STATE TAX COMMISSION OF UTAH V. PACIFIC STATE CAST IRON PIPE CO., 372 U. S. 605 (1963)
Subscribe to Cases that cite 372 U. S. 605
Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
USA Constitution Annotated
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Online Case Law
Cornell LII
FastCase $
Lexis $
LexisOne
Loislaw $
USSCPlus.com $
VersusLaw $
Link to the Case Preview: http://supreme.justia.com/us/372/605/
Link to the Full Text of Case: http://supreme.justia.com/us/372/605/case.html
U.S. Supreme Court
State Tax Commission of Utah v. Pacific State Cast Iron Pipe Co., 372 U.S. 605 (1963)
State Tax Commission of Utah v. Pacific State Cast Iron Pipe Co.
No. 178
Argued March 20, 1963
Decided April 1, 1963
372 U.S. 605
PER CURIAM.
Respondent, a Nevada corporation qualified to do business in Utah, manufactures castiron pipe and related items in Provo, Utah, and sells its products throughout the Western States. Prices set by respondent are for the goods delivered at a specific job site, and interstate delivery is usually made by common carrier or in respondent's own equipment. The sales here involved occurred in a different manner. In each case the material was manufactured to meet the specifications of specific outofstate jobs. The contract called for outofstate shipment, and respondent set a destination price which included the going common carrier freight charges between the two points involved. But delivery was made
and title passed to the purchaser at respondent's foundry in Provo. The purchaser then transported the pipe with its own equipment to the predetermined outofstate destination. The common carrier tariff was credited to the purchaser.
The Utah Tax Commission imposed upon respondent a sales tax deficiency covering these sales.
The Supreme Court of Utah reversed the Tax Commission, on the grounds that the certainty of interstate shipment made the imposition of the tax on these shipments unconstitutional under the Commerce clause. 13 Utah 2d 113, 369 P.2d 123. We reverse its judgment on the authority of International Harvester Co. v. Department of Treasury, 322 U. S. 340, 322 U. S. 345, which holds on facts close to those of this case that a State may levy and collect a sales tax, since the passage of title and delivery to the purchaser took place within the State.
Reversed.