The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1931-05-18
CHAIN STORES
TAX UPHELD BY
SUPREME COURT

OF license fees by Hoosier mer-
chants.
In the 1929 legislature and dur
ing litigation in federal court, esti-
mates Of the revenue which would
be produced by the measure ranged
from 100000 to 100000 annually.
II was estimated that from 10000 to
$4,000 stores would fall under its
provisions.
License Fees Listed
License fees prescribed by the law
are:
q. Upon one store, the annual IL
cense fee shall be So for each such
store.
q. Upon two stores or more, but
not to exceed five stores, the an
nual license fee shall be SO for each
such additional store.
%. Upon each store in excess Of
five, but not to exceed ten, the an
nual fee shall be SIS for each addi-
tional store.
q. Upon each store in excess Of
ten, but not to exceed twenty, the
annual fee shall be $40 for each such
additional store.
IS. Upon each store in excess of
twenty the annual license fee shall
be s25 for each such additional
store"
S250,OoO for School Aid
From sums accruing under the
act during the fiscal year ending
Sept. 30, 1929, $25O,0O0 must be
transferred to the school relief
fund in which a deficit Of ap-
proxinately 100000 has accrued.
For the fiscal year, ending Sept.
80, 1880, the sum to be transferred
to the school relief fund is $780,
600, and for the following year,
S500,000 Annually thereafter, $780,
600 Of the store license revenues are
to 60 to the school relief fund.
Revenues above those going to
school relief will be paid into the
states general fund and will be a
factor in accomplishing some
measure Of state tax reduction.
Collection is under the state tax
commission, which prepared today
to make plans for increasing the
forces and installing necessary
records to carry out the laws pro-
visions.
Rendered by Three Judges
Decision of the federal court here
Jan. 81, 1890, which held the law
unconstitutional, was rendered by
a threeGjudge court of equity. Mem
bers Of the court were Judges Will
H. Sparks, Thomas w. Slick and
Robert c. Baltzell.
The phase of the tax law ques-
toned by Jackson was the variation
III its amount.
The ruling resulted in another
sharp dissent and q five to four de-
cision in the United States court,
as has twice happened before at
this term in tax cases. Justices Van
Devanter, McReynolds, Butler and
Sutherland held that the statutes
should have been held invalid as
arbitrary"
Justice Roberts, in the majority
opinion, said: There seems to be
some ground for making a dis
tinction between chain and individ-
ual stores"
Disilisses Jackson's Plea
He dismissed Jackson's plea that
he paid many times the tax i'm
posed by Indianapolis department
stores with millions Of dollars in
assets by pointing out that the lat
ter had eighty-four different de-
partments Of various goods, while
the chain store was only one de-
partment doing business in various
neighborhoods.
1.-The legislature may clarity if
there is q reasonable base for
classification" Roberts said.
Attorney-General James NJ. Og-
den took an appeal to the highest
court. There the case was argued
by joseph w. Hutchinson, George
w. Hufsmith and V. Ed Funk, de-
puties encouragement
Funk stated today that this is the
first decision Of its kind in the his
tory Of American Jurisprudence. He
pointed out that it will have a far
reaching effect on the economic life
of the country.
Since the passage Of the Indiana
law numerous states have drafted
bills based on the Indiana statute,
he declared. Five or six similar ap-
peals now are pending, but the IN
diana case was the first ever to
reach final decision.