SETH SEIDERS, INCORPORATED, ADELAWARE CORPORATION, Claimant, v. STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.

Case summary

Claimant sought a rebate of franchise tax paid, alleging the tax was excessive due to an error in the information they provided. The court denied the claim, holding that the Secretary of State correctly computed the tax based on the information submitted and any error was the claimant's fault.

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 no award will be made. Where amount of fran-

SETH SEIDERS, INCORPORATED, A DELAWARE CORPORATION, Claimant, vs.

STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.

Opinion filed September 8, 1931.

FRANCHISE TAX-when no award will be made. Where amount of franchise tax is computed and collected by Secretary of State in accordance with law, based on information submitted by claimant, a claim for rebate of a part thereof alleged to have been excessive, on account of error in information furnished by claimant will be denied.

Per Curiam: It appears that the claimant is a corporation organized and known as a Delaware Corporation, a foreign corporation and that they desire to do business in the State of Illinois and that they filed with the Secretary of State information as required by law as to the amount of business and the amount of property which such corporation would have in this State during their first year of business. It appears also that the Secretary of State on information furnished by claimant did compute the franchise fee for doing business in the State during its first year. The claimant now contends [*10] that they should have been taxed at a less percentage than the estimate indicated and should be rebated the difference.

It appears to this court that the Secretary of State followed the directions of the Legislature in computing and collecting taxes and if there was an error in the statements of claimant as to their volume of business or capital stock it was not the fault of the Secretary of State or the State of Illinois and consequently this court is of the opinion that the law was followed in this transaction and the court therefore recommends that claim be disallowed.