Complete Auto test (Wisconsin) · Go Syfert
← Wisconsin issues

Complete Auto test in Wisconsin

5 Wisconsin opinions name it 2 courts 1986–2006 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Wisconsin courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (2)

CaseFollowedCited
Trinova Corp. v. Michigan Department of Treasurygreen
scotus · 1991 · cited in 1 Wisconsin opinions naming this issue, 1991–1991
2 sentences

1991In Trinova Corp. v. Michigan Dept. of Treasury, — U.S. —, 111 S. Ct. 818 (1991), the Supreme Court stated that the four element Commerce Clause test encompasses the Due Process requirements: The Complete Auto test, while responsive to Commerce Clause dictates, encompasses as well the Due Process requirement that there be "a 'minimal connection' between the interstate activities and that taxing State, and a rational relationship between the income attributed to the State and the intrastate values of the enterprise." Trinova, — U.S. —, 111 S. Ct. at 828 (citations omitted).

1991In Trinova Corp. v. Michigan Dept. of Treasury, — U.S. —, 111 S. Ct. 818 (1991), the Supreme Court stated that the four element Commerce Clause test encompasses the Due Process requirements: The Complete Auto test, while responsive to Commerce Clause dictates, encompasses as well the Due Process requirement that there be "a 'minimal connection' between the interstate activities and that taxing State, and a rational relationship between the income attributed to the State and the intrastate values of the enterprise." Trinova, — U.S. —, 111 S. Ct. at 828 (citations omitted).

11
Northwestern States Portland Cement Co. v. Minnesotagreen
scotus · 1959 · cited in 1 Wisconsin opinions naming this issue, 1986–1986
2 sentences

1986No state "may 'impose a tax which discriminates against interstate commerce ... by providing a direct commercial advantage to local business.'" Boston Stock Exchange, 429 U.S. at 329 (quoting Northwestern States Portland Cement Co. v. Minnesota, 358 U.S. 450, 458 (1959)).

1986No state "may `impose a tax which discriminates against interstate commerce . . . by providing a direct commercial advantage to local business.'" Boston stock Exchange, 429 U.S. at 329 (quoting Northwestern States Portland Cement Co. v. Minnesota, 358 U.S. 450, 458 (1959)).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Wisconsin. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (6)

CaseCitedYears
Boston Stock Exchange v. State Tax Commission green
scotus · 1977
2 sentences

2006Under the test established in Complete Auto Transit, Inc. v. Brady, 430 U.S. 274 , 97 S.Ct. 1076 , 51 L.Ed.2d 326 (1977), a state tax is permissible *306 under the implied limitations of the Commerce Clause if (1) there is a substantial nexus between the taxed activity and the taxing State; (2) the tax is fairly apportioned; (3) the tax does not discriminate against interstate commerce; and (4) the tax is fairly related to the services provided by the State. [34] The third elementโ€”the tax does not discriminate against interstate commerce, the test in general negative Commerce Clause jurispru

2006Under the test established in Complete Auto Transit, Inc. v. Brady, 430 U.S. 274 , 97 S.Ct. 1076 , 51 L.Ed.2d 326 (1977), a state tax is permissible *306 under the implied limitations of the Commerce Clause if (1) there is a substantial nexus between the taxed activity and the taxing State; (2) the tax is fairly apportioned; (3) the tax does not discriminate against interstate commerce; and (4) the tax is fairly related to the services provided by the State. [34] The third elementโ€”the tax does not discriminate against interstate commerce, the test in general negative Commerce Clause jurispru

21986–2006
Complete Auto Transit, Inc. v. Brady green
scotus · 1977
2 sentences

2006Under the test established in Complete Auto Transit, Inc. v. Brady, 430 U.S. 274 (1977), a state tax is permissible under the implied limitations of the Commerce Clause if (1) there is a substantial nexus between the taxed activity and the taxing State; (2) the tax is fairly apportioned; (3) the tax does not discriminate against interstate commerce; and (4) the tax is fairly related to the services provided by the State. 34 The third element — the tax does not discriminate against interstate commerce, the test in general negative Commerce Clause jurisprudence — is important in the instant case

2006Under the test established in Complete Auto Transit, Inc. v. Brady, 430 U.S. 274 , 97 S.Ct. 1076 , 51 L.Ed.2d 326 (1977), a state tax is permissible *306 under the implied limitations of the Commerce Clause if (1) there is a substantial nexus between the taxed activity and the taxing State; (2) the tax is fairly apportioned; (3) the tax does not discriminate against interstate commerce; and (4) the tax is fairly related to the services provided by the State. [34] The third elementโ€”the tax does not discriminate against interstate commerce, the test in general negative Commerce Clause jurispru

12006–2006
Central Greyhound Lines, Inc. v. Mealey green
scotus · 1948
2 sentences

1997Oklahoma Tax Comm'n v. Jefferson Lines, Inc., 115 S. Ct. 1331 (1995) (distinguishing Central Greyhound, 334 U.S. 653 ). ¶ 51.

1997Oklahoma Tax Comm'n v. Jefferson Lines, Inc., 115 S. Ct. 1331 (1995) (distinguishing Central Greyhound, 334 U.S. 653 ). ¶ 51.

11997–1997
Oklahoma Tax Commission v. Jefferson Lines, Inc. red
scotus · 1995
2 sentences

1997Oklahoma Tax Comm'n v. Jefferson Lines, Inc., 115 S. Ct. 1331 (1995) (distinguishing Central Greyhound, 334 U.S. 653 ). ¶ 51.

1997Oklahoma Tax Comm'n v. Jefferson Lines, Inc., 115 S. Ct. 1331 (1995) (distinguishing Central Greyhound, 334 U.S. 653 ). ¶ 51.

11997–1997
American Trucking Assns., Inc. v. Scheiner green
scotus · 1987
1 sentence

1996Id.

11996–1996
Consolidated Freightways Corp. v. Wisconsin Department of Revenue neutral
wisctapp · 1990
2 sentences

1991By the Court. — The decision of the court of appeals is reversed. 1 Consolidated Freightways Corp. v. DOR, 157 Wis. 2d 65 , 458 N.W.2d 550 (Ct. App. 1990). 2 Tax 2.47 Apportionment of net business income of interstate motor carriers of property. *769 (s. 71.07(2)(e), Stats.) The apportionable income of an interstate motor carrier of property, doing business in Wisconsin, shall be apportioned to Wisconsin, on the basis of the arithmetical average of the following 2 ratios: (a) The ratio of the gross receipts from carriage of property first acquired for carriage in Wisconsin to the total gross r

1991By the Court. — The decision of the court of appeals is reversed. 1 Consolidated Freightways Corp. v. DOR, 157 Wis. 2d 65 , 458 N.W.2d 550 (Ct. App. 1990). 2 Tax 2.47 Apportionment of net business income of interstate motor carriers of property. *769 (s. 71.07(2)(e), Stats.) The apportionable income of an interstate motor carrier of property, doing business in Wisconsin, shall be apportioned to Wisconsin, on the basis of the arithmetical average of the following 2 ratios: (a) The ratio of the gross receipts from carriage of property first acquired for carriage in Wisconsin to the total gross r

11991–1991

Where else courts name it

TX 21 (1995–2020) IL 19 (1987–2017) PA 11 (1994–2023) NJ 8 (1989–2021) MI 8 (1992–2020) OR 8 (2006–2025) NY 6 (1993–2024) OK 5 (1989–2014) WI 5 (1986–2006) NC 5 (2004–2022) MS 5 (2003–2018) IN 5 (1992–2015) MN 4 (1997–2018) WV 4 (1981–2016) CO 4 (1989–1999) WY 3 (2011–2014) LA 3 (2001–2018) AL 3 (1999–2006) KS 3 (2000–2013) WA 3 (1998–2021) MA 2 (2009–2016) OH 2 (2016–2019) AR 2 (1992–2002) MD 2 (1984–2013) TN 2 (1999–2010) FL 2 (1984–2016) DC 2 (1994–2010) UT 2 (1991–2019) AZ 2 (2000–2002) VT 2 (1984–1986) AK 2 (2008–2022) CA 2 (1999–2008) NV 2 (1985–1985)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check