Document: 128 S. Ct. 467 (2007) CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC., Petitioner, v. GEORGIA STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION et al. No. 06-1287. Supreme Court of United States. Argued November 5, 2007. Decided December 4, *469 Carter G. Phillips, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Douglas Hallward-Driemeier, the States as amicus curiae, by special leave Court, supporting Warren R. Calvert, respondents. Ellen M. Fitzsimmons, David J. Bowling, Jacksonville, FL, Peter Shudtz, DC, Counsel Record, Stephen B. Kinnaird, Ileana Ciobanu, Matthew Warren, Sidley Austin LLP, James W. McBride, Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC, Petitioner. Crossett, John D. Cook, Hiscock Barclay, Syracuse, New York, Thurbert E. Attorney General, Senior Assistant R.O. Lerer, Deputy Respondents. Chief Justice ROBERTS delivered opinion Court. The Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act prohibits from discriminating against railroads taxing railroad property more heavily than other commercial in State. Two decades ago, we held that this statute permits an aggrieved to challenge a State's valuation its tax purposes. Burlington Northern Co. Oklahoma Tax Comm'n, 481 U.S. 454, 462, 107 1855, 95 L. Ed. 2d 404 (1987). Because case challenged only application methods, expressly reserved question whether may methods themselves. We answer today, hold state determining value property, well how those are applied. provides nothing less. I Congress enacted 1976. *470 90 Stat. 31.[1] Called "4-R Act" brevity, law aimed halt economic decline rail industry by, among means, barring "discriminatory taxation property." Northern, supra, at 457, 1855; see also Department Revenue Ore. ACF Industries, Inc., 510 332, 336, 114 843, 127 165 (1994). 4-R four separate forms discriminatory railroads.[2] Only first is issue here: States, provides, not "[a]ssess transportation has higher ratio [property's] true market ... ratio" between assessed values industrial same jurisdiction. 49 U.S.C. § 11501(b)(1). If exceeds least five percent, district court enjoin tax. 11501(c).[3] Petitioner Transportation, freight carrier with multiple routes across State Georgia. As consequence, it subject Georgia's ad valorem on real property. Under Georgia law, most *471 valued locally county boards. Public utilities such railroads, however, initially State, which then certifies proposed valuations boards adoption or alteration. In 2001, Board Equalization, respondent here, put CSX's liability $4.6 million. A year later, appraiser used different combination methodologies determine in-state property.[4] result was significantly levy. estimated railroad's 2002 approximately $7.8 billion, 472 F.3d 1281, 1285 (C.A.11 2006), 47 percent increase over previous year. That brought $514.9 million, final bill $6.5 Brief 15. filed suit District Georgia, contending assessment violated Act. alleged had grossly overestimated while accurately valuing result, according CSX, taxed assessed-to-market considerably 5 greater To make case, submitted testimony own expert appraiser, who relied calculated be $6 billion figure F.3d, 1285-1286. maintained appraiser's were flawed, urged accept accurate. refused do so. Following bench trial, ruled discriminated violation because widely accepted arrive estimate value. 448 F. Supp. 1330, 1341 (N.D.Ga.2005). judgment "does generally allow state's chosen methodology," long rational motivated intent. Ibid. divided panel Appeals Eleventh Circuit affirmed. 1281 (2006). majority reasoned "text does clearly methodologies," clear statement required light intrusion prerogatives. Id., 1289. Judge Fay dissented. 1292. Recognizing division Circuits, compare Consolidated Rail Corp. Hyde Park, 473, 481-482 (C.A.2 1995) (a methodology), Wash., 23 239, 240-241 (C.A.9 1994) (same), Chesapeake Western Ry. Forst, 938 F.2d 528, 531 (C.A.4 1991) *472 1289 (decision below), granted certiorari, 550 ___, 2879, 167 1151 (2007), now reverse. II "[T]he language 1150[1] plainly declares congressional purpose." U.S., 461, 1855. assessed-to-true-market order apply Act, courts must calculate cannot undertake comparison ratios requires without hand. said much Northern: "It [the Act's] actual ratios, necessary what `true values' are." can go about if look behind choice methods. insists there important distinction their application. would have it, allows latter. find no method passage limiting factfinding manner proposes. total lack textual support position surprising. dichotomy presses eviscerate forcing defer when very evil ban. untenable given way calculated. Valuation matter mathematics, could prevent simply doublechecking equations. Rather, calculation applied science, even craft. Most appraisers employing one methodology but combination. These various generate range possible uses derive he considers accurate value, based careful scrutiny all data available. Appraisal Institute, Real Estate (12th ed.2001). instant example, three techniquesthe discounted cashflow approach, stock debt approach. He derived these ranging $8.126 $12.346 billion. After selecting number low end subtracting another $400 million account intangible taxation, settled his 1284-1285. Appraisers typically employ approach entirely accurate, absence established type issue. individual yield sometimes more, less reliable results depending peculiar features evaluated. variation market-value reveals, produce substantially estimates. Kinnard, Income Property Valuation: Principles Techniques Appraising Income-Producing 52 (1971). *473 Given extent affect determination preventing scrutinizing render 11501 largely empty command. It force "true" parties litigation. turn, free appraisal techniques routinely overestimate worth assets. By levying taxes overestimates, implement sought eradicate. On reading statute, powerless stop them, ultimately guarantee mathematically taxation. interpretation compelling. Instead, agree dissent below: "Since objective any should allowed method[s] [by State] attempt prove 1294. agrees fix precision. But draws conclusion premise. estimates plausible, argues, likely get verifying methodsso they broadly reasonableas altogether. warns allowing introduce will inevitably lead futile clash experts, reasonable settle. At Courts shares concern. See Western, F.2d, 532 ("There absolute test assertions competing ..." (internal quotation marks brackets omitted)). similarly troubled. directed however elusive. made benchmark courts' evaluation True single, precise number, obviously believed susceptible judicial inquiry some approximations better others. grim prophecies notwithstanding, mandates unfamiliar courts. though admittedly complex, bottom just "an fact prices," Suitum Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, 520 725, 741, 117 1659, 137 980 (1997), addressing. frequently sold, "determinations proceedings benefit transaction." 742, 1659. knew value: "In typical both expert's] State's] railroad]." F.Supp.2d, 1338, n. 8. so inherently elusive, did statute's directive making factual determined court, really asking limitation types evidence consider part inquiry. wanted impose limit reserving prerogative *474 used, surely done Out deference 11501(c) "[t]he burden proof [shall be] governed law." easily included similar insulating scrutiny. not. Like Oklahoma's argument "depends upon addition words statutory provision complete stands." 463, distinctions where exist, especially where, thwart law's operation. III Considering clarity tempted discussion that. "When terms unambiguous, complete...." Rubin 449 424, 430, 101 698, 66 633 (1981). lodges two objections our interpretation, each merits reply. First, argues ignores background principles federalism enacted. below expressed "The selection ruled, "is th[e] fundamental power [to tax]," 1288, limited absent Congress. means adopt collect "should interfered little possible." Dows Chicago, 11 Wall. 108, 110, 20 65 (1871). persuaded been authorized initial matter, contention policy intimately connected power. prescribe particular law. Its use combinations, fit. 1284-1285 (explaining employed selected best judgment). This suit, fact, decision immediate predecessors. choice, dictate regulation. questions are, believed, "intertwined id., Act's command explained above, necessarily includes vest authority Nation's hardly surprising, Congress's assessing unfairly. Our (1994), contrary. concerned Actnamely, 11501(b)(4) "[i]mpos[ing] discriminates providing *475 transportation" bar facially taxes, held, exempting certain nonrailroad otherwise applicable taxes. 343, 843. time adopted, exempted classes business "including inventories, raw materials textile manufacturing, mechanics tools," name few. 344, provided exemptions years. face widespread historical practice, declined read prohibit exemption text mention. contrast, pointedly noted "prohibit[s] rates uncertain set[s] forth standards rate practices." claim review explicit prohibition ratios. permitted banned litigated federal court. protests destroy States' discretion choose methodologies. disagree. whatever likes, discriminatory. methodology. discrimination. Far requiring follow method, prevents attempting show reversed. ordered. NOTES [1] portion concerns us Section 306, originally codified 26c (1976 ed.). 1978, recodified 11503 ed., II). again 1995, substantive change, 11501. For convenience, references [2] reads, relevant part: "(b) following acts unreasonably discriminate interstate commerce, subdivision acting them: "(1) Assess jurisdiction "(2) Levy under paragraph (1) subsection. "(3) "(4) Impose part." [3] provides: "Notwithstanding section title 28 regard amount controversy citizenship parties, jurisdiction, concurrent subsection (b) section. Relief satisfaction through random-sampling known sales study (to carried out statistical study), shall find, section levy property; collection taxable district." [4] assesses public using "unit rule." rule, determines assets entity, regardless location," multiplies "by percentage entity located within company allocated state." 1283 2006). unit rule appropriate There numerous available many themselves variations. 1284.

Category: 7