This HTML5 document contains 167 embedded RDF statements represented using HTML+Microdata notation.

The embedded RDF content will be recognized by any processor of HTML5 Microdata.

Namespace Prefixes

PrefixIRI
dctermshttp://purl.org/dc/terms/
n18https://scholar.google.com/
yago-reshttp://yago-knowledge.org/resource/
dbohttp://dbpedia.org/ontology/
n26http://cdn.loc.gov/service/ll/usrep/usrep157/usrep157429/
n29http://dbpedia.org/resource/File:
foafhttp://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/
n24https://global.dbpedia.org/id/
umbel-rchttp://umbel.org/umbel/rc/
n13https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/157/429/
yagohttp://dbpedia.org/class/yago/
n20https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/94174/pollock-v-farmers-loan-trust-co/
dbthttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Template:
rdfshttp://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#
freebasehttp://rdf.freebase.com/ns/
dbpedia-simplehttp://simple.dbpedia.org/resource/
n14http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:FilePath/
rdfhttp://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#
n19https://openjurist.org/157/us/
owlhttp://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#
n21https://archive.org/details/
wikipedia-enhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
dbchttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Category:
n5https://www.oyez.org/cases/1850-1900/
dbphttp://dbpedia.org/property/
provhttp://www.w3.org/ns/prov#
xsdhhttp://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#
wikidatahttp://www.wikidata.org/entity/
dbrhttp://dbpedia.org/resource/
n6https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/157/

Statements

Subject Item
dbr:Pollock_v._Farmers'_Loan_&_Trust_Co.
rdf:type
yago:Action100037396 yago:Case107308889 owl:Thing yago:YagoPermanentlyLocatedEntity yago:WikicatUnitedStatesSupremeCourtCases yago:Event100029378 dbo:Case yago:Happening107283608 yago:Abstraction100002137 yago:WikicatOverruledUnitedStatesSupremeCourtDecisions dbo:LegalCase yago:Choice100161243 dbo:UnitOfWork yago:Decision100162632 yago:WikicatAbrogatedUnitedStatesSupremeCourtDecisions wikidata:Q2334719 yago:PsychologicalFeature100023100 umbel-rc:Event yago:Act100030358 dbo:SupremeCourtOfTheUnitedStatesCase
rdfs:label
Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.
rdfs:comment
Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Company, 157 U.S. 429 (1895), affirmed on rehearing, 158 U.S. 601 (1895), was a landmark case of the Supreme Court of the United States. In a 5-to-4 decision, the Supreme Court struck down the income tax imposed by the Wilson–Gorman Tariff Act for being an unapportioned direct tax. The decision was superseded in 1913 by the Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which allows Congress to levy income taxes without apportioning them among the states.
rdfs:seeAlso
dbr:Presidencies_of_Grover_Cleveland dbr:History_of_taxation dbr:The_United_States
foaf:name
Charles Pollock v. Farmers' Loan and Trust Company
foaf:depiction
n14:Justices_of_the_Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States,_October_1894.jpg
dcterms:subject
dbc:Overruled_United_States_Supreme_Court_decisions dbc:Taxing_and_Spending_Clause_case_law dbc:1895_in_United_States_case_law dbc:Abrogated_United_States_Supreme_Court_decisions dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases dbc:United_States_federal_income_tax dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_of_the_Fuller_Court dbc:United_States_Constitution_Article_One_case_law
dbo:wikiPageID
171240
dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
1116361828
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
dbc:Overruled_United_States_Supreme_Court_decisions dbr:Interest dbr:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States dbr:United_States_Democratic_Party dbr:Revenue_Act_of_1861 dbr:Revenue_Act_of_1913 dbr:United_States_Department_of_the_Treasury dbr:Sixteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution dbr:Estate_tax_in_the_United_States dbr:Massachusetts dbr:Municipal_bond dbr:United_States_House_of_Representatives dbr:Chief_Justice_of_the_United_States dbr:Tariffs_in_United_States_history dbr:Gift_tax_in_the_United_States dbr:Springer_v._United_States dbr:Income_tax dbr:Democratic_Party_(United_States) dbr:Socialism dbr:Unconstitutional dbr:United_States_v._E._C._Knight_Co. dbr:Brushaber_v._Union_Pacific_Railroad dbr:William_Jennings_Bryan dbc:Taxing_and_Spending_Clause_case_law dbr:South_Carolina_v._Baker dbr:Nebraska dbr:Bowers_v._Kerbaugh-Empire_Co. dbr:American_Civil_War dbr:Henry_Billings_Brown dbr:1892_United_States_elections dbr:Melville_Fuller dbr:Harvard_Law_Review dbc:Abrogated_United_States_Supreme_Court_decisions dbr:Grover_Cleveland dbr:Corporate_tax_in_the_United_States dbr:Lawyers'_Edition dbc:1895_in_United_States_case_law dbr:Landmark_case dbr:Populism dbr:Benton_McMillin dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases dbr:Norris_Brown dbr:Wilson–Gorman_Tariff_Act dbr:Socialist_Labor_Party_of_America dbr:LexisNexis dbr:Constitution_of_the_United_States dbr:Income_tax_in_the_United_States dbr:Income_taxes dbc:United_States_federal_income_tax dbr:United_States_Constitution dbr:Populist_Party_(United_States) dbr:Hylton_v._United_States dbr:Direct_tax dbr:Howell_Edmunds_Jackson dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_of_the_Fuller_Court dbr:John_Marshall_Harlan dbr:Joseph_Hodges_Choate dbc:United_States_Constitution_Article_One_case_law dbr:Stanton_v._Baltic_Mining_Co. dbr:Farmers'_Loan_&_Trust_Company dbr:Wall_Street dbr:Income_inequality n29:Justices_of_the_Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States,_October_1894.jpg dbr:Majority_opinion dbr:Edward_Douglass_White
dbo:wikiPageExternalLink
n5:157us429 n6:429 n18:scholar_case%3Fcase=7292056596996651119 n19:429 n20: n21:greattaxwars00weis n26:usrep157429.pdf n13:case.html
owl:sameAs
yago-res:Pollock_v._Farmers'_Loan_&_Trust_Co. freebase:m.016_ft n24:4tMrQ dbpedia-simple:Pollock_v._Farmers'_Loan_&_Trust_Co wikidata:Q7225714
dbp:superseded
dbr:Sixteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
dbt:Further dbt:ISBN dbt:USArticleI dbt:See_also dbt:Short_description dbt:Main dbt:Wikisource-inline dbt:Cite_book dbt:Cite_journal dbt:Inflation dbt:Inflation-fn dbt:Cn dbt:Infobox_SCOTUS_case dbt:Ussc dbt:Caselaw_source dbt:Reflist dbt:US_Constitutional_Tax_Law dbt:US16thAmendment
dbo:thumbnail
n14:Justices_of_the_Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States,_October_1894.jpg?width=300
dbp:dissent
Harlan Brown Jackson White
dbp:joindissent
Harlan
dbp:joinmajority
Field, Gray, Brewer, Shiras
dbp:oyez
n5:157us429
dbp:parallelcitations
15
dbp:prior
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York
dbp:uspage
429
dbp:usvol
157
dbp:arguedate
0001-03-07
dbp:argueyear
1895
dbp:case
Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Company,
dbp:courtlistener
n20:
dbp:decidedate
0001-04-08
dbp:decideyear
1895
dbp:fullname
Charles Pollock v. Farmers' Loan and Trust Company
dbp:holding
The unapportioned income taxes on interest, dividends and rents imposed by the Income Tax Act of 1894 were, in effect, direct taxes, and were unconstitutional because they violated the rule that direct taxes be apportioned.
dbp:justia
n13:case.html
dbp:litigants
Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.
dbp:majority
Fuller
dbp:loc
n26:usrep157429.pdf
dbo:abstract
Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Company, 157 U.S. 429 (1895), affirmed on rehearing, 158 U.S. 601 (1895), was a landmark case of the Supreme Court of the United States. In a 5-to-4 decision, the Supreme Court struck down the income tax imposed by the Wilson–Gorman Tariff Act for being an unapportioned direct tax. The decision was superseded in 1913 by the Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which allows Congress to levy income taxes without apportioning them among the states. Congress had previously introduced an income tax during the American Civil War, but this tax had been repealed in 1872. In 1894, Congress passed the Wilson-Gorman Tariff Act, which lowered tariff rates and made up for some of the lost revenue by introducing taxes on income, corporate profits, gifts, and inheritances. Chief Justice Melville Fuller's majority opinion in Pollock held that a federal tax on income derived from property was unconstitutional when it was not apportioned among the states according to representation in the House of Representatives. Fuller also held that federal taxation of interest earned on certain state bonds violated the doctrine of intergovernmental tax immunity. In one dissent, Associate Justice Henry Billings Brown wrote that the majority opinion "involves nothing less than the surrender of the taxing power to the moneyed class." The Court's decision in Pollock was unpopular, but it effectively prevented Congress from implementing another income tax over the next two decades since the apportionment requirements were widely regarded as unworkable. The ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment essentially overturned the key holding in Pollock, and Congress established a new federal income tax in the Revenue Act of 1913. The Court's holding regarding the taxation of interest income on certain bonds was later overruled in the 1988 case of South Carolina v. Baker.
dbp:cornell
n6:429
dbp:googlescholar
n18:scholar_case%3Fcase=7292056596996651119
dbp:openjurist
n19:429
dbp:overruled
South Carolina v. Baker,
prov:wasDerivedFrom
wikipedia-en:Pollock_v._Farmers'_Loan_&_Trust_Co.?oldid=1116361828&ns=0
dbo:wikiPageLength
22462
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
wikipedia-en:Pollock_v._Farmers'_Loan_&_Trust_Co.