Legal Opinion
Barclays Bank International, Ltd. v. Franchise Tax Board
California Supreme Court
Decided May 11, 1992No. S019064PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
ARABIAN, J.
We granted review to decide whether the use by the state Franchise Tax Board of a three-factor formula to apportion the income of a foreign-parent multicorporate unitary enterprise for state tax purposes violates the foreign commerce clause of the federal Constitution (art. I, § 8, cl. 3). We conclude that relevant treaty and other materials manifest a federal intent not to prohibit the states from employing formula apportionment in taxing the income of such a multinational unitary business. We therefore reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeal.
I
Plaintiff taxpayers,…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Gibbons v. OgdenSupreme Court of the United States · 1824
- Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. SawyerSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
- Complete Auto Transit, Inc. v. BradySupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Hughes v. OklahomaSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Cooley v. Board of Wardens of Port of Philadelphia Ex Rel. Soc. for Relief of Distressed PilotsSupreme Court of the United States · 1852
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Barclays Bank PLC v. Franchise Tax Bd. of Cal.Supreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Microsoft Corp. v. Franchise Tax BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006
- Citicorp North America, Inc. v. Franchise Tax BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000
- In Re Tax Appeal of Morton Thiokol, Inc.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1993
- Barclays Bank International Limited v. Franchise Tax BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.