Container Corporation of America v. Franchise Tax Board
United States Supreme Court
463 U.S. 159, 103 S. Ct. 2933 (1983)
- Written by Heather Whittemore, JD
Facts
The Container Corporation of America (Container) (plaintiff), a Delaware corporation headquartered in Illinois, manufactured custom paperboard packaging. Container did business in California and controlled several foreign subsidiaries. Container held or guaranteed half of the long-term debt owned by its subsidiaries, provided advice and consultation to the subsidiaries, and sold used equipment to the subsidiaries. Otherwise, the subsidiaries were largely independent of Container, managing their own day-to-day activities. California imposed a corporate franchise tax on the income of companies that did business in the state. Container paid the franchise tax on its own income but not on the income of its subsidiaries. In 1969 the California Franchise Tax Board (the board) (defendant) assessed tax deficiencies against Container, arguing that Container owed franchise taxes on the income of its subsidiaries under the unitary-business principle. Container paid the assessed deficiencies and filed a lawsuit in state court seeking a refund and arguing that the board’s application of the franchise tax violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution. The superior court upheld the board’s assessments. The court of appeal affirmed the superior court, and the California Supreme Court refused to review the case. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Brennan, J.)
Dissent (Powell, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 790,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.