Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 70.37 (2026)
Net proceeds occupation tax on persons extracting metalliferous minerals in this state
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
70.37(1)(a)(a) The existence has been announced of several economically significant ore bodies containing copper, zinc, lead, taconite and other metalliferous minerals in this state, including one of the largest zinc deposits in North America.
70.37(1)(b)(b) Metalliferous minerals are valuable, irreplaceable natural resources which, once removed, are forever lost as an economic asset to the state.
70.37(1)(c)(c) The activity of mining metalliferous minerals creates jobs, economic activity, tax revenues and other valuable benefits to the economy and residents of this state.
70.37(1)(d)(d) The activity of mining metalliferous minerals creates additional costs to the state and municipalities for highways, sewers, schools and other improvements which are necessary to accommodate the development of a metalliferous mining industry.
70.37(1)(e)(e) The activity of mining metalliferous minerals has a permanent and often damaging effect on the environment of the state.
70.37(1)(f)(f) The activity of mining metalliferous minerals significantly alters the quality of life in communities directly affected by mining.
70.37(1)(g)(g) As the size of a mining operation increases, the cost to the state and municipalities to support the operation increases, as does the damage to the environment. Furthermore, as the size of a mining operation increases, the person mining metalliferous minerals benefits from economies of scale in the mining operation.
70.37(1)(h)(h) A graduated net proceeds occupational tax, by taxing profitability at rates which vary with the level of profitability, encourages important state goals, such as:
70.37(1)(h)4.4. Taxation based on the privileges enjoyed by persons mining metalliferous metallic minerals.
70.37(1)(i)(i) Municipalities incur long-term economic costs as a result of metalliferous mineral mining after the mining operation shuts down. An impact fund, in which is deposited a portion of the tax revenues, should assure that moneys will be available to such municipalities for long- and short-term costs associated with social, educational, environmental and economic impacts of metalliferous mineral mining.
70.37(2)(2) Legislative intent. It is the declared intent of the legislature to establish a net proceeds occupation tax on persons engaged in the activity of mining metalliferous minerals in this state. The tax is established in order that the state may derive a benefit from the extraction of irreplaceable metalliferous minerals and in order to compensate the state and municipalities for costs, past, present and future, incurred or to be incurred as a result of the loss of valuable irreplaceable metallic mineral resources.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1932–2025 · leading case: Burlington N. R.R. v. Dep't of Revenue, 570 F. Supp. 585 (W.D. Wis. 1983).
Burlington N. R.R. v. Dep't of Revenue, 570 F. Supp. 585 (W.D. Wis. 1983). “04 except that which is taxed under §§ 70.37 to 70.395. General property includes manufacturing property subject to § 70.”
Wisconsin Mfrs. & Com., Inc. v. Wisconsin Dep't of Nat. Resources, 2025 WI 26 (Wis. 2025). “(statute defining material harmful to minors as lacking “serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value if, taken as a whole, for minors”); § 70.37(1)(f) (statute governing mining activity that “significantly alters quality of life in [the] communit[y]”).”
Ashland Cnty. Bank v. Vill. of Butternut, 82 A.L.R. 865 (Wis. 1932). ““After an extensive investigation of the character and methods of business followed by these institutions, and receiving legal advice in reference thereto, the Tax Commission is of opinion and respectfully advises all assessing officers that none of such individuals, companies,…”
Metro. Assocs. v. City of Milwaukee, 2009 WI App 157 (Wis. Ct. App. 2009). “Accordingly, the problems identified by Nankin , which we have outlined *646 in Part I, are no longer present, and the treatment of taxpayers in opt-in jurisdictions are not "substantially different" than the treatment of taxpayers in jurisdictions where an action under § 70.”
— Wis. Stat. § 70.37(1)(f) — 1 case
Wisconsin Mfrs. & Com., Inc. v. Wisconsin Dep't of Nat. Resources, 2025 WI 26 (Wis. 2025). “(statute defining material harmful to minors as lacking “serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value if, taken as a whole, for minors”); § 70.37(1)(f) (statute governing mining activity that “significantly alters quality of life in [the] communit[y]”).”
— Wis. Stat. § 70.37(3)(d) — 1 case
Metro. Assocs. v. City of Milwaukee, 2009 WI App 157 (Wis. Ct. App. 2009). “Accordingly, the problems identified by Nankin , which we have outlined *646 in Part I, are no longer present, and the treatment of taxpayers in opt-in jurisdictions are not "substantially different" than the treatment of taxpayers in jurisdictions where an action under § 70.”
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.