Stone v. Memphis Steam Laundry Cleaner

• Decision Date: 11 June 1951
• Docket Number: No. 37960,37960
• Citation: 53 So.2d 89
• Parties: STONE, Chairman, State Tax Commission, v. MEMPHIS STEAM LAUNDRY CLEANER, Inc.
• Court: Mississippi Supreme Court

Page 89

53 So.2d 89

STONE, Chairman, State Tax Commission, v. MEMPHIS STEAM LAUNDRY CLEANER, Inc.

No. 37960.

Supreme Court of Mississippi, Division B.

June 11, 1951.

J. H. Sumrall, Jackson, for appellant.

Clifton & Tual, and J. W. Kirkpatrick, all of Memphis, Tenn., Watkins & Eager, Jackson, for appellee.

ARRINGTON, Commissioner.

This suit was filed by the appellee, Memphis Steam Laundry Cleaner, Inc., a foreign corporation located in Memphis Tennessee, to recover $500 for privilege taxes previously paid by it to A. H. Stone, Chairman State Tax Commission of the State of Mississippi. The suit was tried by the lower court on declaration and answer and judgment rendered for appellee, from which judgment the appellant appeals.

It is admitted that the appellee was sending ten trucks into eight counties in Mississippi soliciting laundry, which it carried to Memphis, serviced and returned, and upon which a privilege tax of $50 was paid on the driver of each truck. This appeal involves the construction of Section 45, subsections (t) and (y), Chapter 138, Laws of Mississippi of 1944, known as the state-wide privilege tax law. Section 3 of this act provides: 'Every person desiring to engage in any business, or exercise any privilege hereafter specified shall first, before commencing same, apply for, pay for, and procure from the state tax commissioner or commissioner of insurance, a privilege license authorizing him to engage in the business or exercise the privilege specified therein, and the amount of tax shown in the following sections is hereby imposed for the privilege of engaging or continuing in the business set out therein.'

Section 45 of said act provides: 'Upon each person doing business as a transient vendor, or dealer, as defined in this section, and upon which a privilege tax is not specifically imposed by another section of this act, a tax for each county according to the following schedules:

* * *

* * *

'(t) Upon each person soliciting business for a laundry not licensed in this state as such, in each county $50.00.

* * *

* * *

'(y) Provided however, that where any person subject to the payment of the tax imposed in this section, makes use of more than one vehicle in carrying on such business, the tax herein imposed shall be paid on each vehicle used in carrying on such business.'

The appellee contends that it is not liable for the tax on the following grounds:

'Point I. Neither the appellee nor the drivers of its trucks were transient vendors or dealers under Paragraphs (t) and (y), Section 45, c. 138, Mississippi Laws of 1944, as defined in said act. If the paragraphs of said statute or either of them shall be construed and enforced in this case as to render the appellee liable for the tax sought to be recovered in this case, the said paragraphs and each of them violate the interstate commerce clause of the Constitution of the United States because the appellee and its agents and servants were engaged solely in interstate commerce and said paragraphs and each of them discriminate against interstate commerce in that under Section 110, Chapter 137, Mississippi Laws of 1944, a tax of only $8.00 would be imposed upon a truck operating exclusively in the State of Mississippi.

'Point II. Paragraphs (t) and (y), Section 45, Chapter 138, Mississippi Laws of 1944, if construed as to impose liability on the appellee in this case, violate the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States in that the appellee would thereby be denied the equal protection of the law, as well as due process, and for the same reason said paragraphs and each of them, would violate the 14th Section of the Bill of Rights of the State of Mississippi.'

We are of the opinion that there is no merit in the contention that the appellee is not liable for the tax for the reason that its drivers are not transient vendors or dealers. Section 110 of Chapter 137, Laws of Mississippi 1944, Local Privilege Tax Law, for the benefit of counties and municipalities, provides:

'Laundries. Sec. 110. Upon each person operating a laundry other than a hand laundry, as follows:

                In municipalities of class 1 .......................................... $120.00
                In municipalities of class 2 ........................................... $80.00
                In municipalities of classes 3 and 4 ................................... $60.00
                In municipalities of classes 5, 6, 7 and elsewhere in the county ....... $32.00
                Upon each truck or other vehicle for such laundry in a municipality
                  other than where the laundry is located ............................. $8.00.'
                

The appellee contends that by reason of the above section, which permits resident and licensed laundries to operate a truck in a municipality other than where the laundry is located by paying a tax of $8, and requiring it to pay a tax of $50, discriminates against interstate commerce. The legislature, in making this classification which is reasonable, no doubt took into consideration the fact that local laundries were required to pay ad valorem, privilege, and many other taxes. The tax involved here is not a tax on interstate commerce, but a tax on a person soliciting business for a laundry not licensed in this state, a local activity which applies to residents and non-residents alike.

In the case of Craig v. Mills, 203 Miss. 692, 33 So.2d 801, 807, which case involved privilege taxes and where similar questions were involved, the Court said:

'From its very nature the business of taking photographs is essentially localized in character. The customer, the photographer and the camera used by him must of necessity be in the state where the photograph is taken. Moreover the tax is not laid upon the transmission of the exposed negative from Mississippi to Tuscaloosa, Alabama, in the instant case, nor upon the return of the finished product to the customer in interstate commerce. It is levied upon the local activity of taking photographs in this state which are to be thereafter developed outside of the state. The interstate commerce does not begin until after the work of the photographer in taking the negative is completed. The taking of such negative is not commerce, but is merely a step in the preparation therefor and which is taken by one engaged in a particular calling or profession in this state. * * *

'As supporting the view that such a tax may be imposed upon the business of the appellees, in so far as the local activity of appellees' photographer...