Nix v. Hedden one of the first companies to ship produce from Virginia, Florida, and Bermuda to New York. In 1883, President Chester A. Arthur signed the Tariff Act of March 3, 1883, requiring a tax to be paid on imported vegetables, but not fruit. The John Nix & Co. company filed a suit against Edward L. Hedden, Collector of the Port of New York, to recover back duties paid under protest. They argued against the tariff by pointing out that, botanically, a tomato is a fruit due to its seed-bearing structure growing from the flowering part of a plant. At the trial,
Slutzkin v Federal Commissioner of Taxation 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 were a capital sum like an ordinary investment asset sale. In the taxonomy of tax schemes the overall operation was a classic exploitation of income versus capital dichotomy. But there was no need for contrivance or collusion, the different tax treatment to each party simply made the transaction an