Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Macallan Co. Vs. Massachusetts

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • May 27, 1929

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

78 entries 8 linked 70 unlinked
Show
  1. Society for Savings Vs. Coite US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1867
  2. Provident Institution Vs. Massachusetts US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1867
  3. Frick Vs. Pennsylvania US Supreme Court · Jun 01, 1925
  4. Alpha Portland Cement Co. Vs. Commonwealth US Supreme Court · May 04, 1925
    Relied / Followed
  5. National Leather Co. Vs. Massachusetts US Supreme Court · May 28, 1928
  6. Baltic Mining Co. Vs. Massachusetts US Supreme Court · Nov 03, 1913
    Relied / Followed
  7. Plummer Vs. Coler US Supreme Court · May 14, 1900
  8. Blodgett Vs. Silberman US Supreme Court · Apr 16, 1928
  9. U.S. 620 (1929) U.S. Supreme Court Macallan Co. v. Massachusetts
    Search
  10. U.S. 620 (1929) Macallan Co. v. Massachusetts
    Search
  11. of government and, carried far enough, would prove destructive. The principle set forth a century ago in Weston v. Charleston
    Search
  12. Home Savings Bank v. Des
    Search
  13. name or by using some form of words, can take away our duty to consider its nature and effect. Choctaw & Gulf R. Co. v. Harrison
    Search
  14. Ry. Co. v. Page
    Search
  15. A tax laid in terms on the occupation of an importer is in effect a tax on imports. Brown v. Maryland
    Search
  16. income of an office is a tax on the office itself, and cannot be laid in that form if the office be exempt. Dobbins v. Erie
    Search
  17. goods are imported and sold for the importer, the law authorizing the tax is void as imposing a duty on imports. Cook v. Pennsylvania
    Search
  18. substance and effect a tax upon the thing transported, because of its necessary association with the shipment. Almy v. California
    Search
  19. And see 75 U. S. Parham, 8 Wall. 123, 75 U. S. 138 . In Indian Territory Illuminating Oil Co. v. Oklahoma
    Search
  20. In Federal Land Bank v. Crosland
    Search
  21. Page 279 U. S. 628 The court below predicates its decision upon a series of decisions, of which Flint v. Stone
    Search
  22. property of the corporation although a part of such income is derived from nontaxable property. See also Home Ins. Co. v. New
    Search
  23. its use as a measure of value was fortuitous and incidental. The aphorism of Chief Justice Marshall in McCulloch v. Maryland
    Search
  24. of course, is important only where the tax is sought to be imposed upon a nontaxable subject, or, as said in Knowlton v. Moore
    Search
  25. to the latter's dignity, subversive of its powers, and repugnant to its paramount authority. See California v. Central
    Search
  26. Fairbank v. United
    Search
  27. the history, the surrounding circumstances, or the statute itself considered in all its parts. See Home Savings Bank v. Des
    Search
  28. upon the latter than when the aim is directed primarily against the latter. See Galveston, Harrisburg, etc., Ry. Co. v. Texas
    Search
  29. supra, p. 210 U. S. 227 . In Miller v. Milwaukee
    Search
  30. Northwestern Ins. Co. v. Wisconsin
    Search
  31. Alpha Cement Co. v. Massachusetts
    Search
  32. Nat. Life Ins. Co. v. United
    Search
  33. only if an excise, and it and its predecessors have been consistently sustained as excises. S.S. White Dental Mfg. Co. v. Commonwealth
    Search
  34. of Portland Bank v. Apthorp
    Search
  35. Commonwealth v. Provident
    Search
  36. Commonwealth v. Hamilton
    Search
  37. Eaton, Crane & Pike Co. v. Commonwealth
    Search
  38. This interpretation of the nature of the exaction has been repeatedly approved by this Court. Provident Institution v. Massachusetts
    Search
  39. Hamilton Co. v. Massachusetts
    Search
  40. Baltic Mining Co. v. Massachusetts
    Search
  41. Alpha Portland Cement Co. v. Massachusetts
    Search
  42. only when the corporation has in fact been so engaged during the taxable year. See Fore River Shipbuilding Corp. v. Commonwealth
    Search
  43. Attorney General v. Boston
    Search
  44. of the corporate franchise. The tax is not measured by gross income, as in Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. Wisconsin
    Search
  45. was recognized. The distinction between net income and gross as the measure of a tax is well established. Peck & Co. v. Lowe
    Search
  46. U. S. 165 . Compare Crew-Levick Co. v. Pennsylvania
    Search
  47. United States Glue Co. v. Oak
    Search
  48. the corporation, including the tax exempt securities of the other or income derived from them. Provident Institution v. Massachusetts
    Search
  49. Home Insurance Co. v. New
    Search
  50. Flint v. Stone
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial