In the case of Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Gillette Motor Transport, Inc., 1959, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Gillette Motor Transport. The dispute revolved around whether or not certain expenses incurred by a trucking company could be considered "ordinary and necessary" business expenses under section 23(a)(1)(A) of the Internal Revenue Code, thereby making them tax deductible. These costs were related to meals and lodging for drivers during their long-haul trips across state lines. The court held that these expenditures were indeed ordinary and necessary as they are common in this industry due to federal regulations requiring rest periods for drivers after specific hours on duty. Therefore, such costs should be allowed as deductions from gross income when calculating taxable income.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Gillette Motor Transport, Inc., argued that the majority had misinterpreted the tax code and its legislative history. They believed that Congress intended to allow businesses to deduct expenses related to maintaining their employees' health and welfare, including costs associated with providing rest periods for truck drivers. The dissenters contended that these breaks were not merely a convenience for workers but an essential part of ensuring their safety and productivity, which directly benefited employers by reducing accidents and improving efficiency. Therefore, they should be considered ordinary business expenses eligible for deduction under section 162(a) of the Internal Revenue Code. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's view on what constitutes "compensation" arguing it was too narrow as it failed to consider indirect benefits companies receive from investing in employee well-being.