Joseph Baldwin Campbell - Page 14

                                                - 14 -                                                   

            the $43,380 per capita distribution he received was in lieu of                               
            the farming income he relinquished in order to allow the building                            
            and operation of the casino.  Therefore, petitioner contends, the                            
            $43,380 paid to him should be exempt from Federal income tax as                              
            "substitute farming income".                                                                 
                  The Court does not disagree that, if petitioner had                                    
            continued to farm the leased land, the income derived from his                               
            farming operations would have been "derived directly" from the                               
            land and, thus, would have been exempt from Federal income taxes.                            
            See Stevens v. Commissioner, supra.  However, this Court is                                  
            unwilling to extend such an exemption to encompass a type of                                 
            income that clearly falls outside the bounds of the "derived                                 
            directly" standard, and that was clearly intended to be subjected                            
            to Federal income tax under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act.                                
            The $43,380 per capita distribution to petitioner in 1992 was not                            
            paid in lieu of his potential farming income for that year but,                              
            rather, was paid to petitioner as a result of his status as an                               
            enrolled member of Prairie Island Indian Community and a resident                            
            on the tribal reservation.  That petitioner may have held a lease                            
            to farm the 270 acres in 1992 had no bearing on whether or not he                            
            received the per capita distribution in that year, and did not                               
            operate to change the character of the per capita distribution he                            
            received.  Each and every enrolled member of Prairie Island                                  
            Indian Community who lived on the reservation received an equal                              

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011