Tank Truck Rentals v. Commissioner
United States Supreme Court
356 U.S. 30 (1958)
- Written by Heather Whittemore, JD
Facts
Tank Truck Rentals (plaintiff) was a Pennsylvania-based corporation that transported bulk liquids in tank trucks across several states. In 1951 Pennsylvania imposed a 45,000-pound weight limit on trucks. Most of the other states that Tank Truck Rentals did business in had weight limits of 60,000 pounds. The trucks that Tank Truck Rentals used had 4,500- to 5,000-gallon capacities, so that if the tanks were full the trucks exceeded Pennsylvania’s weight limit. As it would have been unsafe to transport partially full tanks and economically unfeasible to buy a fleet of smaller tank trucks, Tank Truck Rentals decided to operate its trucks at full capacity, over Pennsylvania’s limit, and incur the cost of whatever violations were discovered. Over the course of 1951, Tank Truck Rentals paid approximately $40,000 in fines for 718 willful and 28 innocent violations of weight restrictions. Tank Truck Rentals classified these fines as ordinary and necessary business expenses and deducted them. The Commissioner of Internal Revenue (the Commissioner) (defendant) disallowed the deductions. The United States Tax Court affirmed the Commissioner, holding that the deductions would go against public policy given that the fines were incurred after Tank Truck Rentals violated weight-limit laws. The court of appeals affirmed the tax court, and Tank Truck Rentals appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Clark, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 830,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 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.