South Carolina              
Administrative Law Court
Edgar A. Brown building 1205 Pendleton St., Suite 224 Columbia, SC 29201 Voice: (803) 734-0550

SC Administrative Law Court Decisions

SCDOR vs. The Catawba Indian Nation of South Carolina

South Carolina Department of Revenue

South Carolina Department of Revenue

The Catawba Indian Nation of South Carolina

Harry Hancock, Esquire
Counsel for Regulatory Litigation
South Carolina Department of Revenue
301 Gervais Street
Columbia, South Carolina 29214
(803) 898-5598

Zoe Sanders-Nettles, Esquire
Attorney for Respondent
Nelson, Mullins, Riley & Scarborough, LLP
1320 Main Street, 17th Floor
Columbia, South Carolina, 20201
(803) 255-9513



This matter came before the Court upon notice of the Respondent to appeal the Final Determination of the Department of Revenue, hereinafter “Department.”


I.                    FACTUAL STIPULATIONS


  1. On March, 24, 2004, the Department issued four violations against the Respondents resulting from alleged violations of South Carolina’s Bingo Control Act, to wit, three violations, numbered 230, 231 & 233, alleged violations of SC Code Annotated Section 12-21-3990(A)(1). For each alleged violation the Department assessed a one-thousand dollar penalty ($1,000.00), for a total of three thousand dollars ($3,000.00). Additionally, the Department assessed the Respondents a penalty of nine-thousand, seven hundred and fifty dollars ($9,750.00) for an alleged series of violations of 12-21-4030(B)(1). This violation was based upon allegations that the Respondent had not collected an $18.00 entrance fee at various bingo sessions.
  2. According to South Carolina Code Annotated Section 12-60-450(A), also known as the “South Carolina Revenue Procedures Act”, the Respondents were allowed until June 23, 2004, in which to respond to the violations and assessments alleged by the Department. The statute allows ninety days from the date of the assessment or violation for a protest or other response.
  3. The Respondents failed to protest or respond to the assessments and violations within the ninety day period. This was the basis for the Department’s Final Determination which was issued on June 6, 2005. Further, the Department’s Prehearing Statement cited the Respondent’s failure to timely protest as the only issue before this Court. The Respondent’s do not dispute this conclusion, but have denied committing the underlying acts as alleged by the Department in the violations listed herein.






II.                 AGREEMENT


  1. The Respondents hereby agree to pay the assessments totaling twelve-thousand, seven hundred and fifty dollars, $12,750.00. Note that the Department’s Final Determination and Prehearing Statement erroneously states the amount as “$11,750.00.” The Respondents will pay the assessments for violations 230, 231 and 233 upon execution of this Agreement in the amount of three-thousand dollars ($3,000.00). Then, the Department agrees to allow the Respondents to pay the remaining assessment resulting from violation number 232, which totals nine-thousand, seven hundred and fifty dollars ($9,750.00) in installments. The installment plan will be finalized by the collections division of the Department as is provided by current law and regulations.
  2. The Department agrees that the Respondent is making no admission as to the underlying alleged violations, but only admits that it failed to file its protest within the prescribed period of ninety days.









____________________________________ August 3, 2005

Ray N. Stevens, Judge Date

South Carolina Administrative Law Court

Edgar A. Brown Office Building, Suite 224

Columbia, South Carolina 29211

Brown Bldg.






Copyright © 2022 South Carolina Administrative Law Court