![](https://d3ilqtpdwi981i.cloudfront.net/xu6OP0wE2e3VQUt4A0uCvyB3jYM=/0x19:1653x2159/425x550/smart/https://bepress-attached-resources.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/fb/fc/fa/fbfcfaf2-b59f-4db4-b650-5b9378b1bfdd/5.jpg)
Article
Cuno v. DaimlerChrysler: A Critique
State Tax Notes
(2004)
Abstract
Edward A. Zelinsky, Cardozo University, criticizes the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in Cuno v. DaimlerChrysler Inc., in which the court ruled that Ohio's investment tax credit violated the U.S. Constitution's Commerce Clause. Zelinsky says the dormant Commerce Clause concept of nondiscrimination is overbroad and undefinable and should be abandoned. He hopes this decision will give the U.S. Supreme Court an opportunity to reassess the concept.
Disciplines
Publication Date
October 4, 2004
Citation Information
Edward A. Zelinsky. "Cuno v. DaimlerChrysler: A Critique" State Tax Notes Vol. 34 (2004) p. 37 Available at: http://works.bepress.com/edward-zelinsky/272/