Keyton E. Barker and Pauline Barker, et al., Peittioners v. Kansas, et al. (503 U.S. 594)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided April 21, 1992 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 503 U.S. 594 · 112 S. Ct. 1619
- Decided
- April 21, 1992
- Term
- October Term 1991
- Vote
- 9–0
- Majority author
- Justice White
- Issue area
- Federalism
- Disposition
- Reversed and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Liberal
Opinion excerpt
Justice White delivered the opinion of the Court. The State of Kansas taxes the benefits received from the United States by military retirees but does not tax the benefits received by retired state and local government employees. Kan. Stat. Ann. §79-3201 et seq. (1989). The issue before us is whether the tax imposed on the military retirees is inconsistent with 4 U. S. C. § 111, which provides: “The United States consents to the taxation of pay or compensation for personal service as an officer or employee of the United States, a territory or possession or political subdivision thereof, the government of the District of Columbia, or an agency or instrumentality of one or more of the foregoing, by a duly constituted taxing authority having jurisdiction, if the taxation does not discriminate against the officer or employee because of the source of the pay or compensation.” Shortly after our decision in Davis v. Michigan Dept. of Treasury, 489 U. S. 803 (1989), which invalidated under § 111 the Michigan income tax imposed on federal civil service retirees, two class actions were filed in Kansas District Court challenging the state income tax imposed on military retirement benefits. Together the classes comprised some 14,000 military retirees, who received federal Armed Forces retirement benefits and were subject to the Kansas income tax for one or more of the tax years from 1984…
Excerpt of a 20,702-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.