Pullman Co. v. Richardson, 261 U.S. 330 (1923)

Please note: this case begins in mid-page. It therefore shares a citation with the last page of the previous case. If you are attempting to follow a link to the last page of 261 U.S. 326, click here.

Pullman Co. v. Richardson

Nos. 143-148

, and 149

Argued December 4, 5, 1922
Decided March 12, 1923
261 U.S. 330

ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT

OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Syllabus

1. A state may tax that part of the property of a carrier engaged in interstate and local business which is permanently located or commonly used within the state, according to its fair value as part of a going concern, measured with reference to the gross receipts from both local and interstate business. P. 338.

2. A tax, measured in this way, which is called a property tax, which is imposed in lieu of all other taxes upon the carrier’s property in the state, which is not in excess of what would be a legitimate tax on such property, valued as part of a going concern, nor relatively higher than taxes on other classes of property, does not discriminate against interstate commerce. P. 339.

3. A state statutory provision that a foreign corporation failing to pay a tax shall be excluded from doing business in the state would be void as applied to interstate commerce. P. 339.

4. The tax here involved, based on the California Constitution (Art. XIII, § 14, as amended, 1910) and on subsequent statutes, was not intended to reach income from property situated or business done outside of the state. P. 340.

185 Cal. 484 affirmed.

Error to judgments of the Supreme Court of California affirming judgments for the defendant in actions brought against the state treasurer to recover money paid, under protest as taxes.