- 4 - affg. Cross v. Commissioner, 83 T.C. 561 (1984); Karmun v. Commissioner, 749 F.2d 567 (9th Cir. 1984), affg. 82 T.C. 201 (1984); Jourdain v. Commissioner, 71 T.C. 980 (1979). Petitioners urge us to reconsider all established case law on this point and find it in error. We decline to do so. B. Cherokee Treaty of 1866 Petitioners alternatively argue that their income is specifically excluded by the 1866 Treaty. As noted above, Native American Indians are subject to Federal income taxation unless an exemption can be found in a Federal statute or treaty. See Squire v. Capoeman, supra. Petitioners argue that the 1866 Treaty confers such an exemption and specifically point to the language contained in Article 10 of the 1866 Treaty as evidence of this. Respondent argues that petitioners should be collaterally estopped from raising this issue because this issue has already been considered and decided by this Court in Beck v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1994-122 (Beck I), affd. without published opinion 64 F.3d 655 (4th Cir. 1995). The following conditions must be met for collateral estoppel to apply: (1) The issue in the second suit must be identical in all respects with the one decided in the first suit. (2) There must be a final judgment rendered by a court of competent jurisdiction. (3) Collateral estoppel may be invoked against parties and their privies to the prior judgment.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011