# Amicus Curiae Brief — Itel Containers Int'l Corp. v. Huddleston

> Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more.

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40385013_0180%3A11

## Record

- **Collection:** Supreme Court brief
- **Document type:** Amicus Curiae Brief
- **Published:** January 1, 1993
- **Citation:** 507 U.S. 60

## Text

Supreme Court of the United States
October Term, 1991

.
ITEL CONTAINERS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION,
Petitioner,

JOE HUDDLESTON,
COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE OF TENNESSEE,

Respondent.

S

On Writ Of Certiorari To The
Supreme Court Of Tennessee
+

BRIEF AMICI CURIAE
OF
PACIFIC MERCHANT SHIPPING ASSOCIATION,
STEAMSHIP OPERATORS INTERMODAL COMMITTEE,
COUNCIL OF EUROPEAN AND JAPANESE
NATIONAL SHIPOWNERS’ ASSOCIATIONS
AND
AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF MERCHANT SHIPPING
IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER
e

R. Freperic FisHer
Counsel of Record
Barry J. LONDON
Lawrence N. MINcH
Littick & CHARLES
Two Embarcadero Center
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone (415) 984-8200

Attorneys for Amici Curiae

COCKLE LAW BRIEF PRINTING CO., (800) 225-6964
OR CALL COLLECT (402) 342-2831

3¢

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ee ee EE cbvbbdeedesccccccvescccsees i
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ..........cccsccccccceces iii
INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE .................... 1
i Sciscdhsetdeehswosewkets o0eseecsecues 4
ct ittceaneholsddecacenssédscchocsdeess 4
ences csshceseccevecsesvcees 6
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT....................... 9
EE ee 11

I. APPLICATION OF TENNESSEE’S SALES TAX
TO LEASES OF MARINE CONTAINERS
IMPERMISSIBLY BURDENS FOREIGN
EE cine Fadecencdccvapeccenn¢ncécoccs 11

A. Sales Taxes On Container Lease Hire Are
Subject to the Same Commerce Clause
Standards As Property Taxes on Carrier-
Se GID cece wcccsccccccccccess 11

B. Tennessee’s Sales Tax Fails A Critical
Threshold Test Because It is Not Geo-

graphically Apportioned................. 15
C. The Tennessee Tax Is Likely to Subject Con-
tainer Lease Hire to Multiple Taxation ..... 19

D. Permitting The Tennessee Tax To Stand
Will Provoke Adverse Foreign Reaction
and Preclude the United States From
Speaking With One Voice ............... 24

E. Lease Hire Paid by Ocean Carriers May
Not Be Subjected to Sales Tax Merely
Because the Containers Are Owned By an
American Company .............00000005 27

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued
Page

Il. THE TENNESSEE TAX CONFLICTS WITH
THE CUSTOMS CONVENTIONS ON
CONTAINERS. .......--00eeeeeeeee ee eeeeeees 28

CORICLRIBNOIE . ........o00svcceseccccnesenseeneneeee 30

iii

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

Page
Cases
Air France v. Saks, 470 U.S. 392 (1985)............... 29
American Trucking Ass‘ns v. Scheiner, 483 U.S. 286
TE CURSGCsER ees cessccesccaccccccccccs: 17
Choctaw Nation of Indians v. United States, 318 U.S.
PM EECESGSESSGCecesccccccsscececcccccess 29

Complete Auto Transit v. Brady, 430 U.S. 274 (1977) .12, 14

Department of Revenue v. Ass'n of Washington Steve-

doring Cos., 435 U.S. 734 (1978) ............. seen 18
Exxon Corp. v. Wisconsin Dep't of Revenue, 447 U.S.

ERG aidan daescccseccccccccsccess 21
Goldberg v. Sweet, 488 U.S. 252 (1989) ........... passim
Hays v. Pacific Mail S.S. Co., 58 U.S. (17 How.) 596

EER eea Sac encccinccccscccsecsccceces 12

].D. Adams Mfg. Co. v. Storen, 304 U.S. 307 (1938) .... 21

Japan Line Ltd. v. County of Los Angeles, 441 U.S.
ECP CCEUER Se esesscabcacccescccccecs passim

Louisiana Land & Exploration Co. v. Pilot Petroleum
Corp., 900 F.2d 816 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 111 S.
Tiere se esesacveseeccecccceses awe 15

McGoldrick v. Gulf Oil Corp., 309 U.S. 414 (1940)..... 15
Mobil Oil Corp. v. Commissioner of Taxes, 445 U.S.

EL ACCERCERSasedpecvesececccccccecs 21
Richfield Oil Corp. v. State Board of Education, 329
ee E aid adecedscscessecececsce 15, 24

Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. County of Los Angeles, 449
U.S. 1119 (1981), aff’g 85 Cal. App. 3d 763 (1978) .... 27

iv

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES - Continued

Page
Seatrain Terminals of California, Inc. v. County of
Alameda, 83 Cal. App. 3d 69 (1978) ...--.-----+++ 14
Star-Kist Foods, Inc. v. County of Los Angeles, 42 Cal.
3d 1 (1986), cert. denied, 480 U.S. 930 (1987)....... 27
Steamship Co. v. Portwardens, 73 U.S. (6 Wall.) 31 -
(DBGT) oo cccccccccccccccccsccccccccccccccsccovcees
United States Lines, Inc. v. State Board of Equaliza-
tion, 182 Cal. App. 3d 529 (1986) ......------++++: 14
United States v. Hvoslef, 237 U.S. 1 (1915)......-.---. 12
Wardair Canada, Inc. v. Florida Dep't of Revenue,
477 US. 1 (1906)... 2c cccccccccccccceess 7, 18, 19, 23
Williams v. Vermont, 472 U.S. 14 (1985) .........--+:- 21

Xerox Corp. v. County of Harris, 459 U.S. 145 (1982) .... 15

CONSTITUTION
Commerce Clause, art. I, § 8, cl. 3........+--+-- passim
Export/Import Clause, art. I, § 10, cl. 2.. 11, 12, 14, 15
Tonnage Duty Clause, art. I, § 10, cl. 3......--.-+-- 12
Supremacy Clause, art. VI, cl. 2.......--++e+eeeseeee: 3

STATUTES, TREATIES AND REGULATIONS

19 CER © 1Alale) (IMP... ... 5 6c. cecccereceeceess 4
I ag icsicssecccsssvossccdess 4
ican ceicvescesscviensencansses 4
46 C.F.R. § 580.5(d)(21) (1991)........00ceeee cere eens 6
Oe CHO I II in. onc sia ced ciinesici scons

Vv

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES - Continued

Se Re I UN an ook ck ccdvadcccccccccence 6
Cal. Rev. & Tax Code § 6006.1 (West 1987). ..18, 19, 22
Cal. Rev. & Tax Code § 6203 (West Supp. 1992)...1, 22
Cal. Rev. & Tax Code § 6406 (West 1987) ........... 22

Customs Convention on Containers, Dec. 2, 1972
[1985], 988 U.N.T.S. 43 (“1972 Convention”)... passim

Customs Convention on Containers, May 18, 1956
[1969], 20 U.S.T. 301 (“1956 Convention”) ..... passim

Tenn. Code Ann. § 67-6-203 (Supp.1991)....... 7, 20, 22
Tenn. Code Ann. § 67-6-204 (1989)................ 5, 22
Tenn. Code Ann. § 67-6-321 (1989)................... 4
Tenn. Code Ann. § 67-6-502 (1989)................... 1
Tenn. Code Ann. § 67-6-507 (Supp. 1991)............ 22
Wrane. Diet. © PFDA) CGGD. . 5... cc cccecccvcccccct 18
MIsCELLANEOUS

T. F. Barnett, Container Care and Feeding, Pacific :

Maritime Magazine, Oct. 1986, at 12............. 3, 6
R.F. Gibney, Containerization Report, Seatrade,

Re hit ewes ccdecsescnscnevevesss 3, 6
G. Muller, Intermodal Freight Transportation (2d ed.

PSD Ait eth abn gunn phiddecdetetcs

CONCLUSION

Amici respectfully urge the Court to hold the Tennessee
tax to be contrary to the Constitution of the United States.

Respectively submitted,

R. Freperic FisHer
Counsel of Record
Barry J. LONDON
LawReNce N. MINCcH
Lituck & CHARLES
Two Embarcadero Center
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone (415) 984-8200

Attorneys for Amici Curiae

NT an [Oe ae ee ee eR PS ae ee ee ee ee ’

Pe Pe he ee

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40385013_0180%3A11. Public record. Not legal advice.