Summary
The Michigan Supreme Court considered consolidated appeals concerning tax exemptions for motor-vehicle emissions test cells and an engine production line under Part 59 of Michigan’s Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act. The Court held that qualifying equipment must have the primary purpose of controlling or disposing of air pollution and must actually and physically control, capture, and remove pollutants. It reversed the Court of Appeals in part, reinstated the denial of exemptions for the test cells, and affirmed the denial for Detroit Diesel’s engine line and the rejection of a due-process challenge.
Holdings
- The test cells do not qualify as facilities because they were installed or acquired primarily to test engines and vehicles for compliance with federal regulations, not primarily to control or dispose of air pollution.
- The test cells do not satisfy MCL 324.5903 because they are not designed and operated primarily to control, capture, and remove pollutants from the air and do not physically perform those functions.
- The Equinox engine production line does not qualify for a part 59 tax exemption because its primary purpose was manufacturing engines for sale, not controlling or disposing of air pollution.
- Detroit Diesel received due process because it was given notice and a full opportunity to present evidence and legal arguments at a hearing before an impartial decisionmaking process.
Questions Presented
- Whether vehicle and engine emissions test cells qualify as tax-exempt air-pollution-control facilities under MCL 324.5901 and MCL 324.5903.
- Whether Detroit Diesel's Equinox engine production line qualifies for a part 59 tax exemption.
- Whether the State Tax Commission's hearing process violated Detroit Diesel's due-process rights.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (16)
- Spiek v Dep’t of Transportation, 456 Mich 331, 337; 572 NW2d 201 (1998)(followed)
- City of Taylor v Detroit Edison Co, 475 Mich 109, 115; 715 NW2d 28 (2006)(followed)
- Ford Motor Co v State Tax Comm, 274 Mich App 108, 113, 118; 732 NW2d 591 (2007)(reversed in part)
- Covert Twp Assessor v State Tax Comm, 407 Mich 561; 287 NW2d 895 (1980)(distinguished)
- Meijer, Inc v State Tax Comm, 66 Mich App 280; 238 NW2d 582 (1975)(distinguished)
- Wexford Medical Group v City of Cadillac, 474 Mich 192, 207; 713 NW2d 734 (2006)(followed)
- Grimes v Dep’t of Transportation, 475 Mich 72, 89; 715 NW2d 275 (2006)(followed)
- Elias Bros Restaurants, Inc v Treasury Dep’t, 452 Mich 144, 150; 549 NW2d 837 (1996)(followed)
- East Saginaw Mfg Co v East Saginaw, 19 Mich 259, 279 (1869)(followed)
- Michigan United Conservation Clubs v Lansing Twp, 423 Mich 661, 664; 378 NW2d 737 (1985)(followed)
Showing top 10 of 16.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.