Moore v. United States
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in Moore v. United States and why it matters. Quotes are taken from the syllabus (the Court’s short summary at the start of the opinion).
Summary
A short, plain-English overview of Moore v. United States.
In Moore v. United States, the Supreme Court addressed the constitutionality of the Mandatory Repatriation Tax (MRT) imposed by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017. The MRT taxes American shareholders on their pro rata share of undistributed income from American-controlled foreign corporations. The Moores challenged the MRT as an unconstitutional direct tax. The Court upheld the MRT, affirming Congress's authority to attribute and tax undistributed income of foreign corporations to American shareholders.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Moore v. United States.
The Court held that the Mandatory Repatriation Tax does not exceed Congress's constitutional authority to tax income, including undistributed income attributed to shareholders.
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in Moore v. United States. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why Due Process is relevant to Moore v. United States
The case involves the constitutional authority of Congress to impose taxes, which implicates procedural due process regarding the legality and fairness of tax laws.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)The Moores paid the tax and then sued for a refund, claiming, among other things, that the MRT violated the Direct Tax Clause of the Constitution.
-
Why Separation of Powers is relevant to Moore v. United States
The case discusses the power of Congress to impose taxes, which is a legislative function, highlighting the separation of powers between branches of government.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Article I of the Constitution affords Congress broad power to lay and collect taxes.
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Moore v. United States that support the summary and concepts above.
The MRT—which attributes the realized and undistributed income of an American-controlled foreign corporation to the entity's American shareholders, and then taxes the American shareholders on their portions of that income—does not exceed Congress's constitutional authority.
Taxes on income are indirect taxes, and the Sixteenth Amendment confirms that taxes on income need not be apportioned.
Congress's longstanding practice of taxing the shareholders or partners of a business entity on the entity's undistributed income reflects and reinforces the Court's precedents.