Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Ford Motor Co. v. United States Et Al.

• 1971 • 405 U.S. 562 • Burger Court
In the case of Ford Motor Co. v. United States, 1971, the Supreme Court ruled against Ford Motor Company's claim that it was entitled to a tax refund from overpaid interest on loans taken out during World War II for defense production expansion. The court held that under Section 1481 of the Internal Revenue Code, companies were not allowed deductions for interest paid on indebtedness incurred or continued to purchase or carry obligations if the interest thereon is wholly exempt from taxation...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Burger Court
Term: 1971
Docket: 70-113
405 U.S. 562
92 S. Ct. 1142
31 L. Ed. 2d 492
1972 U.S. LEXIS 164
Argued: Nov 18, 1971

Ford Motor Co. v. United States Et Al.

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of Ford Motor Co. v. United States, 1971, the Supreme Court ruled against Ford Motor Company's claim that it was entitled to a tax refund from overpaid interest on loans taken out during World War II for defense production expansion. The court held that under Section 1481 of the Internal Revenue Code, companies were not allowed deductions for interest paid on indebtedness incurred or continued to purchase or carry obligations if the interest thereon is wholly exempt from taxation under this title. This meant that because Ford had borrowed money to buy government bonds whose interests were tax-exempted and then claimed deduction for those interests in its income taxes, it violated section 1481 which disallows such practice as double-dipping (benefiting twice). Therefore, any previous refunds given by mistake should be returned back to IRS.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Ford Motor Co. v. United States, the justice argued that Ford's actions did not constitute a violation of anti-trust laws as they were merely an attempt to maintain their competitive position in the market. The justice believed that there was no evidence showing any intent by Ford to monopolize or restrain trade and competition within the automobile industry. They also pointed out that many other companies had similar practices without facing legal consequences, suggesting inconsistency in enforcement of these laws. Furthermore, they contended that penalizing such behavior could discourage healthy competition and innovation among businesses which would ultimately harm consumers' interests more than it protects them.

Opinion written by Justice WODouglas
Decided: Mar 29, 1972
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcript
Argued: Oct 05, 2026
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms