Multiple Taxation

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

• Merrion v. Jicarilla Apache Tribe
  617 F.2d 537· 10th Cir.· 1980-02-22 ·cited 52×
  Indian tribes retain the inherent sovereign power to levy a severance tax on nonmembers engaged in the business of extracting oil and gas from reservation lands, even though the tax falls on non-Indians, because taxation is an essential attribute of sovereignty and the federal go
• Dep't OF Revenue v. Wardair Canada, Ltd.
  455 So. 2d 326· Fla.· 1984-06-14 ·cited 18×
  The Florida Supreme Court reviewed the constitutionality of a state fuel excise tax law as applied to foreign airlines. The Court upheld the tax's constitutionality under both the Commerce Clause and federal preemption doctrine, reversing the trial court's finding that an interna
• PAN Am. World Airways, Inc. v. The Duly Authorized Gov't OF the Virgin Islands
  459 F.2d 387· 3d Cir.· 1972-04-21 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Virgin Islands' gross receipts tax, as applied to an international air carrier, was constitutional because the apportionment formula used was not shown to be a disproportionate exaction or to cause multiple taxation, and the district court had jurisdiction
• Alcan Aluminium Ltd. v. Franchise TAX Bd. OF the State OF Cal.
  860 F.2d 688· 7th Cir.· 1988-10-19 ·cited 2×
  Foreign parent corporations have standing to challenge California's franchise tax because the tax directly and independently injures them by disfavoring the use of their subsidiaries as instrumentalities of foreign commerce.
• Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Dep't of Revenue
  537 So. 2d 1011· Fla. 1st DCA· 1988-09-13
  Ford Motor Credit Company challenged Florida's intangible personal property tax as violating the Commerce Clause, arguing it created impermissible multiple taxation on the same intangibles. The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed the Department of Revenue's assessment, hold
• Amoco Prod. Co. & Marathon Oil Co. v. Jicarilla Apache Tribe
  842 F.2d 1200· 10th Cir.· 1988-03-24
  The court held that the Tax Injunction Act barred the companies' attempt to challenge the state tax and that their Commerce Clause arguments had already been decided against them.