## Facts

- Kip R. Ramsey, a Yakama tribal member, lived and worked on the Yakama Reservation and solely owned Tiin‑Ma Logging Co., which harvested timber only on the reservation.
- Ramsey transported timber to off-reservation markets using diesel-powered trucks exceeding 55,000 pounds on public highways.
- The United States assessed and collected federal excise taxes for tax years 1986–1993, including:
  - the heavy vehicle use tax under I.R.C. § 4481; and
  - the diesel fuel tax under I.R.C. § 4041.
- Ramsey paid $460,702.55 in taxes, penalties, and interest.
- Ramsey sought a refund, contending the taxes were barred by Article III of the 1855 Yakama Treaty, which secures to the Yakama the right, “in common with citizens of the United States, to travel upon all public highways.”
- Ramsey relied on prior litigation involving Yakama loggers in which courts had concluded the same treaty language precluded certain Washington state taxes burdening highway travel.

## Issues

1. Whether Article III of the 1855 Yakama Treaty contains express exemptive language that exempts a Yakama tribal member from federal heavy vehicle and diesel fuel excise taxes.
2. Whether decisions addressing the treaty’s effect on state taxation controlled, or materially determined, the treaty analysis for federal excise taxes.

## Decision

- The Ninth Circuit reversed the district court’s summary judgment for Ramsey and remanded with instructions to enter summary judgment for the United States.
- The court held Article III’s highway-travel guarantee does not contain “express exemptive language” sufficient to exempt Ramsey from the federal taxes.
- The court rejected treating prior state-tax treaty decisions as controlling in the federal-tax context.

## Legal Principles

- A treaty-based exemption from federal taxation requires a definite, plainly stated expression of exemption in the treaty or statute; without such text, courts do not infer an exemption.
- General treaty guarantees (including rights of travel on public highways) do not, without explicit tax language, establish an exemption from federal excise taxes.
- Indian-law interpretive canons and extrinsic evidence are not used to create a federal tax exemption where the treaty text contains no express exemptive provision.
- Precedent limiting state taxation of tribal members does not automatically limit federal taxing power; federal-tax exemption analysis is distinct from state-tax preemption analysis.

## Conclusion

The Ninth Circuit ruled that the Yakama Treaty’s assurance of a right to travel on public highways does not expressly exempt tribal members from paying nationwide federal excise taxes on heavy vehicles and diesel fuel, and it ordered judgment for the United States on Ramsey’s refund claim.


Ramsey v. United States, 302 F.3d 1074 (9th Cir. 2002), cert. denied, 540 U.S. 812 (2003)