Tariff of 1883 tariff without having to involve himself in a congressional battle over the issue. The law exempts fruit but not vegetables, causing tomato importers to file sue claiming that tomatoes are a fruit, resulting in the unanimous U.S. Supreme Court decision in "Nix v. Hedden" (May 10, 1893) that tomatoes are to be considered a vegetable for purposes of this tariff. Tariff of 1883 In United States tax law history, the Tariff of 1883 (signed into law on March 3, 1883), also known as the Mongrel Tariff Act by its critics, reduced high tariff rates only marginally, and left in place
Slutzkin v Federal Commissioner of Taxation or the last, nor even the biggest example of such transactions. The tax landscape has changed considerably since these times. The anti-avoidance provisions of Part IVA are much broader and specifically apply against dividend stripping of the kind Cadiz used. Capital gains tax would apply to Slutzkin's proceeds too. Slutzkin v Federal Commissioner of Taxation Slutzkin v Federal Commissioner Of Taxation, was a High Court of Australia case concerning the tax position of company owners who sold to a dividend stripping operation. The Australian Taxation Office (ATO) claimed the proceeds should be treated as dividends, but the Court held they