Title: THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF THE COUNTY OF CAMPBELL, WYOMING V. RIO TINTO ENERGY AMERICA, INC.

State: wyoming

Issuer: Wyoming Supreme Court

Document:

THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF THE COUNTY OF CAMPBELL, WYOMING V. RIO TINTO ENERGY AMERICA, INC.2008 WY 139Case Number: S-08-0052Decided: 11/25/2008NOTICE:  This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in Pacific Reporter Third.  Readers are requested to notify the Clerk of the Supreme Court, Supreme Court Building, Cheyenne, Wyoming 82002, of any typographical or other formal errors so that correction may be made before final publication in the permanent volume.
OCTOBER 
TERM, A.D. 2008

 
 
THE 
BOARD OF COUNTYCOMMISSIONERS OF THE COUNTY OF CAMPBELL, WYOMING,Appellant(Respondent),v.RIO 
TINTO ENERGY AMERICA, 
INC.,Appellee(Petitioner).

 
 
Appeal 
from the DistrictCourtofCampbellCounty

The 
Honorable Dan R. Price II, Judge

 
 
Representing 
Appellant:

Carol 
Seeger, Deputy Campbell County Attorney, Gillette, Wyoming.

 
 
Representing 
Appellee:

Hadassah 
M. Reimer of Holland & Hart LLP, Jackson, 
Wyoming, and Patrick R. Day of Holland & 
Hart LLP, Cheyenne, 
Wyoming.  Argument by Ms. 
Reimer.

 
 
Before 
VOIGT, C.J., and GOLDEN, HILL, KITE, and BURKE, 
JJ.

 
 
VOIGT, 
Chief Justice.

 
 
[¶1]      This is an appeal 
from a district court's reversal of a county's calculation of statutory interest 
owed upon underpaid taxes.  We agree 
with the district court's reading of the applicable statute and, therefore, 
affirm.

 
 
ISSUE

 
 
[¶2]      Does Wyo. Stat. 
Ann. § 39-14-108(c)(i) (LexisNexis 
2007) require counties to offset overpaid taxes against underpaid taxes across 
tax years in an audit when calculating interest on underpaid 
taxes?

 
 
STATUTE

 
 
[¶3]      Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 
39-14-108(c)(i) provides as follows:

 
 
(c)    Interest.  The following shall 
apply:

        
(i)   The taxpayer is 
entitled to receive an offsetting credit for any overpaid gross product or 
severance tax identified by an audit that is within the scope of the audit 
period, without regard to the limitation period for requesting refunds.  In calculating interest, the department 
or board of county commissioners shall first compute a net deficiency amount 
after subtracting any offsetting credit and then calculate any interest 
due[.]

 
 
STANDARD 
OF REVIEW

 
 
[¶4]      Like the district 
court, we review administrative agency decisions pursuant to Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 
16-3-114(c) (LexisNexis 2007).  We do not afford any deference to the 
decision of the district court, treating the case rather as if it had come 
directly from the agency.  Davis v. City of Cheyenne, 2004 WY 43, ¶ 6, 88 P.3d 481, 484 
(Wyo. 2004).  Similarly, the 
agency's conclusions of law are not entitled to deference, and the agency is 
affirmed only if such conclusions are in accordance with the law.  Penny v. State ex rel. Wyo. Mental Health 
Professions Licensing Bd., 2005 WY 117, ¶ 12, 120 P.3d 152, 160 (Wyo. 
2005).

 
 
[¶5]      Statutory 
construction is a question of law that we review de novo.  Powder River Coal Co. v. Wyo. State Bd. of 
Equalization, 2002 WY 5, ¶ 6, 38 P.3d 423, 426 (Wyo. 
2002).

 
 
This 
Court considers the entire statute in determining if the language of a statute 
is ambiguous:

 
 
In 
interpreting statutes, our primary consideration is to determine the 
legislature's intent.  All statutes 
must be construed in pari materia 
and, in ascertaining the meaning of a given law, all statutes relating to the 
same subject or having the same general purpose must be considered and construed 
in harmony.  Statutory construction 
is a question of law, so our standard of review is de novo.  We endeavor to interpret statutes in 
accordance with the legislature's intent.  
We begin by making an inquiry respecting the ordinary and obvious meaning 
of the words employed according to their arrangement and connection.  We construe the statute as a whole, 
giving effect to every word, clause, and sentence, and we construe all parts of 
the statute in pari materia.  When a statute is sufficiently clear and 
unambiguous, we give effect to the plain and ordinary meaning of the words and 
do not resort to the rules of statutory construction.  Wyoming Board of Outfitters and Professional Guides 
v. Clark, 2001 WY 78, ¶ 12, 30 P.3d 36, ¶ 12 (Wyo. 2001);  Murphy v. State Canvassing Board, 12 P.3d 677, 679 (Wyo. 2000).  
Moreover, we must not give a statute a meaning that will nullify its 
operation if it is susceptible of another interpretation.  Billis v. State, 800 P.2d 401, 413 
(Wyo. 1990) (citing McGuire v. McGuire, 608 P.2d 1278, 1283 
(Wyo. 
1980)).  

 
 
            
Moreover, we will not enlarge, stretch, expand, or extend a statute to 
matters that do not fall within its express provisions.  Gray v. Stratton Real Estate, 2001 WY 
125, ¶ 5, 36 P.3d 1127, ¶ 5 (Wyo. 2001);  Bowen v. State, Wyoming 
Real Estate Commission, 900 P.2d 1140, 1143 (Wyo. 1995).  

 
 

Loberg 
v. Wyo. Workers' Safety & Comp. Div., 
2004 WY 48, ¶ 5, 88 P.3d 1045, ¶ 5 (Wyo. 2004) (quoting Board of County Comm'rs of Teton County v. 
Crow, 2003 WY 40, ¶¶ 40-41, 65 P.3d 720, ¶¶ 40-41 (Wyo. 2003)).  Only if we determine the language of a 
statute is ambiguous will we proceed to the next step, which involves applying 
general principles of statutory construction to the language of the statute in 
order to construe any ambiguous language to accurately reflect the intent of the 
legislature.  If this Court 
determines that the language of the statute is not ambiguous, there is no room 
for further construction.  We will 
apply the language of the statute using its ordinary and obvious 
meaning.

 
 

BP 
Am. Prod. Co. v. Wyo. Dep't of Revenue, 
2005 WY 60, ¶ 15, 112 P.3d 596, 604 (Wyo. 2005).

 

FACTS

 
 
[¶6]      Rio Tinto Energy 
America, Inc., formerly Kennecott Energy Company (Rio Tinto), operates two coal 
minesCaballo Rojo and Corderoin Campbell County, Wyoming.  
After an audit covering the tax years 1999, 2000, and 2001, the Wyoming 
Department of Audit concluded that Rio Tinto had undervalued its production at 
both mines for tax years 1999 and 2000, but that it had overvalued production 
for tax year 2001.  The Wyoming 
Department of Revenue, in re-assessing severance taxes owed to the State of 
Wyoming, offset the underpayments and overpayments in accordance with Wyo. Stat. 
Ann. § 39-14-108(c)(i), and then charged Rio Tinto the balance of the underpaid 
taxes and interest accrued thereon.  
Rio Tinto paid the taxes and interest to the State.

 
 

[¶7]      Subsequently, the 
Department of Revenue certified to CampbellCounty notices of the valuation changes 
for the three tax years.  The  Campbell County Treasurer then issued 
tax notices to Rio Tinto for the additional ad valorem taxes and interest due to the 
County.  In calculating interest, 
however, the CountyTreasurer did not credit the 2001 
overpayment against the 1999 and 2000 underpayments, under the theory that the 
statute contemplated netting overpayments and underpayments during an audit 
period only 
between mines for the same tax year, and not between tax 
years.  Rio Tinto paid the tax due to the 
County, but contested the interest and sought review by the Board of County 
Commissioners.  The Board voted to 
approve the calculations made by the CountyTreasurer.  Rio Tinto filed in the district court a 
Petition for Review of Administrative Action and, on January 30, 2008, the 
district court reversed the Board's decision.  This appeal 
followed.

 
 
DISCUSSION

 
 

[¶8]      
Before 
we evaluate the statutory language at issue, we will present, in simplified 
terms, the positions of the parties.  
For simplicity's sake, we will ignore the payment due dates established 
by Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 39-14-107(b)(ii) (LexisNexis 2007).  Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 39-14-108(c)(iii) 
(LexisNexis 2007) sets interest on 
unpaid ad valorem taxes at 18% per 
annum "until paid or collected."

 
 
[¶9]      The CountyTreasurer would apply the statute by 
assessing interest on the 1999 underpayment from the due date until paid, would 
assess interest against the 2000 underpayment from the due date until paid, and 
would remit to Rio Tinto the 2001 overpayment upon receipt of notice from the 
Department of Revenue of the overpayment.  
This remittance would be in the form of a rebate check, and would have no 
effect on the interest accrued during the audit period in which the overpayment 
occurred.  The CountyTreasurer asserts that overpayments may 
only be credited between mines within the same tax year.

 
 
[¶10]   Rio Tinto, on the other hand, would 
apply the statute by assessing interest on the 1999 underpayment from its due 
date and interest on the 2000 underpayment from its due date until receipt of 
notice of the 2001 overpayment, at which time it would subtract the overpayment 
from the total and assess interest only on the balance due from that point.  Rio Tinto asserts that the statute 
clearly mandates that any overpayment during the audit period must be credited 
against any deficiency, across tax years and for both 
mines.

 
 
[¶11]   The district court's decision 
letter is premised upon a conclusion that Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 39-14-108(c)(i) is 
unambiguous.  We agree.  The unequivocal mandate of the statute 
is that a net deficiency be computed, and that any offsetting credit be 
subtracted in determining the net deficiency for computing interest during the 
audit.  This audit took place in 
2005, and it covered the tax years of 1999, 2000, and 2001.  The total deficiency for the audit 
period should have been calculated using the underpayment for tax year 1999 with 
18% annual interest thereon from the due date, plus the underpayment for the tax 
year 2000 with 18% annual interest thereon from the due date. The overage credit 
for tax year 2001 should have been subtracted from the sum of those two 
deficiencies on the date it came due, leaving the net underpayment against which 
future interest was then to be calculated.

 
 
[¶12]   This is the only reading of the 
statute that gives effect both to its requirement for the determination of a net 
deficiency, and for its requirement that any offsetting credit be subtracted if 
"within the scope of the audit period."  
The deficiency at the end of tax year 1999 was the amount of the 
underpayment, plus accrued interest.1  The deficiency at the end of tax year 
2000 was the amount of the total deficiency from the previous year and interest 
accrued thereon in 2000, plus the new underpayment with accrued interest.  The overpayment in 2001 should have been 
subtracted from the total deficiency, and interest should have continued to 
accrue on that new number until payment.  
The CountyTreasurer's reading of the 
statute does not give effect to its plain meaning because it fails to deduct the 
credit to reach a "net" deficiency.  
If the legislature intended to limit overpayment credits to different 
mines during the same year, and to disallow overpayment credits between years, 
it would have said so.  Language to 
that effect does not appear in the statute and it is not appropriate for us to 
supply it.

 
 
CONCLUSION

 
 
[¶13]   The district court correctly 
applied Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 39-14-108(c)(i) to require the Campbell County 
Treasurer to determine Rio Tinto's net ad 
valorem tax deficiency for the audit period by subtracting a 2001 
overpayment credit from the gross deficiencies for 1999 and 
2000.

 
 
[¶14]   We affirm and remand to the 
district court for further remand to the Board of County Commissioners to apply 
the 2001 offsetting overvaluation credit in determining Rio Tinto's net 
deficiency in a manner consistent herewith.

 
 
FOOTNOTES

 
 

1It is 
possible for interest to accrue on a deficiency during the tax year in which it 
becomes due because, as mentioned, ad 
valorem taxes are due more than once during the year (see supra ¶ 8).  Interest accrues on unpaid balances from 
the due date, which is not necessarily the end of the tax 
year.