Justices strike down Lumberton’s sweepstakes tax

  • Posted: Saturday, March 9, 2013 12:19 a.m.
    UPDATED: Saturday, March 9, 2013 12:32 a.m.



RALEIGH (AP) — The North Carolina Supreme Court said Friday high taxes aren’t necessarily unlawful but had no problem striking down a city’s special levy on electronic sweepstakes businesses that was at least 600 times the original rate.

The justices ruled the decision of Lumberton’s leaders in 2010 to raise existing privilege taxes on sweepstakes locations in the city limits violated the state constitution’s provision that taxation be exercised in a “just and equitable manner.”


Companies that previously owed $12.50 per year faced taxes of at least $7,500 under the ordinance —$5,000 per business and $2,500 for each computer terminal where players played casino-style or other games to reveal potential prizes. Two sweepstakes companies challenged the tax’s constitutionality, while the city sued two other businesses that didn’t pay the tax.

A divided three-judge panel of the Court of Appeals last year upheld a higher privilege tax, which many municipalities have approved in part to discourage or sharply regulate what many viewed as illegal gambling.

Justice Mark Martin, writing the Supreme Court’s opinion, said courts must exercise care when determining if a government has initiated an abusive tax policy, but the Lumberton case “is hardly nuanced.” The new tax rate required the companies to pay from $75,000 to $137,500, the ruling said.

“The city’s 59,900 percent minimum tax increase is wholly detached from the moorings of anything reasonably resembling a just and equitable tax,” Martin wrote. “If the Just and Equitable Tax Clause has any substantive force, as we hold it does, it surely renders the present tax invalid.”

Notice about comments:

Salisburypost.com is pleased to offer readers the ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Salisburypost.com cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not Salisburypost.com. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "report abuse" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website. Full terms and conditions can be read here.

Do not post the following:

  • Potentially libelous statements or damaging innuendo.
  • Obscene, explicit, or racist language.
  • Personal attacks, insults or threats.
  • The use of another person's real name to disguise your identity.
  • Comments unrelated to the story.