Felt Tarrant Mfg Co v. Gallagher
Citation | 306 U.S. 62,59 S.Ct. 376,83 L.Ed. 488 |
Decision Date | 30 January 1939 |
Docket Number | No. 302,302 |
Parties | FELT & TARRANT MFG. CO. v. GALLAGHER et al |
Court | United States Supreme Court |
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of California.
Messrs. A. Calder MacKay and Thomas R. Dempsey, both of Los Angeles, Cal., for appellant.
Mr. James J. Arditto, of San Francisco, Cal., for appellees.
[Argument of Counsel from page 63 intentionally omitted] Mr. Justice McREYNOLDS delivered the opinion of the Court.
Appellant seeks an injunction prohibiting the state officers from enforcing against it the California Use Tax Act of 1935. Cal.Stat.1935, Ch. 361, p. 1297, Cal.Stat.1937, Chs. 401, 671 and 683, pp. 1327, 1874, 1936. Counsel do not question the right of the state to collect this tax from the user, etc., but they say that, in the circumstances here disclosed, the officers may not compel appellant to serve as an agent for collecting the tax as they are threatening to do.
The trial court, three judges, dismissed the bill upon motion.
It appears—
Appellant, an Illinois corporation, is engaged in manufacturing and selling comptometers in that state and delivering these to purchasers in various parts of the Union. As stated by the court below its method of doing business with respect to California purchasers is substantially as follows:
And further
The Use Tax Act (sec. 6, St.Cal.1937, p. 1938) directs retailers maintaining a place of business in the state, and making sales of tangible personal property for storage, use or other consumption therein, to collect from the purchaser the tax imposed.
Appellant presents for our consideration two points: (1) The statute as construed and applied by the appellees to the appellant is...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Freeman v. Hewit
...'use tax' cases: General Trading Co. v. State Tax Commission, 322 U.S. 335, 64 S.Ct. 1028, 88 L.Ed. 1309; Felt & Tarrant Mfg. Co. v. Gallagher, 306 U.S. 62, 59 S.Ct. 376, 83 L.Ed. 488; Nelson v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 312 U.S. 359, 61 S.Ct. 586, 85 L.Ed. 888, 132 A.L.R. 475; Nelson v. Montgo......
-
Nelson v. Sears, Roebuck Co
...on a foreign corporation in Monamotor Oil Co. v. Johnson, 292 U.S. 86, 54 S.Ct. 575, 78 L.Ed. 1141, and Felt & Tarrant Mfg. Co. v. Gallagher, 306 U.S. 62, 59 S.Ct. 376, 83 L.Ed. 488. But respondent insists that those cases involved local activity by the foreign corporation as a result of wh......
-
Evanston Ins. Co., Inc. v. Merin
...example, that taxation was appropriate where "sales were arranged by local agents in the taxing state ..., Felt & Tarrant Co. v. Gallagher, 306 U.S. 62 59 S.Ct. 376, 83 L.Ed. 488; General Trading Co. v. Tax Comm'n, 322 U.S. 335 64 S.Ct. 1028, 88 L.Ed. 1309 ..., where a mail order seller mai......
-
Miller Bros Co v. State of Maryland
...S.Ct. 586, 85 L.Ed. 888; Nelson v. Montgomery Ward & Co., 312 U.S. 373, 61 S.Ct. 593, 85 L.Ed. 897, and Felt & Tarrant Mfg. Co. v. Gallagher, 306 U.S. 62, 59 S.Ct. 376, 83 L.Ed. 488. Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, with whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE, Mr. Justice BLACK and Mr. Justice CLARK, concur, The State......
-
Hawaii Department Of Taxation Finds Internet Retailer Has General Excise Tax Nexus
...v. Carson, 362 U.S. 207 (1960); General Trading Co. v. Iowa, 322 U.S. 335 (1944); and Felt & Tarrant Manufacturing Co. v. Gallagher, 306 U.S. 62 7 See MTC Nexus Program Bulletin No. 95-1 and Tax Information Release No. 96-1. 8 See Borders Online, LLC v. State Board of Equalization, Cali......
-
The imposition of sales and use taxes on e-commerce: a taxing dilemma for states and remote sellers.
...on a remote seller where the remote seller's sales were arranged by local agents in the taxing state. Felt & Tarrant Co. v. Gallagher, 306 U.S. 62, 68 (1939). The Court similarly concluded in a case where a mail order seller maintained local retail stores in the taxing state. Nelson v. ......