Stanley Forman Reed

“ This is a suit against the state. Utah has established an adequate procedure for the recovery of taxes illegally collected. When the state collects a tax under protost, the money is segregated and held for the determination of the taxpayers' rights with provision for any deficiency for interest or costs to be paid by the state. [2] The Mining Occupation Tax makes the State Tax Commission the state agency for administration and collection of the Utah tax. The petitioners paid their taxes to the Commission under protest and brought these actions to recover the contested portion. ”

“ We are informed that Utah employs explicit language to indicate, in other litigation, its consent to suits in federal courts. [8] It is to be noted that the cases under consideration illustrate the disadvantage of deducing from equivocal language a state's consent to suit in the federal courts on causes of action arising under state tax statutes. ”

“ The basis for inference advanced by petitioners might logically lead to a conclusion that Utah intended to submit the interpretati n of its tax statutes to federal trial courts where the controversies arise under federal law. On the other hand, it may be cogently argued that the practice of treating the federal courts as courts of competent jurisdiction under section 80-11-11 before the addition of the state as a possible defendant resulted from the fact that consent was not necessary for suits against counties and municipalities. ”