Law Center Search Results

The Supreme Court 6/20/05 held that a flat fee imposed by Michigan on trucks engaged in intrastate hauling does not unconstitutionally discriminate against interstate hauling. The American Trucking Associations had argued that the fee violates the dormant Commerce Clause because trucks engaged in interstate hauling generally engage in much less intrastate hauling—and, accordingly, bear a much higher burden per mile of intrastate hauling—than trucks devoted solely to intrastate hauling. The Supreme Court disagreed, noting that the flat fee applies equally “to all carriers that make domestic journeys,” and approving generally of “such neutral, locally-focused” fees and taxes. The Court emphasized the absence of record evidence showing that the fee significantly deters interstate trade. The Court also rejected the contention that Michigan’s fee structure violates the “internal consistency” test, which asks what the cumulative effect would be if “all States did the same.” It reasoned that even if an interstate carrier paid similar fees to every state where it also engaged in intrastate hauling, the dormant Commerce Clause would not be violated because the fees would be assessed as a consequence of intrastate activity. This decision is important to any business subject to regulatory fees or taxes on activity wholly within a given state.

Decision Below: 673 N.W.2d 752 (Mich. 2003).