Document: 380 U.S. 451 85 S.Ct. 1130 14 L.Ed.2d 1 The AMERICAN OIL COMPANY, Appellant,v.P. G. NEILL et al. No. 19. Argued Jan. 25 and 26, 1965. Decided April Frank I. Goodman, for appellant. Allan Shepard, Boise, Idaho, appellees. Mr. Chief Justice WARREN delivered the opinion of Court. This appeal presents issue whether, where a licensed Idaho dealer in motor fuels sells transfers gasoline outside State importation into by an agency Federal Government, may constitutionally impose excise tax upon transaction on theory that constructively 'receives' its importation. 2 On June 1959, invitations bids were issued United States Government from Regional Office General Services Administration (GSA) at Seattle, Washington, covering some 607 separate items—each designed to supply distinct fuel need particular government one multitude locations Montana, Oregon, Washington period November 1, through October 31, 1960. Bids each item be submitted Seattle office evaluated their individual merits accepted or rejected without reference other items. 3 Appellant's predecessor interest, Utah Oil Refining Company (Utah Oil), is Delaware corporation. Pursuant GSA invitation it transmitted offices Salt Lake City, Utah, various Included numbers 63 64 dealing with approximately 200,000 1,000,000 gallons gasoline, respectively, use Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) Falls, Idaho. these two items alternative form, quoting price f.o.b. City AEC activity site Idaho.1 4 Oil's GSA. Under terms contract was sold designated Bulk Plant, City. total did not include any state but provision made increase if such imposed. 5 In accordance contract, AEC, operating agent, Phillips Petroleum Company, periodically ordered 1,436,355 gasoline. Delivery effected Although facts subsequent delivery are dispute, appears thereafter common carriers, selected paid transported Falls placed AEC-owned storage tanks used operations Idaho.2 6 During time performing authorized do business as 'licensed dealer' defined Motor Fuels Tax Act, amended, Code, Tit. 49, c. 12 (1957). Act imposes initial requirement all 'dealers' hold permit Collector. To procure only fill out application, post bond, pay five-dollar filing fee. Securance necessary before can 'import, receive, use, sell distribute fuels' within State. Code Ann. § 49—1202 7 A 'dealer' 49—1201 person who first receives meaning word 'received.'3 As dealer, required make monthly reports Collector six cents per gallon 'received' ambit 49 1201(g). then provides proceeds highway fund. 8 performance contracts reports. thereupon insisted payment six-cent forthcoming pursuant 49—1201(g) due fact which had 'not holder (a) * point origin state.' Taxes totaling $86,181.30 under protest. instant litigation initiated District Court Third Judicial refund. Appellant claimed threshold imposition out-of-state sale violated Due Process, Commerce, Supremacy Clauses Constitution. 9 trial judge granted summary judgment appellant finding Process Commerce since applied Supreme reversed, constitutional objections merit. 86 7, 383 P.2d 350. We noted probable jurisdiction, 377 962, 84 1643, 734, because validity statute been upheld over objection repugnant 28 U.S.C. 1257(2) (1958 ed.) 10 When passing constitutionality taxing scheme firmly established this concerns itself practical operation tax, is, substance rather than form. Wisconsin v. J. C. Penney Co., 311 435, 443—444, 61 246, 249, L.Ed. 267; Lawrence Comm'n, 286 276, 280, 52 556, 557, 76 1102, cases cited therein. approach requires us determine ultimate effect law enforced or, words, find incidence tax. Connecticut Gen. Life Ins. Co. Johnson, 303 77, 80, 58 436, 438, 82 673. 11 court has own definitive determination incidence, our task simplified. give great weight determining natural statute, consistent statute's reasonable interpretation will deemed conclusive.4 Such situation manifest case. found clearly fell dealer: 13 '(T)he way pass collect consumer, purchaser consumer no responsibility whatsoever While overall policy 6¢ propel vehicles highways, taxable event local purchaser, 'receipt' gas dealer. It cannot said mere collector user *.' conclusion further buttressed administrative past treat privilege dealer.5 15 left court's conclusions undisturbed. Moreover, Attorney his brief expressly states 'is falls *.'6 unanimity between courts agencies accord literal inasmuch 49—1210 'each shall commissioner *' coinciding burden purchaser. therefore findings below controlling II. 16 agreed taxed events sales factors considered sufficient bring transactions purview Idaho's power. First, knowledge would imported Idaho; and, second, having received dealer's 'authorizing enter market distributor 23, P.2d, 360. conclude considerations insufficient uphold against attack Clause. 17 knew little discussion. More once struck down taxes directly imposed resulting held insufficiently related activities State, despite vendor goods destined Miller Bros. Maryland, 347 340, 74 535, 98 744 (use tax); Norton Department Revenue, 340 534, 71 377, 95 517 (gross receipts McLeod E. Dilworth 322 327, 1023, 88 1304 (sales tax). 18 These have also doctrine when vendor, 'nexus' taxpayer outstanding prerequisite power Consistent there must 'some definite link, minimum connection, person, property seeks tax.' supra, 344-345, 539. Granted corporation, permission given, enters 'link' strong. instances strong inference exists result economic benefits obtained source State's territorial limits. corporation can, however, exempt clear showing in-state connected sales. instances, 'dissociated business,' 537, 380, not, process, taxed. 19 present case plain neither position nor otherwise engaged suffice transfer unquestionably vis-a -vis entirely unconnected Each every phase locus Idaho: Washington; City; Seattle; called title passed. There reason suppose, does record indicate, contributed procurement contract. Compare Motors Corp. 1564, 430. 20 fully cognizant chose characterize authorizing 'to engage very now claims statement, fails reflect holding granting 'of doing consequent authority withdraw protection process clause privilege' elsewhere. 82, 439. exactly circumstances we purely fortuitous. 21 Since decide exacted violates Clause, discussion decision reversed remanded proceedings inconsistent opinion. 22 Reversed remanded. 23 BLACK dissents. proposed points discretionary bidder whether quotations submitted. ground 'use tax' usual sense, declined offer proof what occurred after tendered concurred, evidence immaterial status contractor AEC. section provides, inter alia: '2. refineries pipe line terminals immediately same unloaded owner thereof dealer; owned prior being unloaded; provided, shipped brought qualified uncanceled permit, shipping bringing state; provided manner supplied, furnished agency, whatsoever, state, so supplying, selling, furnishing fuel, Idaho.' (Emphasis added.) (Supp.1963). Railway Express Agency, Inc. Com. Virginia, 359, 369—372, 558, 564, 565, 337 (dissenting opinion), 358 434, 440—441, 79 411, 415—416, 450. Letter Don McClenahan, Assistant Bigelow Boysen, May 9, 1950. reached 'the act places legal vendee consumer.' Comptroller agrees conclusion. 24 Comp.Gen. 163 (1944). Brief appellee, p. 5.

Category: 7