Daimlerchrysler Corporation v. Charlotte Cuno et al. (547 U.S. 332)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided May 15, 2006 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 547 U.S. 332 · 126 S. Ct. 1854
- Decided
- May 15, 2006
- Term
- October Term 2005
- Vote
- 9–0
- Majority author
- Justice Roberts
- Issue area
- Judicial Power
- Disposition
- Vacated and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Chief Justice Roberts delivered the opinion of the Court. Jeeps were first mass-produced in 1941 for the U. S. Army by the Willys-Overland Motor Company in Toledo, Ohio. Nearly 60 years later, the city of Toledo and State of Ohio sought to encourage the current manufacturer of Jeeps— DaimlerChrysler — to expand its Jeep operation in Toledo, by offering local and state tax benefits for new investment. Taxpayers in Toledo sued, alleging that their local and state tax burdens were increased by the tax breaks for Daimler-Chrysler, tax breaks that they asserted violated the Commerce Clause. The Court of Appeals agreed that a state tax credit offered under Ohio law violated the Commerce Clause, and state and local officials and DaimlerChrysler sought review in this Court. We are obligated before reaching this Commerce Clause question to determine whether the taxpayers who objected to the credit have standing to press their complaint in federal court. We conclude that they do not, and we therefore can proceed no further. I Ohio levies a franchise tax “upon corporations for the privilege of doing business in the state, owning or using a part or all of its capital or property in [the] state, or holding a certificate of compliance authorising it to do business in [the] state.” Wesnovtek Corp. v. Wilkins, 105 Ohio St. 3d 312, 313, 2005-Ohio-1826, ¶ 2, 825 N. E. 2d 1099, 1100; see Ohio…
Excerpt of a 34,056-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.