25 C.F.R. § 575.4

When civil fine will be assessed

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

The Chairman may assess a civil fine, not to exceed $65,655 per violation, against a tribe, management contractor, or individual operating Indian gaming for each notice of violation issued under § 573.3 of this chapter after considering the following factors:

(a) Economic benefit of noncompliance. The Chairman shall consider the extent to which the respondent obtained an economic benefit from the noncompliance that gave rise to a notice of violation, as well as the likelihood of escaping detection.

(1) The Chairman may consider the documented benefits derived from the noncompliance, or may rely on reasonable assumptions regarding such benefits.

(2) If noncompliance continues for more than one day, the Chairman may treat each daily illegal act or omission as a separate violation.

(b) Seriousness of the violation. The Chairman may adjust the amount of a civil fine to reflect the seriousness of the violation. In doing so, the Chairman shall consider the extent to which the violation threatens the integrity of Indian gaming.

(c) History of violations. The Chairman may adjust a civil fine by an amount that reflects the respondent's history of violations over the preceding five (5) years.

(1) A violation cited by the Chairman shall not be considered unless the associated notice of violation is the subject of a final order of the Commission and has not been vacated; and

(2) Each violation shall be considered whether or not it led to a civil fine.

(d) Negligence or willfulness. The Chairman may adjust the amount of a civil fine based on the degree of fault of the respondent in causing or failing to correct the violation, either through act or omission.

(e) Good faith. The Chairman may reduce the amount of a civil fine based on the degree of good faith of the respondent in attempting to achieve rapid compliance after notification of the violation.

[58 FR 5844, Jan. 22, 1993, as amended at 81 FR 43942, July 6, 2016; 82 FR 12069, Feb. 28, 2017; 83 FR 2060, Jan. 16, 2018; 84 FR 6968, Mar. 1, 2019; 85 FR 8396, Feb. 14, 2020; 86 FR 7647, Feb. 1, 2021; 87 FR 2550, Jan. 18, 2022; 89 FR 2880, Jan. 17, 2024; 90 FR 5606, Jan. 17, 2025]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 2014–2020 · leading case: Bettor Racing, Inc. v. Nat'l Indian Gaming Comm'n, 47 F. Supp. 3d 912 (D.S.D. 2014).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Bettor Racing, Inc. v. Nat'l Indian Gaming Comm'n, 47 F. Supp. 3d 912 (D.S.D. 2014). · cites it 9× “§ 2713 (a)(1); 25 C.F.R. § 575.4 . NIGC regulations further specify which factors to consider in assessing whether a fine is imposed, as well as if “each daily illegal act or omission will be deemed a separate violation!!]” 25 C.”

Bettor Racing, Inc. v. Nat'l Indian Gaming Comm'n, 812 F.3d 648 (8th Cir. 2016). · cites it 2× “25 C.F.R. § 575.4 (d) (“The Chairman may adjust the amount of a civil fine based on the degree of fault of the respondent in causing or failing to correct the violation, either through act or omission.”

Peoria Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma v. Campbell (N.D. Okla. 2020). “§2713 (a)(1); 25 C.F.R. §575.4 . Id., ¶37 . The NOV alleges that Campbell, Baxcase, Qualls, Holden and DED committed 77 violations of IGRA and the regulations of the NIGC.”

— 25 C.F.R. § 575.4(b) — 1 case

Bettor Racing, Inc. v. Nat'l Indian Gaming Comm'n, 47 F. Supp. 3d 912 (D.S.D. 2014). “§ 2713 (a)(1); 25 C.F.R. § 575.4 . NIGC regulations further specify which factors to consider in assessing whether a fine is imposed, as well as if “each daily illegal act or omission will be deemed a separate violation!!]” 25 C.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.