Intergovernmental Tax Immunity

67 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• The Agua Caliente Band OF Mission Indians v. The Cnty. OF Riverside
  442 F.2d 1184· 9th Cir.· 1971-05-12 ·cited 47×
  The court held that a state possessory interest tax on Indian trust lands is valid, distinguishing it from a tax on the land itself and finding no implied legislative immunization.
• City OF Vanceburg v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n
  571 F.2d 630· D.C. Cir.· 1977-11-28 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the dam-use charges assessed by the Commission were proper compensatory fees, not unauthorized taxes, and that Vanceburg's challenge to the net benefits formula was untimely.
• Redding Ford v. Cal. State Bd. OF Equalization
  722 F.2d 496· 9th Cir.· 1983-12-16 ·cited 18×
  The Tax Injunction Act bars federal jurisdiction over state tax collection when a plain, speedy, and efficient state remedy exists, even if the taxpayer cannot afford to pay the tax upfront.
• State of Fla. ex rel. C. P. O. Mess (Open) v. Green
  174 So. 2d 546· Fla.· 1965-04-23 ·cited 13×
  The court consolidated appeals concerning the validity of a county ordinance prohibiting outdoor advertising signs within 600 feet of an expressway, which the appellants argued was unconstitutional due to exceptions.
• Ray Marshall (Successor to W. J. Usery) v. Owensboro-Daviess Cnty. Hosp.
  581 F.2d 116· 6th Cir.· 1978-08-09 ·cited 12×
  The Court held that the Equal Pay Act, as applied to state employers, is a valid exercise of Congress's power under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment, and is not prohibited by the Tenth Amendment as interpreted in National League of Cities.
• The Marquardt Corp. & the United States v. Weber Cnty.
  360 F.2d 168· 10th Cir.· 1966-05-09 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the United States, as the real party in interest due to contractual reimbursement obligations, has standing to assert the invalidity of a state use tax on its contractors if the tax is discriminatorily applied against those dealing with the federal government.
• Brock v. Wash. Metro. Area Transit Auth.
  796 F.2d 481· D.C. Cir.· 1986-07-18 ·cited 8×
  The court held that WMATA's obligation to contribute to the Special Fund is a user fee, not a tax, and therefore WMATA is not immune from these payments under either constitutional intergovernmental tax immunity or its own compact.
• Skills Dev. Servs., Inc. v. Donovan
  728 F.2d 294· 6th Cir.· 1984-02-20 ·cited 8×
  Applying the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) to private corporations contracting with the state does not violate the Tenth Amendment because it does not regulate the 'States as States'.
• V. O. Motors, Inc. v. Cal. State Bd. OF Equalization
  691 F.2d 871· 9th Cir.· 1982-10-28 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the suit against the California State Board of Equalization was barred by the Eleventh Amendment, as the Tax Anti-Injunction Statute does not clearly abrogate this immunity.
• Wash. State Dairy Prods. Comm'n v. United States
  685 F.2d 298· 9th Cir.· 1982-08-24 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Washington State Dairy Products Commission is not exempt from federal telephone excise tax because it does not possess significant sovereign powers or perform traditional governmental functions, and thus imposing the tax does not unduly interfere with stat
• United States v. State OF NEW Mexico
  624 F.2d 111· 10th Cir.· 1980-06-02 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the contractors were not agents of the United States for tax purposes, but the United States has the right to intervene in state administrative tax proceedings.
• The State OF Okla. v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n
  661 F.2d 832· 10th Cir.· 1981-09-22 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Natural Gas Policy Act of 1978 is a constitutional exercise of Congress's Commerce Clause power and does not violate the Tenth Amendment or the doctrine of intergovernmental immunity.
• Homestake-Sapin P'rs v. United States
  375 F.2d 507· 10th Cir.· 1967-01-16 ·cited 6×
• Mescalero Apache Tribe v. O'Cheskey
  625 F.2d 967· 10th Cir.· 1980-06-05 ·cited 5×
• Swanson v. Wallace
  937 F.2d 965· 4th Cir.· 1991-06-25 ·cited 4×
  The court held that Secretary Powers is entitled to qualified immunity because the law was not clearly established at the time she enforced North Carolina's tax statutes, and her actions were objectively reasonable.
• Commonwealth OF Mass. v. United States
  548 F.2d 33· 1st Cir.· 1977-01-28 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the annual tax on civil aircraft use is a user charge, not an unconstitutional tax violating intergovernmental tax immunity.
• Muriel Dodge Neeman (Formerly Muriel Dodge) v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  255 F.2d 841· 2d Cir.· 1958-05-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that alimony payments received by the petitioner were taxable income under section 22(k) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1939, and that the application of this section did not violate the Fifth or Sixteenth Amendments.
• Brodhead v. Borthwick
  174 F.2d 21· 9th Cir.· 1949-04-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Hawaiian General Excise Tax Law, as construed by the Hawaii Supreme Court, is constitutional and that the 1.5% tax rate applied to sales to post exchanges and ships' service stores was not discriminatory or unconstitutional.
• Chrysler Corp. v. Twp. OF Sterling
  410 F.2d 62· 6th Cir.· 1969-03-31 ·cited 2×
  The dissenting judge believes the majority misapplied precedent and that the state tax discriminated against the federal government, contrary to established law.
• Atlas Life Ins. Co. v. United States
  333 F.2d 389· 10th Cir.· 1964-05-25 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the government's refusal to make a statutory adjustment to prevent taxing income from tax-exempt securities resulted in an illegal tax imposition.
• United States v. Wash. Toll Bridge Auth.
  307 F.2d 330· 9th Cir.· 1962-07-31 ·cited 2×
• United States v. a Single Fam. Residence Located at 3181 S.W. 138th Place
  778 F. Supp. 1570· S.D. Fla.· 1991-11-29 ·cited 1×
  The Court held that the relation back provision of the civil forfeiture statute, 21 U.S.C. § 881(h), operates to destroy state and local government tax liens that arise after the property's commission of the offense giving rise to forfeiture. The County's argument for innocent ow
• United States v. Real Prop. Located at 12921 Treeline Ave.
  837 F. Supp. 1168· M.D. Fla.· 1993-11-12
  The court held that forfeited property is owned by the United States as of the date of the offense, making it immune from subsequent state and local taxes, and that the Tax Collector was not an 'innocent owner' entitled to priority for tax liens.
• United States v. Marion Cnty.
  1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6061· M.D. Fla.· 1993-03-31
  A validly issued tax deed under Florida law extinguishes a prior VA mortgage lien, as federal law does not grant the VA lien priority over nondiscriminatory state tax laws.
• United States v. State OF Del.
  958 F.2d 555· 3d Cir.· 1992-03-12
  A state tax on electricity distributors is unconstitutional as applied to the federal government if the tax is mandatorily passed through to consumers, regardless of the distributor's nominal liability.
• State OF Ariz. v. Bowsher
  935 F.2d 332· D.C. Cir.· 1991-06-11
  The Supremacy Clause bars states from asserting custody over federal funds held by the Treasury for unknown owners, as such claims would directly regulate federal property and interfere with federal objectives.
• Boli v. The United States
  831 F.2d 276· Fed. Cir.· 1987-10-15
  The court held that the inclusion of tax-exempt interest in a taxpayer's modified adjusted gross income under Section 86 of the Internal Revenue Code results in a tax on Social Security benefits, not on the tax-exempt interest itself.
• United States v. The Metro. Gov't OF Nashville & Davidson Cnty.
  808 F.2d 1205· 6th Cir.· 1987-01-12
  Assuming a leasehold interest exists, it has no value and is therefore not subject to local real property taxation.
• United States v. Cnty. OF Cook
  725 F.2d 1128· 7th Cir.· 1984-01-20
  Illinois realty acquired by the United States under an installment purchase program and used for public purposes is exempt from local ad valorem taxation.
• Int'l Paper Co. v. Cnty. OF Siskiyou
  515 F.2d 285· 9th Cir.· 1974-03-14
  States can tax private possessory interests in national forest standing timber, and California counties have the statutory authority to do so.
• Pope v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
  138 F.2d 1006· 6th Cir.· 1943-12-06
  Compensation received by the petitioner for services as a state investigator, appointed under a legislative act and fulfilling specific duties and responsibilities, is exempt from federal income tax as compensation for a state officer. However, a claimed loss from a property exch