Legal Opinion
Agley v. Tracy
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided December 8, 1999No. Nos. 98-1879, 98-1880 and 98-1881PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtLundberg Stratton, J.
The appellants assert five propositions of law in support of their contention that an out-of-state shareholder should not be taxed in Ohio on the distributive share of income he or she receives from his or her S corporation that is doing business in Ohio. For the following reasons, we disagree. Thus, we affirm the Board of Tax Appeals in each case.
Appellants argue that nonresident shareholders of an S corporation that conducts business activities in Ohio should not be subject to income tax on their distributive share of the S corporation’s income under R.C. 5747.02 because it is the S…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Quill Corp. v. North Dakota Ex Rel. HeitkampSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Northwestern States Portland Cement Co. v. MinnesotaSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
- Miller Brothers Co. v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
- Wisconsin Department of Revenue v. William Wrigley, Jr., Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Heublein, Inc. v. South Carolina Tax CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Corrigan v. Testa (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2016
- Lanzi v. Alabama Dept. of RevenueCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 2006
- Tetlak v. Village of BratenahlOhio Supreme Court · 2001
- Thomas v. KramerOhio Court of Appeals · 2011
- Chagrin Realty, Inc. v. TestaOhio Supreme Court · 2018
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.