Standard Oil Co. v. Thoresen
Decision Date | 17 November 1928 |
Docket Number | No. 8107.,8107. |
Parties | STANDARD OIL CO., INDIANA, v. THORESEN, Tax Commissioner of North Dakota, et al. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit |
E. B. Cox, of Bismarck, N. D. (C. W. Martyn and F. E. Packard, both of Chicago, Ill., and O'Hare, Cox & Cox, of Bismarck, N. D., on the brief), for appellant.
C. J. Lynch, of Bismarck, N. D. (T. H. H. Thoresen, of Bismarck, N. D., on the brief), for appellees.
Before BOOTH, Circuit Judge, and POLLOCK and DEWEY, District Judges.
This is a tax case from the state of North Dakota. That state enacted a tax law in the year 1923, which, in so far as here material, provides (chapter 312, Session Laws North Dakota 1923) as follows:
"There shall be levied, collected and paid for the year ending December 31, 1923, and annually thereafter, upon the net income of every domestic and every foreign corporation received from such sources as are described in article II, sections 7 and 8, a tax equivalent to three per cent. (3%) of such net income." Section 26.
Section 7 of the act, providing for allocation by apportionment of income of corporations, which is involved in this suit, reads, as follows:
Section 8 of the act makes plain to our minds the intent of the Legislature in the enactment of this statute. It reads, as follows:
"If any corporation believes that the method of allocation and apportionment hereinbefore prescribed as administered by the tax commissioner and applied to their business has operated or will so operate as to subject them to taxation on a greater portion of their net income than is reasonably attributable to business or sources within the state, they shall be entitled to file with the commissioner a statement of their objections and of such alternative method of allocation and apportionment as they believe to be proper under the circumstances with such detail and proof and within such time as the tax commissioner may reasonably prescribe; and if the tax commissioner shall conclude that the method of allocation and apportionment theretofore employed is in fact inapplicable and inequitable, he shall redetermine the taxable income of such other method of allocation and apportionment as seems best calculated to assign to the state for taxation the portion of the income reasonably attributable to business and sources within the state, not exceeding, however, the amount which would be arrived at by application of the statutory rules for apportionment."
The Standard Oil Company of Indiana, herein appellant, made return of its property for the purpose of income taxes for the year 1923, as follows:
"That for the year 1923 the plaintiff duly reported and filed with the tax commissioner of the state of North Dakota a report and statement of the business of the plaintiff in connection with the sale and distribution of its products within the state of North Dakota, this being plaintiff's interpretation of the application of chapter 312 of the Session Laws of North Dakota for the year 1923, and in said report plaintiff did include its entire gross income derived from the sale and distribution of its products and by-products both within and without the state of North Dakota, and deducted therefrom the expenses incurred in connection with said business and authorized as deductions from gross income under section nineteen of chapter 312 of the Session Laws of 1923, and reported a total net income derived from its business of selling and distributing petroleum products of twelve million, six hundred one thousand, five hundred fifty-seven and 27/100 dollars ($12,601,557.27); that in accordance with the provisions of section 7 of said act, the plaintiff company reported to the tax commissioner the total...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Artophone Corp. v. Coale
... ... 161 Wis. 111; Secs. 10115, 10117, R. S. 1929; Laws 1931, pp ... 365, 367; Piedmont & Northern Ry. Co. v. Query, 56 ... F.2d 172; Standard Oil Co. v. Thoresen, 29 F.2d 708; ... Palmolive Co. v. Conway, 43 F.2d 226. (2) The ... Missouri Income Tax Act imposes a tax on general ... ...
-
Union Twist Drill Co. v. Erwin M. Harvey, Commr. of Taxes
... ... Inc. v. North Carolina , 283 U.S. 123, 51 S.Ct ... 385, 75 L.Ed. 879; Fisher v. Standard Oil ... Co. 12 F.2d 744; Standard Oil Co. v ... Thoresen , 29 F.2d 708; Magnolia Petroleum ... Co. v. Oklahoma Tax Commission , 190 Okla ... ...
-
Union Twist Drill Co. v. Harvey
...v. State of North Carolina, 283 U.S. 123, 51 S.Ct. 385, 75 L.Ed. 879; Fisher v. Standard Oil Co., 8 Cir., 12 F.2d 744; Standard Oil Co. v. Thoresen, 8 Cir., 29 F.2d 708; Magnolia Petroleum Co. v. Oklahoma Tax Commission, 190 Okl. 172, 121 P.2d 1008; and Standard Oil Co. v. Wisconsin Tax Com......
-
Square D Co. v. Kentucky Bd. of Tax Appeals
...business operations as to justify a state in claiming a proportionate share of the income from foreign sources. In Standard Oil Co. of Indiana v. Thoresen, 8 Cir., 29 F.2d 708, an Indiana corporation engaged in the business in North Dakota of marketing refined oil products. In other states ......