281:
77: (1989), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that state governments may not tax federal pensions if they exempt their own state pensions from taxation. However, they may choose to subject both federal and state pensions to taxation, as the federal government waived its immunity in the Public Salary Tax Act (1939),
93:
In some cases, the federal government may voluntarily subject itself to local regulations. For example, the policy of the
General Services Administration is that federal employees must obey state and local laws "except when the duties of your position require otherwise", and are personally
52:. The Court found that if a state had the power to tax a federally incorporated institution, then the state effectively had the power to destroy the federal institution, thereby thwarting the intent and purpose of Congress. This would make the states superior to the federal government.
94:
responsible for paying parking fines and moving violation fines not required for official purposes. A 2008 Congressional report found the federal government's lack of effective enforcement of this policy was creating traffic hazards in
Washington, D.C., and New York City.
41:(1819), which ruled unanimously that states may not regulate property or operations of the federal government. In that case, Maryland state law subjected banks not chartered by the state to restrictions and taxes. In
67:
265:
HeinOnline: 112 Yale L.J. 2195 (2002-2003) What Kind of
Immunity - Federal Officers, State Criminal Law, and the Supremacy Clause; Waxman, Seth P.; Morrison, Trevor W.
24:
is a doctrine that prevents the federal government and individual state governments from intruding on each other's sovereignty. It is also referred to as a
222:
346:
85:. They may also tax pensions of other states. For example, Michigan exempts federal, Michigan state, and Michigan municipal pensions from taxation.
264:
168:
322:
269:
78:
270:
Google Books: Excerpt from "The
Supremacy Clause: A Reference Guide to the United States Constitution" by Christopher R. Drahozal
49:
17:
226:
32:
315:
239:"Lax Fleet Management Practices Enable Government Employees to Ignore Local Parking Laws and Evade Fines"
128:
71:
37:
142:
341:
206:
188:
308:
103:
62:
292:
237:
Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure, U.S. House of Representatives (2008-10-24).
180:
108:
25:
238:
74:
335:
280:
82:
192:
184:
48:
s case, state law had attempted to impose these restrictions on the
288:
296:
207:"General Information - Pension Schedule (Form 4884)"
28:
immunity or simply federal immunity from state law.
316:
8:
323:
309:
132:, 17 U.S. (4 Wheat.) 316, at 426 (1819).
56:Federal pension exemption from state tax
120:
7:
277:
275:
31:The doctrine was established by the
169:"The Public Salary Tax Act of 1939"
295:. You can help Knowledge (XXG) by
212:. Michigan Department of Treasury.
167:Shaw, Lucien W. (September 1939).
14:
347:United States constitutional law
279:
50:Second Bank of the United States
18:United States Constitutional Law
143:"McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)"
89:Traffic and parking violations
1:
33:United States Supreme Court
363:
274:
22:intergovernmental immunity
291:-related article is a
173:California Law Review
129:McCulloch v. Maryland
38:McCulloch v. Maryland
304:
303:
147:National Archives
63:Davis v. Michigan
354:
325:
318:
311:
283:
276:
252:
251:
249:
248:
243:
234:
228:
220:
214:
213:
211:
203:
197:
196:
164:
158:
157:
155:
154:
139:
133:
125:
109:Supremacy Clause
47:
26:Supremacy Clause
362:
361:
357:
356:
355:
353:
352:
351:
332:
331:
330:
329:
261:
256:
255:
246:
244:
241:
236:
235:
231:
225:102-34.235-245
221:
217:
209:
205:
204:
200:
185:10.2307/3476042
166:
165:
161:
152:
150:
141:
140:
136:
126:
122:
117:
100:
91:
58:
45:
12:
11:
5:
360:
358:
350:
349:
344:
334:
333:
328:
327:
320:
313:
305:
302:
301:
284:
273:
272:
267:
260:
259:External links
257:
254:
253:
229:
215:
198:
179:(6): 705–711.
159:
134:
119:
118:
116:
113:
112:
111:
106:
104:States' rights
99:
96:
90:
87:
57:
54:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
359:
348:
345:
343:
340:
339:
337:
326:
321:
319:
314:
312:
307:
306:
300:
298:
294:
290:
285:
282:
278:
271:
268:
266:
263:
262:
258:
240:
233:
230:
227:
224:
219:
216:
208:
202:
199:
194:
190:
186:
182:
178:
174:
170:
163:
160:
148:
144:
138:
135:
131:
130:
124:
121:
114:
110:
107:
105:
102:
101:
97:
95:
88:
86:
84:
80:
79:4 U.S.C.
76:
73:
69:
65:
64:
55:
53:
51:
44:
40:
39:
34:
29:
27:
23:
19:
297:expanding it
286:
245:. Retrieved
232:
218:
201:
176:
172:
162:
151:. Retrieved
149:. 2021-05-28
146:
137:
127:
123:
92:
61:
59:
42:
36:
30:
21:
15:
336:Categories
247:2015-09-06
153:2023-03-08
115:References
83:§ 111
342:Law stubs
43:McCulloch
98:See also
193:3476042
223:41 CFR
191:
81:
66:,
287:This
242:(PDF)
210:(PDF)
189:JSTOR
70:
46:'
293:stub
72:U.S.
289:law
181:doi
75:803
68:489
60:In
35:in
16:In
338::
187:.
177:27
175:.
171:.
145:.
20:,
324:e
317:t
310:v
299:.
250:.
195:.
183::
156:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
