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

Kraft General Foods, Inc. v. Iowa Department Of Revenue And Finance

• 1991 • 505 U.S. 71 • Rehnquist Court
In the 1991 case Kraft General Foods, Inc. v. Iowa Department of Revenue and Finance, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that an Iowa law violated the Commerce Clause by taxing a multinational corporation's domestic income more heavily than its foreign income. The state of Iowa had imposed a tax on Kraft’s worldwide net income but allowed deductions for dividends received from U.S.-based subsidiaries while denying such deductions for dividends received from foreign-based subsidiaries. This resulted...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 Rehnquist Court
Term: 1991
Docket: 90-1918
505 U.S. 71
112 S. Ct. 2365
120 L. Ed. 2d 59
1992 U.S. LEXIS 3685
Argued: Apr 22, 1992

Kraft General Foods, Inc. v. Iowa Department Of Revenue And Finance

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the 1991 case Kraft General Foods, Inc. v. Iowa Department of Revenue and Finance, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that an Iowa law violated the Commerce Clause by taxing a multinational corporation's domestic income more heavily than its foreign income. The state of Iowa had imposed a tax on Kraft’s worldwide net income but allowed deductions for dividends received from U.S.-based subsidiaries while denying such deductions for dividends received from foreign-based subsidiaries. This resulted in higher taxes on domestically-sourced dividend income compared to foreign-sourced dividend income which was deemed unconstitutional by the court as it discriminated against interstate commerce and favored foreign commerce over domestic commerce.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Kraft General Foods, Inc. v. Iowa Department of Revenue and Finance, Justice Scalia argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings on state taxation of foreign income. He contended that states should have the right to tax all income of their domestic corporations, including income from foreign subsidiaries. According to him, this is not a violation of the Foreign Commerce Clause as long as it does not result in multiple taxation or impede federal uniformity in international trade policy. The majority’s ruling would create an incentive for companies to invest overseas rather than domestically because they could avoid state taxes by doing so; he saw this as detrimental to U.S economy and unfair competition against local businesses which are subject to these taxes.

Opinion written by Justice JPStevens
Decided: Jun 18, 1992
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