Youngstown Sheet & Tube Company v. Bowers (1958)
- Docket
- 9
- Decided
- 1958-01-01
- Category
- General
Summary
Question: Did the manufacturers act on the imported supplies significantly enough to change their status from imports to taxable property? Conclusion: Yes. In a 6-2 decision, Justice Charles E. Whittaker wrote the majority opinion affirming the lower courts. The Supreme Court held that because the imported goods became supplies needed for manufacturing, the goods changed their status as imports. It did not matter that the goods were stored away from other taxable property before us. The court also deferred to the Supreme Court of Ohio and rejected Youngstown’s claim that the Ohio tax violated equal protection. Justice Felix Frankfurter wrote a partial dissent, agreeing with the majority about Youngstown, but disagreeing about Plywood. He found that Plywood’s main purpose for storing the lumber was drying, so it remained an import. Justice Potter Stewart did not participate.