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

Wiloil Corporation v. Pennsylvania

• 1934 • 294 U.S. 169 • Hughes Court
In the 1934 case of Wiloil Corporation v. Pennsylvania, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of Pennsylvania, upholding its right to tax a foreign corporation for conducting business within state borders. The Wiloil Corporation was incorporated in Delaware but had an office and conducted operations in Pennsylvania where it bought and sold oil leases and royalties. The company argued that these transactions were interstate commerce, which would make them exempt from state taxation under federal...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 Hughes Court
Term: 1934
Docket: 439
294 U.S. 169
55 S. Ct. 358
79 L. Ed. 838
1935 U.S. LEXIS 44
Argued: Jan 14, 1935

Wiloil Corporation v. Pennsylvania

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the 1934 case of Wiloil Corporation v. Pennsylvania, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of Pennsylvania, upholding its right to tax a foreign corporation for conducting business within state borders. The Wiloil Corporation was incorporated in Delaware but had an office and conducted operations in Pennsylvania where it bought and sold oil leases and royalties. The company argued that these transactions were interstate commerce, which would make them exempt from state taxation under federal law at that time. However, the court disagreed with this argument stating that while buying and selling oil leases could be considered as part of interstate commerce when done across state lines; maintaining an office for such transactions within a single state constituted doing business there - thus subjecting it to local taxes even if all sales were made out-of-state or abroad. The ruling clarified how states can levy taxes on corporations operating within their jurisdiction regardless of whether they are domestic or foreign entities.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Wiloil Corporation v. Pennsylvania, the justice argued that the state of Pennsylvania had no right to impose a tax on an out-of-state corporation's gross receipts from interstate commerce. The justice contended that such taxation was in direct violation of the Commerce Clause of the U.S Constitution which gives Congress exclusive power over interstate commerce. They believed this clause prohibits states from imposing taxes or regulations that would interfere with or discriminate against interstate commerce, and thus found it unconstitutional for Pennsylvania to levy a tax on Wiloil Corporation's gross receipts derived entirely from its operations outside of Pennsylvania. Furthermore, they disagreed with majority’s view about due process not being violated as they felt taxing income generated by activities conducted wholly beyond a state’s borders infringes upon rights guaranteed under Due Process Clause.

Opinion written by Justice PButler
Decided: Feb 04, 1935
PDF viewer is not available.
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