Direct MKTG. Ass'n v. Brohl (575 U.S. 1)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided March 3, 2015 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 575 U.S. 1 · 135 S. Ct. 1124
- Decided
- March 3, 2015
- Term
- October Term 2014
- Vote
- 9–0
- Majority author
- Justice Thomas
- Issue area
- Economic Activity
- Disposition
- Reversed and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Justice THOMASdelivered the opinion of the Court. In an effort to improve the collection of sales and use taxes for items purchased online, the State of Colorado passed a law requiring retailers that do not collect Colorado sales or use tax to notify Colorado customers of their use-tax liability and to report tax-related information to customers and the Colorado Department of Revenue. We must decide whether the Tax Injunction Act, which provides that federal district courts "shall not enjoin, suspend or restrain the assessment, levy or collection of any tax under State law," 28 U.S.C. § 1341, bars a suit to enjoin the enforcement of this law. We hold that it does not. I A Like many States, Colorado has a complementary sales-and-use tax regime. Colorado imposes both a 2.9 percent tax on the sale of tangible personal property within the State, Colo.Rev.Stat. §§ 39-26-104(1)(a), 39-26-106(1)(a)(II) (2014), and an equivalent use tax for any property stored, used, or consumed in Colorado on which a sales tax was not paid to a retailer, §§ 39-26-202(1)(b), 39-26-204(1). Retailers with a physical presence in Colorado must collect the sales or use tax from consumers at the point of sale and remit the proceeds to the Colorado Department of Revenue (Department). §§ 39-26-105(1), 39-26-106(2)(a). But under our negative Commerce Clause precedents, Colorado may not require retailers who…
Excerpt of a 25,518-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.