John Paul Stevens

“ First, the court held that a tax on liquidation sales places a burden on the federal function of the bankruptcy court and therefore violates principles of intergovernmental tax immunity first recognized in McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. (4 Wheat.) 316, 4 L.Ed. 579 (1819) . Second, it found that a federal statute specifically authorizing the States to impose taxes on business operations of the bankruptcy trustee negated by implication their power to tax bankruptcy liquidations. Neither argument is persuasive. ”

“ A great many receivers in oil cases have been held by the court not liable to pay taxes. They do not pay the gasoline taxes to the State. There are thousands of dollars being lost to the State, because these receivers in gasoline and oil cases are not liable to pay those taxes. ”

“ The immunity of one sovereign from taxation by another originated in the belief that the taxing power is necessarily destructive. This rationale has been repudiated, and Graves [v. New York ex rel. O'Keefe, 306 U.S. 466, 59 S.Ct. 595, 83 L.Ed. 927 (1939) ,] indicates that only taxes which can be so manipulated should be invalidated. Absent discriminatory application against sellers and buyers at liquidation sales, a sales or use tax should not seriously impede the federal bankruptcy process") .↑ Title 28 U.S.C. § 960 provides:↑ See also 78 Cong.Rec. ”