Summary
supplementing 23 Ariz.App. 101, 530 P.2d 1134
Summary of this case from Calpine Construction Finance Co. v. Arizona Depatment of RevenueOpinion
No. 1 CA-CIV 2368.
March 4, 1975.
Taxpayer instituted action to recover monies paid on property tax assessment against its mining operations on Indian reservations. The Superior Court, Navajo County, Cause Nos. C-13650 and C-13651 (consolidated), Melvyn T. Shelley, J., granted taxpayer's motion for summary judgment, and appeal was taken. The Court of Appeals, 23 Ariz. App. 101, 530 P.2d 1134, affirmed. On motion for rehearing, the Court of Appeals, Ogg, P.J., held that where issue of county's authority to tax personal property and improvements of coal company was never presented, decision prohibiting county from assessing taxes on coal company's leasehold interest in producing mines located on Indian reservations should not be interpreted to prevent county from imposing taxes on personal property and improvements owned by coal company and located on Indian reservation.
Motion denied.
Mary Z. Chandler, James D. Winter, Asst. Attys. Gen., Phoenix, for appellant.
Philip E. von Ammon, Donald R. Gilbert, Fennemore, Craig, von Ammon Udall, Phoenix, for appellee.
SUPPLEMENTAL OPINION
Appellants, in their motion for rehearing, have urged that this Court further clarify the original decision in the case because of the far-reaching tax implications.
Appellants assert that our decision could be interpreted to strike down Navajo County's entire assessment on all property of Peabody Coal Company located within the County upon the Navajo and Hopi Indian Reservations. The issue of Navajo County's authority to tax the personal property and improvements of Peabody Coal Company was never presented to this Court or the Superior Court of Navajo County. The appellants now admit that it was error when they failed to separate the two concepts of taxing Peabody's leasehold interest in the producing mines and the taxing of Peabody's improvements and personal property.
To avoid future misinterpretation of our decision, the limited holding in this case as applied to this fact situation only prohibits Navajo County from assessing taxes on Peabody's leasehold interest in the producing mines that are located on the Navajo and Hopi Indian Reservations. There is nothing in this opinion that should be interpreted to prevent Navajo County from imposing taxes upon the personal property and improvements owned by Peabody that are located upon the Navajo and Hopi Indian Reservations. See Navajo County v. Four Corners Pipeline Co., 106 Ariz. 511, 479 P.2d 174 (1970). Supplemental Opinion 107 Ariz. 296, 486 P.2d 778 (1971); Pima County v. American Smelting and Refining Co., 21 Ariz. App. 406, 520 P.2d 319 (1974); Article XX of the Arizona Constitution, A.R.S.
We are aware that there may be some problems in determining the exact tax payable to Navajo County by Peabody Coal Company under the present assessment and tax bill. We regret that we cannot in this case dispose of all future problems by determining the exact sum owed in taxes. This specific matter was never presented to this Court or the Superior Court of Navajo County and we therefore lack both the necessary information and the authority to make such a determination in this case.
The motion for rehearing is denied.
DONOFRIO and STEVENS, JJ., concur.