Opinion ID: 2601772
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: the plain language of our holding in exxon i mandates retroactive application of our holding in exxon i to all severance tax claims filed by exxonmobil

Text: ¶ 10 When this court finds a statute unconstitutional or provides the correct interpretation of a rule or law, we have the equitable power to determine whether the new rule will be applied retroactively or prospectively and in doing so we seek a blend of what is necessary, what is fair, and what is workable. Rio Algom Corp. v. San Juan County, 681 P.2d 184, 196 (Utah 1984). ¶ 11 In Rio Algom, we struck down a tax statute on constitutional grounds but directed that the holding be prospective only except to the plaintiff taxpayers in that case. Id. As to those parties, the holding was retroactive for the year for which [the] suit for refund was brought. Id. Similarly, in Merrill v. Utah Labor Commission, we limited the retroactive application of a new rule for workers compensation calculation to certain classes of plaintiffs who had not previously settled their claims. 2009 UT 74, ¶ 18, 223 P.3d 1099. ¶ 12 The Commission argues that, similar to Rio Algom, we limited the new rule announced in Exxon I to the claims before the court in that case. We disagree. In Exxon I, we stated that ExxonMobil is entitled to further adjudication of its claim for a refund. 2003 UT 53, ¶ 24, 86 P.3d 706 (emphasis added). The Commission makes much of our use of the singular term claim, but when this sentence is read in conjunction with the preceding paragraph, it does not alter the unlimited application of the new rule to ExxonMobil. In paragraph 23 we stated that whether in refund requests or deficiency proceedings, as to all but ExxonMobil the rule announced today is to have prospective application only. Id. ¶ 23 (emphasis added). We could have limited the retroactive relief for ExxonMobil to the claims at issue in the case as we did in Rio Algom, but we did not. Therefore under the plain language of Exxon I, ExxonMobil is entitled to application of the new rule for all its claims for refund of overpaid taxes.