Thames & Mersey Marine Insurance v. United States
Supreme Court of the United States
ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OP THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. The facts, which involve the construction of § 9, Article I, of the Federal Constitution, prohibiting any tax or duty on exports and the validity of stamp taxes under the War Revenue Act of 1898 on policies of marine insurance on exports, are stated in the opinion. The claim of the petitioner was presented to the Commissioner of Internal Revenue and by him rejected.
Read the full summary
ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OP THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. The facts, which involve the construction of § 9, Article I, of the Federal Constitution, prohibiting any tax or duty on exports and the validity of stamp taxes under the War Revenue Act of 1898 on policies of marine insurance on exports, are stated in the opinion. The claim of the petitioner was presented to the Commissioner of Internal Revenue and by him rejected. The remedy of petitioner was therefore an action against the Collector of Internal Revenue and not against the United States. It does not…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Hughes
The plaintiff in error is a corporation engaged in the business of underwriting policies of marine insurance. It .brought this action to recover the amount paid as stamp taxes upon policies insuring certain exports against marine risks. The taxes were paid under the War Revenue Act of June 13,1898, c. 448, 30 Stat. 448, 461; and the recovery was sought under the provisions of the act of July 27,1912, c. 256, 37 Stat. 240, upon the ground that the tax was invalid, being in substance a tax upon exportation and hence contrary to § 9, Article I, of -the Federal Constitution, prohibiting any…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Paul v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1869
- Coe v. ErrolSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Hooper v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Kidd v. PearsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Shaw v. Quincy Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1892
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by117 opinions
- Willcutts v. BunnSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
- Department of Revenue v. Ass'n of Washington Stevedoring CompaniesSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Richfield Oil Corp. v. State Board of EqualizationSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- United States v. International Business MacHines Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1996
- William E. Peck & Co. v. LoweSupreme Court of the United States · 1918
112 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.