Legal Opinion
Carlisle Tire and Rubber Co. v. United States
United States Court of International Trade
Decided May 18, 1983No. Court 79-5-00748PublishedCited by 26 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
On Plaintiff’s Supplementary Motion and Defendant’s Supplementary Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment
MALETZ, Senior Judge.
This case is one of first impression, posing the question whether a generally available tax deduction for accelerated depreciation of equipment is a bounty or grant within the meaning of section 303 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. § 1303 (1976). 1 Plaintiff Carlisle Tire and Rubber Company (Carlisle), a domestic manufacturer of bicycle tires and tubes, challenges the countervailing duty redetermination of the International Trade Administration of the…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Udall v. TallmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- United States v. BryanSupreme Court of the United States · 1950
- United States v. PriceSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Train v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1975
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Timken Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1986
- Hercules, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1987
- Philipp Bros., Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1986
- Cabot Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1985
- PPG Industries, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1987
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.