HEARTH Act Approval of Gila River Indian Community Regulations, 77655-77656 [2015-31565]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 240 / Tuesday, December 15, 2015 / Notices
information, it would be impossible to
determine which applicants were
eligible for award.
Respondents (i.e. affected public):
National organizations with expertise in
rural housing and community
development, including experience
working with rural housing
development organizations, community
development corporations (CDCs),
community housing development
organizations (CHDOs), local
governments, and Indian tribes.
77655
Estimated Number of Respondents:
30.
Estimated Number of Responses: 1.
Frequency of Response: Annual.
Average Hours per Response: 40.
Total Estimated Burdens Hours: 1200
hours.
Information collection
Number of
respondents
Frequency of
response
Responses
per annum
Burden hour
per response
Annual burden
hours
Hourly cost
per response
Annual cost
Total .............................
30
1
1
40
1200
$45
$54,000
B. Solicitation of Public Comment
This notice is soliciting comments
from members of the public and affected
parties concerning the collection of
information described in Section A on
the following:
(1) Whether the proposed collection
of information is necessary for the
proper performance of the functions of
the agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(2) The accuracy of the agency’s
estimate of the burden of the proposed
collection of information;
(3) Ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and
(4) Ways to minimize the burden of
the collection of information on those
who are to respond; including through
the use of appropriate automated
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology, e.g., permitting
electronic submission of responses.
HUD encourages interested parties to
submit comment in response to these
questions.
Authority: Section 3507 of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. chapter 35.
Dated: December 9, 2015.
Colette Pollard,
Department Reports Management Officer,
Office of the Chief Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 2015–31507 Filed 12–14–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210–67–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Indian Affairs
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
[167A2100DD/AAKC001030/
A0A501010.999900 253G]
HEARTH Act Approval of Gila River
Indian Community Regulations
Bureau of Indian Affairs,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
On November 20, 2015, the
Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) approved
the Gila River Indian Community
leasing regulations under the HEARTH
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:08 Dec 14, 2015
Jkt 238001
Act. With this approval, the Tribe is
authorized to enter into the following
types of leases without BIA approval:
Commercial leases and solar resource
leases.
Ms.
Sharlene Round Face, Bureau of Indian
Affairs, Division of Real Estate Services,
MS–4642–MIB, 1849 C Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20240, at (202) 208–
3615.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
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 Gila River
Indian Community.
II. Federal Preemption of State and
Local Taxes
The Department’s regulations
governing the surface leasing of trust
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
and restricted Indian lands specify that,
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 72440, 77 FR 72447
(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)). Similarly, section 465
preempts state taxation of rent payments
by a lessee for leased trust lands,
because ‘‘tax on the payment of rent is
indistinguishable from an impermissible
tax on the land.’’ See Seminole Tribe of
Florida v. Stranburg, No. 14–14524,
*13–*17, n.8 (11th Cir. 2015). 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 nonIndians 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 selfgovernment,’’ 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
E:\FR\FM\15DEN1.SGM
15DEN1
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
77656
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 240 / Tuesday, December 15, 2015 / Notices
regulations, 77 FR 72447, 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:08 Dec 14, 2015
Jkt 238001
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 Gila
River Indian Community.
Dated: November 20, 2015.
Kevin K. Washburn,
Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2015–31565 Filed 12–14–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4337–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Office of the Secretary
[166D1114PD DPD000000.000000
DS62100000 DX.62101]
Renewal of Information Collection for:
OMB Control Number—1093–0005—
Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) Act,
Statement of Federal Lands Payments,
(43 CFR 44)
Office of the Secretary, Office
of Budget, Department of the Interior.
ACTION: Notice and request for
comments.
AGENCY:
In compliance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the
Office of Budget, Office of the Secretary,
and Department of the Interior (DOI),
announces the proposed extension of a
public information collection required
by the Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILT)
Act and seeks public comments on the
provisions thereof. In compliance with
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
the Office of Budget has submitted a
request for renewal of approval of this
information collection to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and
requests public comments on this
submission.
SUMMARY:
OMB has up to 60 days to
approve or disapprove the information
collection request, but may respond
after 30 days; therefore, public
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
comments should be submitted to OMB
by January 14, 2016, in order to be
assured of consideration.
ADDRESSES: Send your written
comments by facsimile (202) 395–5806
or email (OIRA_Submission@
omb.eop.gov) to the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget,
Attention: Department of the Interior
Desk Officer (1093–0005). Also, please
send a copy of your comments to the
U.S. Department of the Interior, Office
of the Secretary, Office of Budget, Attn.
Dionna Kiernan, 1849 C St. NW., MS
7413 MIB, Washington, DC 20240. Send
any faxed comments to (202) 219–2849,
Attn. Dionna Kiernan. Comments may
also be emailed to dionna_kiernan@
ios.doi.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Requests for additional information or
copies of the information collection
instrument should be directed to the
U.S. Department of the Interior, Office
of the Secretary, Office of Budget, Attn.
Dionna Kiernan, 1849 C St. NW., MS
7413 MIB, Washington, DC 20240.
Requests for additional information may
also be emailed to dionna_kiernan@
ios.doi.gov or faxed to (202) 219–2849.
You may also review the information
collection request online at https://
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Abstract
Public Law 97–258 (31 U.S.C. 6901–
6907), as amended, the Payments in
Lieu of Taxes (PILT) Act, was designed
by Congress to help local governments
recover some of the expenses they incur
in providing services on public lands.
These local governments receive funds
under various Federal land payment
programs such as the National Forest
Revenue Act, the Mineral Lands Leasing
Act, and the Taylor Grazing Act. PILT
payments supplement the payments
local governments receive under these
other programs. The FY 2016 budget
proposes a one-year extension of the
current PILT program, maintaining the
existing formula for calculating
payments to counties. That proposal is
currently pending before Congress. This
renewal authority is being done in
anticipation of reauthorization by
Congress.
The PILT Act requires the Governor of
each State to furnish the Department of
the Interior with a listing of payments
disbursed to local governments by the
States on behalf of the Federal
Government under 12 statutes described
in Section 6903 of 31 U.S.C. The
Department of the Interior uses the
amounts reported by the States to
E:\FR\FM\15DEN1.SGM
15DEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 240 (Tuesday, December 15, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77655-77656]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-31565]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Indian Affairs
[167A2100DD/AAKC001030/A0A501010.999900 253G]
HEARTH Act Approval of Gila River Indian Community Regulations
AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On November 20, 2015, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA)
approved the Gila River Indian Community leasing regulations under the
HEARTH Act. With this approval, the Tribe is authorized to enter into
the following types of leases without BIA approval: Commercial leases
and solar resource leases.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Sharlene Round Face, Bureau of
Indian Affairs, Division of Real Estate Services, MS-4642-MIB, 1849 C
Street NW., Washington, DC 20240, at (202) 208-3615.
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 Gila River Indian Community.
II. Federal Preemption of State and Local Taxes
The Department's regulations governing the surface leasing of trust
and restricted Indian lands specify that, 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 72440, 77 FR 72447 (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)). Similarly, section 465 preempts state
taxation of rent payments by a lessee for leased trust lands, because
``tax on the payment of rent is indistinguishable from an impermissible
tax on the land.'' See Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Stranburg, No. 14-
14524, *13-*17, n.8 (11th Cir. 2015). 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
[[Page 77656]]
regulations, 77 FR 72447, 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
Gila River Indian Community.
Dated: November 20, 2015.
Kevin K. Washburn,
Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2015-31565 Filed 12-14-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4337-15-P
