The Supreme Court announced today that it has granted certiorari in Cuno v. DaimlerChrysler, Inc., 386 F.3d 738 (6th Cir. 2004), which held that Ohio’s investment tax credit is unconstitutional because it grants preferential tax treatment to companies to expand within the state.
The Supreme Court docket numbers are 04-1407, 04-1704, 04-1724. See press coverage in AP and Reuters. For prior TaxProf Blog coverage, see here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.
Update I: For the relationship of this case to Anna Nicole Smith, see here.
Update II: For the story on how we scooped the MSM on this, see here.
6 responses to “Supreme Court Grants Certiorari in Cuno v. DaimlerChrysler”
Blog Round-up – Tuesday, September 27th
Here is Rick Hasen on the Court’s decision this morning to grant cert in two campaign finance cases. Election Law Blog discusses the cases further here. The First Amendment Center has posted this article by Tony Mauro on the First…
Blog Round-up – Tuesday, September 27th
Here is Rick Hasen on the Court’s decision this morning to grant cert in two campaign finance cases. Election Law Blog discusses the cases further here. The First Amendment Center has posted this article by Tony Mauro on the First…
SUPREME COURT TO HEAR CUNO
The U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear the Cuno case on state tax incentives. The Sixth Circuit decision disallowed state…
SUPREME COURT TO HEAR CUNO
The U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear the Cuno case on state tax incentives. The Sixth Circuit decision disallowed state…
The Cuno decision
The Supreme Court has granted cert in Cuno v. DaimlerChrysler, which held that Ohio’s investment tax credit encouraging firms to stay in Ohio violated the Commerce Clause. Here’s the TaxProf discussion, with links to previous posts. As I argue in
The Cuno decision
The Supreme Court has granted cert in Cuno v. DaimlerChrysler, which held that Ohio’s investment tax credit encouraging firms to stay in Ohio violated the Commerce Clause. Here’s the TaxProf discussion, with links to previous posts. As I argue in