Legal Opinion
General Motors Corp. v. Tracy
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided August 9, 1995No. Nos. 94-642, 94-643 and 94-644PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Per curiam
R.C. 5741.02 imposes a use tax on the storage, use, or consumption of tangible personal property in Ohio. R.C. 5741.02(C)(2) exempts from this tax acquisitions “which, if made in Ohio, would be a sale not subject to the tax imposed by sections 5739.01 to 5739.31 of the Revised Code.” GM claims that the instant acquisitions would be exempt under R.C. 5739.02(B)(7) as sales of natural gas by a natural gas company.
However, in Chrysler Corp. v. Tracy (1995), 73 Ohio St.3d 26, 652 N.E.2d 185, we upheld the determination of the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio that a vendor in the type of sales…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- State v. AdamsOhio Supreme Court · 1980
- Hughes v. OklahomaSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Maine v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Bacchus Imports, Ltd. v. DiasSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- New Energy Co. of Indiana v. LimbachSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- General Motors Corp. v. TracySupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- State ex rel. Master v. City of ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 1996
- Columbia Gas Transmission Corp. v. LevinOhio Supreme Court · 2008
- State ex rel. Master v. ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 1996
- OPUS III-VII Corp. v. Ohio State Board of PharmacyOhio Court of Appeals · 1996
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.