This month, the U.S. Supreme Court will decide whether to hear a case involving a tax on vessels imposed by the city of Valdez.
At issue is the City of Valdez, Alaska's tax on personal property. Apparently, Valdez exempted personal property from taxation, then carved out an exception to the exemption for "boats and vessels of at least 95 feet in length" that are not used "primarily in some aspect of commercial fishing" and that dock at privately owned docks in the City.
The U.S. Constitution, art. I., s. 10, cl. 3 provides: No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage. Simply put, the State's have no power to impose taxes based on weight of cargo.
The question presented to the U.S. Supreme Court is:
1. Whether a municipal personal property tax that falls exclusively on large vessels using the municipality’s harbor violates the Tonnage Clause of the Constitution, art. I, § 10, cl. 3.
2. Whether a municipal personal property tax that is apportioned to reach the value of property with an out-of-State domicile for periods when the property is on the high seas or otherwise outside the taxing jurisdiction of any State violates the Commerce and Due Process Clauses of the Constitution.
Decision by the Alaska Supreme Court here. Polar Tankers cert petition here, Valdez' brief in opposition here, Polar Tanker reply here [Hat tip to scotusblog for posting the petition phase briefs].
The City of Valdez brief to the Alaska Supreme Court is here, Polar Tanker's Opposition here, City's Reply here. [Hat tip to Polar Tanker attorney Leon Vance of Juneau for the briefs].
Valdez' law is argued to be a de facto duty of tonnage. Hawaii's invasive species assessment fee law seems to be a de jure one.
Comments