indians on the
reservation is preempted. White
Mountain Apache Tribe v. Bracker, 448
U.S. 136, 143 (1980). The Bracker
balancing test, which is conducted
against a backdrop of ‘‘traditional
notions of Indian self-government,’’
requires a particularized examination of
the relevant State, Federal, and tribal
interests. We hereby adopt the Bracker
analysis from the preamble to the
surface leasing regulations, 77 FR
72,447–48, as supplemented by the
analysis below.
The strong Federal and tribal interests
against State and local taxation of
improvements, leaseholds, and
activities on land leased under the
Department’s leasing regulations apply
equally to improvements, leaseholds,
and activities on land leased pursuant to
tribal leasing regulations approved
under the HEARTH Act. Congress’s
overarching intent was to ‘‘allow tribes
to exercise greater control over their
own land, support self-determination,
and eliminate bureaucratic delays that
stand in the way of homeownership and
economic development in tribal
communities.’’ 158 Cong. Rec. H. 2682
(May 15, 2012). The HEARTH Act was
intended to afford tribes ‘‘flexibility to
adapt lease terms to suit [their] business
and cultural needs’’ and to ‘‘enable
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:37 Jun 24, 2015
Jkt 235001
[tribes] to approve leases quickly and
efficiently.’’ Id. at 5–6.
Assessment of State and local taxes
would obstruct these express Federal
policies supporting tribal economic
development and self-determination,
and also threaten substantial tribal
interests in effective tribal government,
economic self-sufficiency, and territorial
autonomy. See Michigan v. Bay Mills
Indian Community, 134 S. Ct. 2024,
2043 (2014) (Sotomayor, J., concurring)
(determining that ‘‘[a] key goal of the
Federal Government is to render Tribes
more self-sufficient, and better
positioned to fund their own sovereign
functions, rather than relying on Federal
funding’’). The additional costs of State
and local taxation have a chilling effect
on potential lessees, as well as on a tribe
that, as a result, might refrain from
exercising its own sovereign right to
impose a tribal tax to support its
infrastructure needs. See id. at 2043–44
(finding that State and local taxes
greatly discourage tribes from raising tax
revenue from the same sources because
the imposition of double taxation would
impede tribal economic growth).
Just like BIA’s surface leasing
regulations, tribal regulations under the
HEARTH Act pervasively cover all
aspects of leasing. See Guidance for the
Approval of Tribal Leasing Regulations
under the HEARTH Act, NPM–TRUS–
29 (effective Jan. 16, 2013) (providing
guidance on Federal review process to
ensure consistency of proposed tribal
regulations with Part 162 regulations
and listing required tribal regulatory
provisions). Furthermore, the Federal
government remains involved in the
tribal land leasing process by approving
the tribal leasing regulations in the first
instance and providing technical
assistance, upon request by a tribe, for
the development of an environmental
review process. The Secretary also
retains authority to take any necessary
actions to remedy violations of a lease
or of the tribal regulations, including
terminating the lease or rescinding
approval of the tribal regulations and
reassuming lease approval
responsibilities. Moreover, the Secretary
continues to review, approve, and
monitor individual Indian land leases
and other types of leases not covered
under the tribal regulations according to
the Part 162 regulations.
Accordingly, the Federal and tribal
interests weigh heavily in favor of
preemption of State and local taxes on
lease-related activities and interests,
regardless of whether the lease is
governed by tribal leasing regulations or
Part 162. Improvements, activities, and
leasehold or possessory interests may be
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
subject to taxation by the Cowlitz Indian
Tribe.
Dated: June 17, 2015.
Kevin K. Washburn,
Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2015–15590 Filed 6–24–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4337–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[LLMTC 00900.L16100000.DP0000
MO#4500080556]
Notice of Public Meeting, Eastern
Montana Resource Advisory Council
Meeting
Bureau of Land Management,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of public meeting.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
Federal Land Policy and Management
Act (FLPMA) and the Federal Advisory
Committee Act of 1972 (FACA), the U.S.
Department of the Interior, Bureau of
Land Management (BLM) Eastern
Montana Resource Advisory Council
(RAC) will meet as indicated below.
DATES: The Eastern Montana Resource
Advisory Council meeting will be held
on July 29, 2015 in Miles City, Montana.
When determined, the meeting place
will be announced in a news release.
The meeting will start at 1 p.m. and
adjourn at approximately 5:30 p.m.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mark Jacobsen, Public Affairs Specialist,
BLM Eastern Montana/Dakotas District,
111 Garryowen Road, Miles City,
Montana, 59301; (406) 233–2831;
mjacobse@blm.gov. Persons who use a
telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD) may call the Federal Information
Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–677–8339
to contact the above individual during
normal business hours. The FIRS is
available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week
to leave a message or question with the
above individual. You will receive a
reply during normal business hours.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 15member council advises the Secretary of
the Interior through the BLM on a
variety of planning and management
issues associated with public land
management in eastern Montana. At this
meeting, topics will include: An Eastern
Montana/Dakotas District report, Billing
Field Office and Miles City Field Office
manager reports, Resource Management
Plan updates, a Pumpkin Creek
Subcommittee report, individual RAC
member reports and other issues the
council may raise. All meetings are
open to the public and the public may
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM
25JNN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 122 (Thursday, June 25, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36573-36574]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-15590]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Indian Affairs
[156A2100DD/AAKC001030/A0A501010.999900 253G]
HEARTH Act Approval of Cowlitz Indian Tribe Regulations
AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On January 22, 2015, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA)
approved the Cowlitz Indian Tribe leasing regulations under the HEARTH
Act. With this approval, the Tribe is authorized to enter into the
following type of leases without BIA approval: Business leases.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Cynthia Morales, Office of Trust
Services--Division of Realty, Bureau of Indian Affairs; Telephone (202)
768-4166; Email: cynthia.morales@bia.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Summary of the HEARTH Act
The HEARTH (Helping Expedite and Advance Responsible Tribal
Homeownership) Act of 2012 (the Act) makes a voluntary, alternative
land leasing process available to tribes, by amending the Indian Long-
Term Leasing Act of 1955, 25 U.S.C. 415. The Act authorizes tribes to
negotiate and enter into agricultural and business leases of tribal
trust lands with a primary term of 25 years, and up to two renewal
terms of 25 years each, without the approval of the Secretary of the
Interior. The Act also authorizes tribes to enter into leases for
residential, recreational, religious or educational purposes for a
primary term of up to 75 years without the approval of the Secretary.
Participating tribes develop tribal leasing regulations, including an
environmental review process, and then must obtain the Secretary's
approval of those regulations prior to entering into leases. The Act
requires the Secretary to approve tribal regulations if the tribal
regulations are consistent with the Department's leasing regulations at
25 CFR part 162 and provide for an environmental review process that
meets requirements set forth in the Act. This notice announces that the
Secretary, through the Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs, has
approved the tribal regulations for the Cowlitz Indian Tribe.
II. Federal Preemption of State and Local Taxes
The Department's regulations governing the surface leasing of trust
and restricted Indian lands specify that,
[[Page 36574]]
subject to applicable Federal law, permanent improvements on leased
land, leasehold or possessory interests, and activities under the lease
are not subject to State and local taxation and may be subject to
taxation by the Indian tribe with jurisdiction. See 25 CFR 162.017. As
explained further in the preamble to the final regulations, the Federal
government has a strong interest in promoting economic development,
self-determination, and tribal sovereignty. 77 FR 72,440, 72447-48
(December 5, 2012). The principles supporting the Federal preemption of
State law in the field of Indian leasing and the taxation of lease-
related interests and activities applies with equal force to leases
entered into under tribal leasing regulations approved by the Federal
government pursuant to the HEARTH Act.
Section 5 of the Indian Reorganization Act, 25 U.S.C 465, preempts
State and local taxation of permanent improvements on trust land.
Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation v. Thurston County, 724
F.3d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 2013) (citing Mescalero Apache Tribe v.
Jones, 411 U.S. 145 (1973)). In addition, as explained in the preamble
to the revised leasing regulations at 25 CFR part 162, Federal courts
have applied a balancing test to determine whether State and local
taxation of non-Indians on the reservation is preempted. White Mountain
Apache Tribe v. Bracker, 448 U.S. 136, 143 (1980). The Bracker
balancing test, which is conducted against a backdrop of ``traditional
notions of Indian self-government,'' requires a particularized
examination of the relevant State, Federal, and tribal interests. We
hereby adopt the Bracker analysis from the preamble to the surface
leasing regulations, 77 FR 72,447-48, as supplemented by the analysis
below.
The strong Federal and tribal interests against State and local
taxation of improvements, leaseholds, and activities on land leased
under the Department's leasing regulations apply equally to
improvements, leaseholds, and activities on land leased pursuant to
tribal leasing regulations approved under the HEARTH Act. Congress's
overarching intent was to ``allow tribes to exercise greater control
over their own land, support self-determination, and eliminate
bureaucratic delays that stand in the way of homeownership and economic
development in tribal communities.'' 158 Cong. Rec. H. 2682 (May 15,
2012). The HEARTH Act was intended to afford tribes ``flexibility to
adapt lease terms to suit [their] business and cultural needs'' and to
``enable [tribes] to approve leases quickly and efficiently.'' Id. at
5-6.
Assessment of State and local taxes would obstruct these express
Federal policies supporting tribal economic development and self-
determination, and also threaten substantial tribal interests in
effective tribal government, economic self-sufficiency, and territorial
autonomy. See Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community, 134 S. Ct. 2024,
2043 (2014) (Sotomayor, J., concurring) (determining that ``[a] key
goal of the Federal Government is to render Tribes more self-
sufficient, and better positioned to fund their own sovereign
functions, rather than relying on Federal funding''). The additional
costs of State and local taxation have a chilling effect on potential
lessees, as well as on a tribe that, as a result, might refrain from
exercising its own sovereign right to impose a tribal tax to support
its infrastructure needs. See id. at 2043-44 (finding that State and
local taxes greatly discourage tribes from raising tax revenue from the
same sources because the imposition of double taxation would impede
tribal economic growth).
Just like BIA's surface leasing regulations, tribal regulations
under the HEARTH Act pervasively cover all aspects of leasing. See
Guidance for the Approval of Tribal Leasing Regulations under the
HEARTH Act, NPM-TRUS-29 (effective Jan. 16, 2013) (providing guidance
on Federal review process to ensure consistency of proposed tribal
regulations with Part 162 regulations and listing required tribal
regulatory provisions). Furthermore, the Federal government remains
involved in the tribal land leasing process by approving the tribal
leasing regulations in the first instance and providing technical
assistance, upon request by a tribe, for the development of an
environmental review process. The Secretary also retains authority to
take any necessary actions to remedy violations of a lease or of the
tribal regulations, including terminating the lease or rescinding
approval of the tribal regulations and reassuming lease approval
responsibilities. Moreover, the Secretary continues to review, approve,
and monitor individual Indian land leases and other types of leases not
covered under the tribal regulations according to the Part 162
regulations.
Accordingly, the Federal and tribal interests weigh heavily in
favor of preemption of State and local taxes on lease-related
activities and interests, regardless of whether the lease is governed
by tribal leasing regulations or Part 162. Improvements, activities,
and leasehold or possessory interests may be subject to taxation by the
Cowlitz Indian Tribe.
Dated: June 17, 2015.
Kevin K. Washburn,
Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2015-15590 Filed 6-24-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4337-15-P
