About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


2022 Op. N.D. Att'y Gen. 1 (2022)

handle is hein.sag/sagnd0103 and id is 1 raw text is: LETTER OPINION 2022-L-01 The Honorable Thomas Beadle State Treasurer 600 E. Boulevard Ave Dept 120 Bismarck, ND 58505 Dear Mr. Beadle: Thank you for your letter inquiring as to the method of distribution of gross production and oil extraction taxes to the constitutional funds set forth in N.D. Const. art. X, §§ 22, 24, and 26. For the reasons indicated below, it is my opinion that the distributions of gross production and oil extraction tax revenues should be allocated from the state's share of the aforementioned revenues. Further, that portion of the gross production and oil extraction tax revenue derived from oil and gas exploration and production within the exterior boundaries of the reservations and on trust properties outside reservation boundaries (reservation wells), which is distributed directly to the tribes pursuant to N.D.C.C. ch. 57-51.2, should not be included in the definition of revenue when making constitutional allocations of oil and gas revenues under N.D. Const. art. X. ANALYSIS In 2007, the 60th Legislative Assembly enacted chapter 57-51.2 of the North Dakota Century Code, allowing the state to enter into agreements with the tribes1 relating to the taxation and regulation of oil and gas extraction and production on reservation wells. This law was passed in response to a U.S. Supreme Court Case, Cotton Petroleum Corp. v. New Mexico,2 where the Court held that states, in addition to the tribe, may tax a non-indian oil and gas operator whose operations are located on a reservation. At the time, this created the prospect for dual taxation on oil and gas produced on reservations. The oil produced on reservation wells was taxed at a 5% rate for the tribe 1 Three Affiliated Tribes, Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, and Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians. 2 Cotton Petroleum Corp. v. New Mexico, 490 U.S. 163 (1989).