C5C3A104d01 - Page 1 1 of 1 DOCUMENT NATIONAL BELLAS HESS,...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
1 of 1 DOCUMENT NATIONAL BELLAS HESS, INC. v. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS No. 241 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 386 U.S. 753 ; 87 S. Ct. 1389; 18 L. Ed. 2d 505; 1967 U.S. LEXIS 2792 February 23, 1967, Argued May 8, 1967, Decided PRIOR HISTORY: APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS. DISPOSITION: 34 Ill. 2d 164, 214 N. E. 2d 755, reversed. CASE SUMMARY: PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Appellant taxpayer challenged the judgment of the Supreme Court of Illinois, which held that the taxpayer was required to collect and pay to appellee, the Department of Revenue of the State of Illinois (State), the use taxes imposed by Ill. Rev. Stat. ch. 120, § 439.3 (1965). OVERVIEW: The taxpayer was a mail order house and did not maintain a place of business, had no representatives, and owned no property, real or personal, in the state. The taxpayer also did not have a telephone listing and did not advertise its merchandise in the state. All of the taxpayer's contacts with the state were via the United States mail or common carrier. The state supreme court held that the taxpayer was required to collect and pay to the State use taxes imposed by Ill. Rev. Stat. ch. 120, § 439.3 (1965). On appeal, the court reversed. The court held that the nature of the taxpayer's business was purely interstate, and, therefore, was exclusively within Congress' power to regulate under the Commerce Clause. OUTCOME: The court reversed the state court's judgment in favor of the taxpayer. CORE TERMS: seller, use tax, customers, collection, mail order house, out-of-state, merchandise, catalogue, retailer, mail, interstate, resident, sales taxes, interstate commerce, advertising, consumer, place of business, common carrier, exploitation, collecting, systematic, mailing, mailed, taxing, tax obligation, present case, retail outlets, retail stores, solicitation, soliciting LexisNexis(R) Headnotes Overview [HN1] State taxation falling on interstate commerce can only be justified as designed to make such commerce bear a fair share of the cost of the local government whose protection it enjoys. And in determining whether a state tax falls Page 1
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
within the confines of the Due Process Clause, the simple but controlling question is whether the state has given anything for which it can ask return. The same principles have been held applicable in determining the power of a state to impose the burdens of collecting use taxes upon interstate sales. Here, too, the Constitution requires some definite link, some minimum connection, between a state and the person, property or transaction it seeks to tax. Contracts Law > Sales of Goods > Performance > General Overview
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 11

C5C3A104d01 - Page 1 1 of 1 DOCUMENT NATIONAL BELLAS HESS,...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online