Schneider National has filed a lawsuit against the California Department of Motor Vehicles charging that a $10-million fine levied against the Green Bay, Wis.-based carrier violates the International Registration Plan and the U.S. Constitution.
The complaint stems from a $6-million assessment for additional apportioned trailer fees, penalties and interest. When California joined the IRP in 1984 it did so with an "exception," allowing it to collect registration fees on trailers as well as tractors.
Other IRP states, however, argued that California’s trailer fee created an accounting and collections burden for them. In 1999 IRP members voted to eliminate exceptions and to place a sunset provision of Dec. 31, 2000 for collection of outstanding fees. After the deadline, California passed legislation shifting its trailer fees to tractors effective Jan. 1, 2002.
The assessment against Schneider was issued in 2002. The carrier remitted funds to its base jurisdictions – Wisconsin and Illinois – but also filed an appeal. In August of 2002, an IRP hearing officer in Wisconsin determined that the assessed fees must be returned to Schneider. California is appealing that decision.
In September, California issued a revised assessment of more than $10 million to Schneider for the same vehicles and the same period as the first assessment. According to Schneider, the state says this "full fee" assessment must be paid or appealed through California’s administrative process rather than the IRP.
Schneider’s complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of California, charges that the repeated assessments are unconstitutional and represent a "punitive" action against the carrier.
Schneider also alleges that virtually all interstate trucking companies have paid California trailer fees that were collected without authority under the IRP.
"California is auditing other trucking companies across the country to levy the same assessments that have been ruled to be invalid under the IRP in Schneider’s case," the company said. "Other interstate trucking companies are facing or can expect to soon face similar California assessments."
Schneider General Counsel Thomas Vandenberg said that the case is really about preserving the integrity of the IRP.
"If California is allowed to unilaterally disregard whatever IRP obligations it finds inconvenient and ignore the IRP’s mechanisms for resolving issues, the IRP’s purpose of promoting uniformity in commercial motor vehicle registration is lost."
The complaint stems from a $6-million assessment for additional apportioned trailer fees, penalties and interest. When California joined the IRP in 1984 it did so with an "exception," allowing it to collect registration fees on trailers as well as tractors.
Other IRP states, however, argued that California’s trailer fee created an accounting and collections burden for them. In 1999 IRP members voted to eliminate exceptions and to place a sunset provision of Dec. 31, 2000 for collection of outstanding fees. After the deadline, California passed legislation shifting its trailer fees to tractors effective Jan. 1, 2002.
The assessment against Schneider was issued in 2002. The carrier remitted funds to its base jurisdictions – Wisconsin and Illinois – but also filed an appeal. In August of 2002, an IRP hearing officer in Wisconsin determined that the assessed fees must be returned to Schneider. California is appealing that decision.
In September, California issued a revised assessment of more than $10 million to Schneider for the same vehicles and the same period as the first assessment. According to Schneider, the state says this "full fee" assessment must be paid or appealed through California’s administrative process rather than the IRP.
Schneider’s complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of California, charges that the repeated assessments are unconstitutional and represent a "punitive" action against the carrier.
Schneider also alleges that virtually all interstate trucking companies have paid California trailer fees that were collected without authority under the IRP.
"California is auditing other trucking companies across the country to levy the same assessments that have been ruled to be invalid under the IRP in Schneider’s case," the company said. "Other interstate trucking companies are facing or can expect to soon face similar California assessments."
Schneider General Counsel Thomas Vandenberg said that the case is really about preserving the integrity of the IRP.
"If California is allowed to unilaterally disregard whatever IRP obligations it finds inconvenient and ignore the IRP’s mechanisms for resolving issues, the IRP’s purpose of promoting uniformity in commercial motor vehicle registration is lost."
media brand
0 Comments
See all comments