U.S. Code » Title 15 » Chapter CHAPTER 10B— STATE TAXATION OF INCOME FROM INTERSTATE COMMERCE › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER II— DISCRIMINATORY TAXES

15 U.S.C. § 391

Tax on or with respect to generation or transmission of electricity

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 15 CasesGoogle Scholar

No State, or political subdivision thereof, may impose or assess a tax on or with respect to the generation or transmission of electricity which discriminates against out-of-State manufacturers, producers, wholesalers, retailers, or consumers of that electricity. For purposes of this section a tax is discriminatory if it results, either directly or indirectly, in a greater tax burden on electricity which is generated and transmitted in interstate commerce than on electricity which is generated and transmitted in intrastate commerce.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases, 1978–2012 · leading case: Duquesne Light Co. v. State Tax Dept., 327 S.E.2d 683 (W. Va. 1984).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Duquesne Light Co. v. State Tax Dept., 327 S.E.2d 683 (W. Va. 1984). · cites it 22× “2d 106 (1979), in which the United States Supreme Court struck down a New Mexico utility tax because it violated Section 2121(a) of the Tax Reform Act of 1976, 15 U.S.C. § 391 (1976). We disagree and reverse.”
Arizona Pub. Serv. Co. v. Snead, 441 U.S. 141 (1979). · cites it 3× “1914 , codified at 15 U. S. C. § 391 , provides: "No State, or political subdivision thereof, may impose or assess a tax on or with respect to the generation or transmission of electricity which discriminates against out-of-State manufacturers, producers, wholesalers, retailers,…”
Pac. Power & Light Co. v. Montana Dep't of Revenue, 773 P.2d 1176 (Mont. 1989). · cites it 4× “The first is § 2121(a) of the Tax Reform Act of 1976, 15 U.S.C. § 391 (Anti-Discrimination Act) (1982).”
W. Air Lines, Inc. v. Hughes Cnty., 372 N.W.2d 106 (S.D. 1985). · cites it 2× “Also, the federal statute, *110 15 U.S.C. § 391 , which preempts the right of the state to tax electrical generation and transmission, is entirely different than the federal statutes under consideration herein.”
The Kansas City S. Ry. Co., Cross v. Shirley McNamara Sec'y of the Dept. Of Revenue & Taxation, State of Louisiana, Cross-Appellee, 817 F.2d 368 (5th Cir. 1987). “2d 106 (1979) (discriminatory electricity taxes forbidden by 15 U.S.C. § 391 ), General American Transportation Corp.”
Tennessee v. Louisville & Nashville R.R., 478 F. Supp. 199 (M.D. Tenn. 1979). “The effect of the tax was to discriminate against out-of-state consumers in violation of the Tax Reform Act of 1976, 15 U.S.C. § 391 . The Supreme Court, in response to New Mexico’s contention that the Tax Reform Act exceeded the permissible bounds of congressional action under…”
City of Seattle I v. Dept. of Rev., 20 Or. Tax 408 (Or. T.C. 2011). · cites it 2× “495 adopted in violation of Article IV, section 4 of the Oregon Constitution (the Origination Clause)? Cite as 20 OTR 408 (2011) 411 (2) Does taxation of taxpayers’ property by Oregon vio- late Article I, section 8, clause 3 of the United States Constitution (the Commerce…”
CSX Transp., Inc. v. Alabama Dep't of Revenue, 892 F. Supp. 2d 1300 (N.D. Ala. 2012). “1629 (citing 15 U.S.C. § 391 ). This federal law prohibited states from “assessfing] a tax on or with respect to the generation or transmission of electricity which discriminates against out-of-State manufacturers, producers, wholesalers, retailers, or consumers of that…”
Alabama Great S. R.R. Co. v. Eagerton, 541 F. Supp. 1084 (M.D. Ala. 1982). “1981), the Eighth Circuit ruled that the entire tax structure of the State of North Dakota should not be considered in determining whether that State violated § 11503(b)(4) by including personal property and trade fixtures in the assessed value of railroad property when the…”
City of Burbank v. Nevada, 658 F.2d 708 (9th Cir. 1981). “consumers of that electricity. In enacting § 391, Congress did not intend to affect § 1341’s jurisdictional limitation.”
Arizona Pub. Serv. Co. v. O'CHESKY, 576 P.2d 291 (N.M. 1978). “Section 2121(a) of that Act, 15 U.S.C. § 391 (1976), provides: No State, or political subdivision thereof, may impose or assess a tax on or with respect to the generation or transmission of electricity which discriminates against out-of-State manufacturers, producers,…”
Duquesne Light Co. v. State Tax Dep't, 350 S.E.2d 754 (W. Va. 1986). · cites it 5× “In that proceeding we addressed only the question of whether the tax imposed by Code 11-13-2m [1978] violates 15 U.S.C. § 391 , as interpreted by the Supreme Court in Arizona Public Service Company v.”
Show all 13 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.