2023 New Mexico Statutes › Chapter 7 - Taxation › Article 1 - Administration › Section 7-1-22 - Exhaustion of administrative remedies.

No court of this state has jurisdiction to entertain any proceeding by a taxpayer in which the taxpayer calls into question the taxpayer's liability for any tax or the application to the taxpayer of any provision of the Tax Administration Act, except as a consequence of the appeal by the taxpayer to the court of appeals from the order of a hearing officer, or except as a consequence of a claim for refund as specified in Section 7-1-26 NMSA 1978.
History:
1953 Comp., § 72-13-36, enacted by Laws 1965, ch. 248, § 24; 1966, ch. 30, § 1; 1979, ch. 144, § 21; 1995, ch. 70, § 2; 2015, ch. 73, § 14.
ANNOTATIONS
The 2015 amendment,
effective July 1, 2015, provided jurisdiction to the court of appeals to review orders of hearing officers; after "court of appeals from the", deleted "action and order of the secretary, all as specified in Section 7-1-24 NMSA 1978" and added "order of a hearing officer".
The 1995 amendment,
effective July 1, 1995, substituted "secretary" for "director" near the end of the section, and made gender neutral changes throughout the section.
Exhaustion of remedies required.
— Challenges to the validity of the Tax Administration Act must be first presented either through the protest remedy or the refund remedy.
Neff v. State Taxation & Revenue Dep't
, 1993-NMCA-116, 116 N.M. 240, 861 P.2d 281.
Tax Administration Act requires exhaustion of remedies for each denial of a given credit.
— Where plaintiff taxpayers (taxpayers) twice challenged the New Mexico taxation and revenue department's (department) denial of applications for high wage jobs tax credits, once in 2015 and again in 2016, and where taxpayers elected to dispute the denial of the 2015 credits by filing a written protest to be heard by the department's administrative hearing officer (AHO), pursuant to § 7-1-24 NMSA 1978, but elected to protest the denial of the 2016 credits by claiming a refund from the department for the credit denied, pursuant to § 7-1-26 NMSA 1978, and where the department filed a motion for summary judgment, claiming that when a taxpayer pursues successive denials of tax credits raising a common issue, the taxpayer must have the issue resolved in the forum where it was initially raised or is otherwise bound by their choice of remedy for the original denial, the district court erred in granting the department's motion for summary judgment, because the Tax Administration Act, §§ 7-1-1 to 7-1-83 NMSA 1978, requires only that a taxpayer denied a given credit exhaust their remedy for that denied credit before seeking relief from the courts. Taxpayers were not required to pursue the same remedy for the denial of the 2016 credits as they pursued for the denial of the 2015 credits; the act requires only that a taxpayer exhaust whatever remedy it has chosen to challenge the denial of a given credit.
Weatherford Artificial Lift Systems v. Clarke
, 2021-NMCA-065.
Doctrine of vicarious or virtual exhaustion of remedies does not apply.
— The Tax Administration Act provides the exclusive remedies for tax refunds and requires taxpayers to individually seek a refund. Each member of the class of taxpayers challenging the constitutionality of a tax must individually exhaust their administrative remedies and only after individual exhaustion by each class member can the district court have jurisdiction over the class. The doctrine of vicarious or virtual exhaustion of remedies that allows a class action for tax refunds to proceed when only a few members of the proposed class have exhausted their administrative remedies does not apply to proceedings under the Tax Administration Act.
U.S. Xpress v. N.M. Taxation & Revenue Dep't
, 2006-NMSC-017, 139 N.M. 589, 136 P.3d 999,
rev'g
2005-NMCA-091, 138 N.M. 55, 116 P.3d 846.
Federal claims.
— Where taxpayers were seeking exemption from taxes under a claimed federal right, the Federal Supremacy Clause did not preclude a state from requiring exhaustion of administrative remedies before its courts will decide state tax matters, unless taxpayers would thereby be denied a plain, adequate and complete remedy.
Neff v. State Taxation & Revenue Dep't
, 1993-NMCA-116, 116 N.M. 240, 861 P.2d 281.
Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. —
71 Am. Jur. 2d State and Local Taxation §§ 97, 605; 72 Am. Jur. 2d State and Local Taxation § 811.
85 C.J.S. Taxation § 1091.