Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States
Panhandle Oil Co. v. Mississippi Ex Rel. Knox
42 Cont. Cas. Fed. 77,297
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Supreme Court of the United States
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
- Date
- 1928-05-14
- Topic
- general
holding unconstitutional a sales tax imposed on one who made sales to the Federal Government | hold ing unconstitutional a sales tax imposed on one who made sales to the Federal Government | vendor immune from sales tax on vendor’s proceeds from sale to the United States | vendor immune from sales tax on vendor's proceeds from sale to the United States | “Here the lease . . . was an instrumentality of the State .... To tax the income of the lessee arising therefrom would amount to an imposition upon the lease itself” | vendor immune from state sales tax on vendor’s proceeds from sale to the United States | “It is immaterial that the seller and not the purchaser is required to report and make payment to the State. Sale and purchase constitute a transaction by which the tax is measured and on which the burden rests” | "It is immaterial that the seller and not the purchaser is required to report and make payment to the State. Sale and purchase constitute a transaction by which the tax is measured and on which the burden rests" | Holmes, J., dissenting from the invalidation of state sales taxes on goods and services sold to the United States government, and responding to John Marshall's dictum that "the power to tax is the power to destroy" | Holmes, J., dissenting from the Court's decision to strike down state taxes on sales to the United States government on the basis that the power of the States to tax the federal government would inevitably lead to its destruction | sales tax imposed on one who sold to federal government unconstitutional | sales tax imposed on one whn sold to federal govemment lmcxmsiDJtional | state tax on military contractor | state tax on military contractor
Citator
- Cited by
- 179 opinions
delivered the opinion of the Court.
Chapter 116 of the Laws of Mississippi of 1922 provided that “ any person engaged in the business of distributing gasoline, or retail dealer in gasoline, shall pay for the privilege of engaging in such business, an excise tax of 14 [one cent] per gallon upon the sale of gasoline . . . ,” except that sold in interstate commerce or purchased outside the State and brought in by the consumer for his own use. Chapter 115, Laws of 1924, increased the tax to three cents and c. 119, Laws of 1926, made it four, cents per gallon. Since some time in 1925 petitioner has been engaged in that business. The State sued to recover taxes claimed on account of sales made by petitioner to •the United States for the use of its Coast Guard Fleet in service in the Gulf of Mexico and its Veterans’ Hospital at Gulfport. Some of the sales were made while the Act of 1924 was in force and some after the rate had been increased by the Act of 1926. Accordingly the demand was for three cents a gallon on some and four cents on the rest. Petitioner defended on the ground that these sthtutes, if construed to impose taxes on such sales, are
The United States is empowered by the Constitution to maintain, and operate the fleet and hospital. Art. I, § 8. That authorization and laws enacted pursuant thereto are supreme (Art. VI); and, in case of conflict, they control state enactments. The Státes may not burden or interfere with the exertion of national power or make it a source of revenue or take the funds raised or tax the means used for the performance of federal functions. McCulloch v. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316, 425, et seq. Dobbins v. The Commissioners of Erie County, 16 Pet. 435, 448. Ohio v. Thomas, 173 U. S. 276. Choctaw & Gulf R. R. v. Harrison, 235 U. S. 292. Indian Oil Co. v. Oklahoma, 240 U. S. 522. Johnson v. Maryland, 254 U. S. 51. Clallam County v. United States, 263 U. S. 341, 344. Northwestern Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Wisconsin, 275 U. S. 136. New Brunswick v. United States, 276 U. S. 547. The strictness of that rule was emphasized in Gillespie v. Oklahoma, 257 U. S. 501, 505. The right of the United States to make such purchases is derived from the Constitution. The petitioner’s right to make sales to the United States was not given by the State and does not depend on state laws; it results from the authority of the national government under the Constitution to choose its own means and sources of supply. While Mississippi may-impose charges upon petitioner for the privilege of carrying on trade that is subject to the power of the State, it may not lay any tax upon transactions by which the United States secures the things desired for its governmental purposes,
The exactions demanded from petitioner infringe its right to have the constitutional independence of the United States in respept of such purchases remain untrammeled. Osborn v. United States Bank, 9 Wheat. 738, 867. Telegraph Co. v. Texas, supra. Cf. Terrace v. Thompson, 263 U. S. 197, 216. Petitioner is not liable for the taxes claimed.
Judgment reversed.