National Muffler Dealers Association, Inc. v. United States
United States Supreme Court
440 U.S. 472 (1979)
- Written by Jenny Perry, JD
Facts
The National Muffler Dealers Association, Inc. (the association) (plaintiff) was a trade organization whose members were muffler dealers franchised by Midas International Corporation (Midas). Midas franchisees formed the association to negotiate as a group with Midas management for more favorable franchise terms. Thus, the association’s principal activity was to serve as a bargaining agent for its members. Most Midas franchisees were members of the association. The association sought exemption from income taxation under § 501(c)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code, which applied to nonprofit business leagues, chambers of commerce, real-estate boards, and professional football leagues, if no part of the organization’s net earnings inured to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) (defendant) rejected the association’s application, stating that § 501(c)(6) did not apply to an organization that was not industrywide. The association then amended its bylaws and eliminated the requirement that its members be Midas franchisees, but the association did not recruit or acquire any non-Midas muffler dealers as members. The association sought a refund of taxes paid, and the district court ruled in favor of the IRS. The circuit court affirmed, and the United States Supreme Court granted the association’s petition for certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Blackmun, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 802,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 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.