Thiokol Corp. V. Department Of Treasury Thiokol Corp. V. Department Of Treasury

Thiokol Corp. V. Department Of Treasury

    • 0,99 €
    • 0,99 €

Publisher Description

Plaintiffs appeal an order dismissing their complaint in this ERISA action challenging various provisions of the Michigan Tax Code. On January 16, 1990, Thiokol Corporation, Morton International, Inc. and Bee Chemical Company ("plaintiffs"), all Michigan corporations, sued the Revenue Division of the Michigan Department of Treasury, Douglas B. Roberts, in his official capacity as Treasurer of the State of Michigan and Thomas M. Hoatlin, in his official capacity as Commissioner of Revenue of the State of Michigan ("defendants") in federal district court.*fn1 Under Michigan's Single Business Tax ("SBT"), contributions to employee benefit plans are taxed. Mich. Comp. Laws §§ 208.4(3), 208.9(5). In their complaint, the plaintiffs sought declaratory, injunctive and monetary relief. In count I, plaintiffs sought a declaration that these provisions of the SBT were invalid and preempted by section 514(a) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act ("ERISA"), 29 U.S.C. § 1144 (a). In count II, plaintiffs asked the court to enjoin the collection of taxes based on the payment by employers to employee welfare benefit plans and to prohibit defendants from refusing to honor their refund requests. In count III, plaintiffs requested that taxes that they had allegedly erroneously overpaid, be refunded with interest.

GENRE
Professional & Technical
RELEASED
1993
5 March
LANGUAGE
EN
English
LENGTH
18
Pages
PUBLISHER
LawApp Publishers
SIZE
68.3
KB

More Books by United States Court Of Appeals For The Sixth Circuit

United States v. Wesley United States v. Wesley
2005
Ross v. Wall Street Systems Ross v. Wall Street Systems
2005
[U] Higgins v. International Union [U] Higgins v. International Union
2005
Motorists Mutual Insurance Company v. Hammond Motorists Mutual Insurance Company v. Hammond
2004
In re Huffman In re Huffman
2004
Swix v. Daisy Manufacturing Co. Swix v. Daisy Manufacturing Co.
2004