In Trinova Corporation v. Michigan Department of Treasury, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1990 that a state's method for taxing an out-of-state corporation did not violate the Due Process Clause or Commerce Clause of the Constitution. The case involved Trinova Corporation, an Ohio-based company with operations in multiple states including Michigan. The State of Michigan taxed Trinova based on a formula considering property, payroll and sales within its borders relative to nationwide totals - known as apportionment formula taxation. Trinova argued this was unconstitutional because it resulted in taxes disproportionate to their activities conducted within Michigan. The court upheld the constitutionality of such tax schemes provided they are fairly related to services provided by the state and do not discriminate against interstate commerce; thus ruling in favor of Michigan Department Of Treasury.

In the dissenting opinion for Trinova Corporation v. Michigan Department of Treasury, Justice O'Connor argued that the tax imposed by Michigan was unconstitutional because it violated both the Due Process and Commerce Clauses. She contended that a state cannot tax value earned outside its borders, which she believed Michigan's Single Business Tax did in this case. The justice criticized the majority's decision to uphold such a tax without requiring clear evidence that it fairly apportioned income based on where economic activity occurred. Furthermore, she expressed concern about potential double taxation if other states adopted similar taxes and used different formulas to calculate them.