Southern Package Corporation v. State Tax Commission, 31888

• Court: Mississippi Supreme Court
• Writing for the Court: Anderson, J.
• Citation: 164 So. 45,174 Miss. 212
• Parties: SOUTHERN PACKAGE CORPORATION v. STATE TAX COMMISSION
• Decision Date: 11 November 1935
• Docket Number: 31888

164 So. 45

174 Miss. 212

SOUTHERN PACKAGE CORPORATION
v.
STATE TAX COMMISSION

No. 31888

Supreme Court of Mississippi

November 11, 1935

Division B

1. LICENSES.

Statute exempting from taxation sales of boxes and crates used in preparing agricultural products for market held not to exempt manufacturer of such boxes and crates from payment of manufacturer's tax, since it was not tax on sales (Laws 1932, chapter 90, section 4, as amended by Laws 1932, chapter 91, section 2).

2. LICENSES.

Statute imposing manufacturer's tax under which tax rate was not same for manufacturers of all products covered by tax held not unconstitutional on ground that it was not uniform, since constitutional provision requiring uniformity applied only to ad valorem taxes and not to privilege or excise taxes (Laws 1932, chapters 90, 91; Laws 1934, chapter 119; Const. Miss. 1890, section 112).

3. LICENSES.

Taxes levied under statute imposing tax on persons engaging or [174 Miss. 213] continuing in certain businesses held privilege or excise taxes and not property taxes (Laws 1932, chapters 90, 91; Laws 1934, chapter 119).

4. TAXATION. States have wide discretion in making classification for purpose of taxation.

"Classification" is grouping of things in speculation or practice because they agree with one another in certain particulars and differ from other things in the same particulars.

5. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW.

Classification, for purposes of taxation, to be obnoxious to constitutional guaranty of equal protection of laws must be manifestly arbitrary and unreasonable and not possibly so (Const. U.S. Amend. 14).

6. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW.

Statute imposing manufacturer's tax under which tax rate imposed against manufacturers of some products was different from that imposed against manufacturers of other products held not invalid as denial of equal protection (Laws 1932, chapters 90, 91; Laws 1934, chapter 119; Const. U.S. Amend. 14).

HON. E. J. SIMMONS, Judge.

APPEAL from the circuit court of Copiah county HON. E. J. SIMMONS, Judge.

Action by the Southern Package Corporation against the State Tax Commission. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

Affirmed.

W. S. Henley, of Hazlehurst, for appellant.

The statute involved in this controversy is chapter 90, Laws of 1932, approved April 28, 1932, as amended by chapter 91, Laws of 1932, approved May 18, 1932.

Chapter 90, Laws of 1932, violates section 112 of the Constitution of the state of Mississippi.

It is assumed that there can be no question about this statute violating section 112 of the Constitution providing the tax levy is a property tax and not a privilege tax.

This tax certainly is a revenue measure, and is not levied under the police power of the state, for the purpose of regulating the businesses in which the various parties, who have been taxed, are engaged. [174 Miss. 214]

Hamilton v. Collins, 154 So. 201.

Unless the Supreme Court should overrule the case of Thompson v. McLeod, 112 Miss. 383, 73 So. 193, the tax in question should certainly be held to be a property tax.

Barnes v. Jones, 139 Miss. 675, 103 So. 773; South Carolina. Power Co. v. South Carolina Tax Commission, 52 F.2d 527.

Crates manufactured for sale as containers for agricultural products exempt from provisions of act.

64 L.R.A. 55; People ex rel. Standard Wood Co. v. Roberts, 20 A.D. 514, 47 N.Y.S. 122; Southern Electric Light & Power Co. v. City of Philadelphia, 43 A. 123; In re Consolidated Electric Storage Co., 26 A. 983, 63 L.Ed. 1086; American Mfg. Co. v. City of St. Louis, 142 S.W. 297; International Shoe Co. v. Chapman, License Collector, 276 S.W. 32; Simmons Hardware Co. v. City of St. Louis, 192 S.W. 394.

Just as the Supreme Court of the United States said, in the American Mfg. Co. case, that the manufacturer's tax imposed by the ordinance of the city of St. Louis, did not apply to certain sales, the Legislature of the state of Mississippi has said, that the manufacturer's tax levied by it, shall not apply to sales of certain commodities.

J. A. Lauderdale, Assistant Attorney-General, for appellee.

Whether under the facts of this case the appellant, a manufacturer of boxes and crates for sale to be used in preparing agricultural products for market, is exempt from the tax levied by chapter 90, Laws of 1932.

The question raised here is exactly the same as the question raised in the case of Jackson Fertilizer Co. v. Stone, State Tax Commissioner, 162 So. 170. The decision of the court in that case is conclusive against the contention of appellant made here. [174 Miss. 215]

Section 112 of the State Constitution has no application to a privilege or excise tax.

Postal Tel. Co. v. Robertson, 116 Miss. 204; State v. G. M. & N. Ry. Co., 138 Miss. 70; State v. Lawrence, 108 Miss. 291; Barataria Canning Co. v. State, 101 Miss. 890; Coca Cola Co. v. Skillman, 91 Miss. 677; Clarksdale Ins. Agency v. Cole, 87 Miss. 637; Holbert v. Macon, 55 Miss. 112.

The tax levied by chapter 119, Laws of 1934, is a privilege tax or excise tax and not a property tax.

American Mfg. Co. v. St. Louis, 63 L.Ed. 1084; State v. G. M. & N. Ry. Co., 138 Miss. 70; Knisely v. Cotterel, 196 Pa. 614; Banker Bros. v. Commonwealth, 38 Pa. S.Ct. 101, 56 L.Ed. 168; Commonwealth v. Bailey, 20 Pa. S.Ct. 210; State v. Yelle, 25 P.2d 91; Winter v. Barrett, 186 N.E. 113; Reif et al. v. Barrett, 188 N.E. 889; State ex rel. v. Welch, 251 N.W. 189; Grocery Co. v. Robertson, 126 Miss. 34, 88 So. 4; Coca Cola Co. v. Skillman, 91 Miss. 677; Canning Co. v. State ex rel., 101 Miss. 890, 58 So. 769; American Sugar Refining Co. v. Louisiana, 45 L.Ed. 102; Oliver Iron & Mining Co. v. Lord, 67 L.Ed. 930; Hope Natural Gas Co. v. Hall, 71 L.Ed. 1049, 102 W.Va. 272; Article IX, sec. 1, Constitution of Pennsylvania; Article X, sec. 1, Constitution of West Virginia; Section 2 (a), chap. 1, Acts of Legislature of West Virginia, Extra Session of 1925; Article IX, secs 1 and 5, Constitution of Florida; Section 1, Chap. 15658, Acts of 1931, Extra Session, State of Florida; City of Lakeland v. Amos, 143 So. 744; Article IX, secs. 1 and 2, Constitution of Illinois; Smith-Hurd Rev. St. 1933, chap. 120, sec. 440; Article XI, sec. 2, Constitution of South Dakota; Chapter 184, Laws...