INTERSTATE IRON AND STEEL COMPANY v. STATE OF ILLINOIS.

Case summary

The claimant paid an excess franchise tax on its capital stock for the year beginning July 1, 1920, because it had filed a certificate of decrease in capital stock before payment. The court awarded a refund of $99.05, the difference between the amount paid and the amount due on the decreased capital stock.

Claim type: Tax Refund

AI-generated summary from the opinion text — may contain errors. The opinion text and PDF above are the official record.

Headnotes

FRANCHISE TAX-when entitled to refund. Where a corporation pays

Edward J. Brundage, Attorney General, for State. The Attorney General has entered his appearance and consent to

INTERSTATE IRON AND STEEL COMPANY

v.

STATE OF ILLINOIS.

Opinion filed May 9, 1922.

FRANCHISE TAX-when entitled to refund. Where a corporation pays its annual franchise tax for the current year, but prior to such payment it had filed with the Secretary of State a certificate of decrease of its capital stock the franchise tax should be based upon the capital stock as decreased, and it is entitled to a refund of the difference in the amount paid on the capital stock as shown by its annual report and the amount to be assessed on its capital stock as decreased.

Edward J. Brundage, Attorney General, for State.

The claimant has filed its petition for a refund of ninety-nine dollars and five cents ($99.05) for excess franchise tax paid on its capital stock for the year beginning July 1st, 1920. Claimant paid thirty-five hundred dollars ($3,500.00) as a franchise tax for the year commencing July 1, 1920, on its capital stock of seven million dollars ($7,000,000.00), but prior thereto, to-wit: On April 26th, 1920, it had filed in the office of the Secretary of State a certificate of decrease of its stock to six million, eight hundred and one thousand, nine hundred dollars ($6,801,- 900.00), and this is the amount on which the franchise tax should have been paid, amounting to thirty-four hundred dollars and ninety-five cents ($3,400.95). The over-payment of $99.05 should be refunded and is a proper allowance against the State.

The Attorney General has entered his appearance and consent to the allowance of this claim, and it appears from copy of letter on file that the Secretary of State admits that there was an excess payment and that there is a refund of $99.05 due the claimant.

Claimant is therefore allowed the sum of $99.05.