Opinion ID: 2011365
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Administrative Remedies are Adequate

Text: This might be a different case if Sproles lacked adequate recourse at law, but here he does not. [19] On the contrary, the Legislature has provided a range of statutory remedies. As discussed above, the Tax Court can enjoin collection of the tax pending the outcome of the original tax appeal. IND. CODE § 6-8.1-9-1(d)(1993); see also IND. CODE § 33-3-5-11 (1993); cf. Clifft v. Indiana Dept. of State Revenue, 660 N.E.2d 310, 317-18 (Ind.1995)(CSET does not deny due process because taxpayer may seek to enjoin tax collection while pursuing statutory appellate rights). Sproles has already begun to challenge the CSET assessment under the protest process. See IND.CODE § 6-8.1-5-1 (1993). Sproles could also have paid the tax and sued for a refund. IND.CODE § 6-8.1-9-1(d)(1993). Thus, taxpayers in Sproles' position will eventually have their day in the Tax Court. It is for the Legislature to determine what taxpayers must do to get there. The Legislature's expansion of the jurisdiction of the Tax Court in 1993 to allow appeals from a letter of findings and the 1986 authorization of injunction proceedings in that court make clear there is no need to allow taxpayers to circumvent the exclusive jurisdiction of the Tax Court over original tax appeals. With the removal of the requirement that a tax be paid before it can be challenged in court, the adequacy of the current administrative scheme is not open to question. [20] Whether the exhaustion requirement in constitutional cases is a wise idea is a matter for legislative determination. And the Legislature, in the form of numerous amendments to the administrative review process this century, has spoken. In light of Indiana's well-established policy favoring exhaustion of remedies, especially in tax cases, we hold that the protest and refund avenues for contesting a listed tax are not only adequate but exclusive. The Legislature's preference on this issue is neither arbitrary nor capricious. If circuit courts could invalidate listed taxes, a patchwork of conflicting rulings on a tax's legality could significantly affect the revenue-collection process and the budgeting that depends on those revenues. The Legislature understandably wanted to avoid this result when it created a specialized judicial tribunal for tax disputes.