Alliant Techsystems, Inc. v. Salt Lake County Board of Equalization, 363 P.3d 530

ATK is a for-profit aerospace/defense contractor that operates on NIROP, land owned by the Navy.
NIROP is tax-exempt property, but Utah privilege tax can apply to use of exempt property if there’s no exclusive possession.
In 2000 Salt Lake County assessed a privilege tax on ATK’s use of NIROP; ATK challenged the tax.
Utah Supreme Court held exclusive possession means present right to occupy/control akin to owner/lessee and remanded for fact-finding on ATK’s rights vis‑à‑vis the Navy.
On remand, the district court held ATK lacked exclusive possession; the Board appealed; this court affirms.]

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether ATK has exclusive possession of NIROP under §59-4-101(3)(e).	ATK lacks exclusive possession due to Navy retention of control.	Exclusivity is judged against third parties, not the owner; Navy’s rights do not defeat ATK’s exclusive possession.	ATK does not have exclusive possession; district court correct.
Whether the district court properly struck the Board’s expert affidavit.	Board’s leasing expert would illuminate possession terms.	Expert’s opinions were not admissible on legal questions; district court acted within discretion.	District court did not abuse discretion; strike affirmed.
Whether the court should apply public-policy/strict-construction considerations despite Alliant’s interpretation.	Strict construction should close gaps in tax laws.	Supreme Court interpretation controls and should not be overridden by policy arguments.	Court followed Alliant’s interpretation; declined to rewrite superior court’s reading.

Alliant Techsystems, Inc. v. Salt Lake County Bd. of Equalization, 2012 UT 4 (Utah Supreme Court, 2012) (exclusive-possession defined to require present right akin to owner/lessee; three hallmark factors)
Osguthorpe v. Wolf Mountain Resorts, LC, 2010 UT 29 (Utah Supreme Court, 2010) (illustrates restrictions on possession consistent with nonpossessory interests)