Legal Opinion
Cominco Products, Inc. v. State Tax Commission
Oregon Supreme Court
Decided February 9, 1966PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SCHWAB, J. (Pro Tempore).
The defendant, Oregon State Tax Commission, appeals from a tax court decree, 2 OTR Adv Sh 165, holding that the U. S. Constitution, Art. I, § 10, prohibits the levying of an ad valorem tax on certain fertilizers owned and imported by plaintiff, Cominco Products, Inc. The pertinent portion of Art. I, § 10, U. S. Constitution, reads:
“* * * No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports * *
The parties agree that property in the possession of an importer in the original form or package in which it was imported is…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Brown v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1827
- Low v. AustinSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
- May v. New OrleansSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
- Department of Revenue v. James B. Beam Distilling Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. BowersSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Freightliner Corp. v. Department of RevenueOregon Supreme Court · 1976
- Freightliner Corp. v. Department of RevenueOregon Tax Court · 1975
- Halo Sales Corp. v. City and County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
- Roseburg Lumber Co. v. CommissionOregon Tax Court · 1968
- Halo Sales Corp. v. City and County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971