## Facts

- Yakima County, Washington imposed (1) an ad valorem tax on taxable real property and (2) an excise tax on sales of real property within the county.
- The county sought to foreclose for unpaid taxes on certain reservation allotments within the Yakima Reservation that had become fee simple (“fee-patented”) and were held by the Yakima Indian Nation or its members.
- The fee status of the parcels derived from the Indian General Allotment Act of 1887 and later amendments, including the Burke Act, which provided for issuance of fee patents and removal of restrictions, including restrictions related to taxation.
- The Yakima Indian Nation sued for declaratory and injunctive relief to block both taxes as applied to the fee-patented reservation lands.
- The federal district court granted summary judgment for the Tribe, holding both the ad valorem and excise taxes impermissible.
- The Ninth Circuit held the excise tax impermissible, but remanded the ad valorem tax question for a factual inquiry into whether the tax had a “demonstrably serious” impact on tribal interests.
- The Supreme Court granted review of both sides’ petitions and consolidated the cases.

## Issues

1. Whether the Indian General Allotment Act and related amendments authorize a county to impose an ad valorem property tax on fee-patented allotment lands within a reservation owned by tribal members or the Tribe.
2. Whether the same statutory framework authorizes a county to impose and enforce an excise tax on sales of those fee-patented allotment lands.

## Decision

- The Court held that the Allotment Act framework permits Yakima County to impose an ad valorem property tax on reservation lands patented in fee pursuant to the allotment statutes, including when owned by reservation Indians or the Tribe.
- The Court held that the allotment statutes do not provide the required clear congressional authorization for the county’s excise tax on sales of such lands.
- The Court rejected the Ninth Circuit’s use of an impact-based balancing test for the validity of the ad valorem tax once Congress has clearly authorized taxation.
- The judgment was affirmed in part and remanded: the ad valorem tax was upheld as a matter of law; the excise tax remained barred.

## Legal Principles

- State and local taxation in Indian country requires “unmistakably clear” congressional authorization; ambiguities are resolved in favor of Indians.
- The Burke Act’s removal of “restrictions as to . . . taxation of said land” upon issuance of a fee patent constitutes clear authorization for ad valorem taxation of the land itself.
- Fee-simple, freely alienable land is generally subject to ordinary local property taxation when federal law removes barriers to taxation.
- Authorization to tax land (ad valorem property taxation) does not, without explicit language, extend to transactional levies such as excise taxes on sales of that land.
- When Congress has clearly spoken to permit a tax, courts need not apply separate case-specific impact balancing to determine permissibility.

## Conclusion

The Supreme Court held that federal allotment statutes clearly allow local ad valorem property taxation of reservation allotments patented in fee, but do not clearly permit a county excise tax on sales of those lands, drawing a statutory line between taxes on land ownership and taxes on land transfers.


County of Yakima v. Confederated Tribes & Bands of Yakima Indian Nation, 502 U.S. 251 (1992)