In the 1943 case International Harvester Co. et al. v. Department of Treasury et al., the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of International Harvester, a manufacturer and distributor of agricultural machinery and vehicles. The company had challenged Indiana's gross income tax law, arguing that it violated the Commerce Clause by taxing interstate commerce activities disproportionately to intrastate ones. The court agreed with this argument, finding that while states have some power to tax businesses operating within their borders, they cannot do so in a way that discriminates against or burdens interstate commerce excessively compared to local business operations.

The dissenting opinion in the case of International Harvester Co. et al. v. Department of Treasury et al., 1943, argued that the majority's decision was a departure from established principles regarding interstate commerce and taxation by states. The dissenters believed that Indiana's use tax, which taxed goods purchased out-of-state for use within Indiana, violated the Commerce Clause because it discriminated against interstate commerce by imposing a heavier burden on it than on intrastate commerce. They contended that this tax created an unfair advantage for local businesses over their out-of-state competitors and thus interfered with free trade among states as envisioned by the framers of Constitution.