Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.: Difference between revisions

From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
No edit summary
m (Text replacement - "|case_treatment=No " to "")
 
(3 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown)
Line 4: Line 4:
|date=April 8, 1895
|date=April 8, 1895
|subject=Tax Law
|subject=Tax Law
|appealed_from=
|comments=*[[Constitution_of_the_United_States#16th_Amendment_.28Income_tax.29|16th Amendment (Income tax)]]
|Court_opinion_parts=
|case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link
|link=https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/157/429/
|case_text_source=Justia
}}
}}
'''Holding:''' Unapportioned income taxes on interest, dividends, and rents imposed by the Income Tax Act of 1894 are direct taxes, and are therefore unconstitutional.
}}
'''Holding:''' Unapportioned income taxes on interest, dividends, and rents imposed by the Income Tax Act of 1894 are [[Constitution of the United States|direct taxes]], and are therefore unconstitutional.

Latest revision as of 03:40, July 14, 2023

Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.
Court U.S. Supreme Court
Citation 157 US 429 (1895)
Date decided April 8, 1895

Comments

Resources

Holding: Unapportioned income taxes on interest, dividends, and rents imposed by the Income Tax Act of 1894 are direct taxes, and are therefore unconstitutional.