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

Van Allen v. The Assessors

1865 • 70 U.S. 573 • Chase Court
Van Allen v. The Assessors was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court determined that state governments have no authority to tax federal bonds held by citizens of their respective states. In this case, Van Allen had purchased U.S. government bonds and paid taxes on them to the State of New York, but he argued that since these were federal securities, they should not be subject to taxation by any state or local government body. The Supreme Court agreed with him and ruled that it...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 Chase Court
Term: 1865
70 U.S. 573
18 L. Ed. 229
1865 U.S. LEXIS 741
Argued: Jan 31, 1866

Van Allen v. The Assessors

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

Van Allen v. The Assessors was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court determined that state governments have no authority to tax federal bonds held by citizens of their respective states. In this case, Van Allen had purchased U.S. government bonds and paid taxes on them to the State of New York, but he argued that since these were federal securities, they should not be subject to taxation by any state or local government body. The Supreme Court agreed with him and ruled that it is unconstitutional for a state or local government entity to impose taxes on federally issued securities owned by its citizens as such an act would interfere with Congress’s power over national finances and commerce under Article I Section 8 Clause 1 of the Constitution (the “Necessary & Proper Clause”). This ruling established important precedent regarding how states can interact with federal financial instruments and has been cited in numerous cases since then involving similar issues related to taxation of federally-issued securities owned by individuals within those states

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In Van Allen v. The Assessors, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a state tax on income derived from federal bonds was unconstitutional. Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion, arguing that Congress had exclusive authority over taxation of federal securities and that states could not interfere with this power by imposing taxes on them. He argued that such an interference would be in direct violation of Article I Section 8 Clause 1 of the Constitution which grants Congress exclusive power to lay and collect taxes for any purpose whatsoever. Furthermore, he noted that if states were allowed to impose their own taxes on these securities it would create confusion as different rules may apply in each state making it difficult for investors who hold these securities across multiple jurisdictions. As such, Justice Field concluded that allowing states to impose their own taxes on federally issued bonds is unconstitutional and should be struck down accordingly

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