State Taxing Power after Direct Marketing Association v. Brohl

7 Pages Posted: 21 May 2016

See all articles by Adam B. Thimmesch

Adam B. Thimmesch

University of Nebraska College of Law

Date Written: April 25, 2016


The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals’ recent decision in Direct Marketing Association v. Brohl marked another entry into the ongoing saga regarding the scope of state taxing power over remote vendors. That decision, along with the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in an earlier iteration of the litigation, has predictably increased the debates regarding the meaning and validity of the Court’s long-standing physical presence rule and the merits of congressional intervention. One could thus view the Direct Marketing litigation as the potential catalyst that will break the stasis regarding this issue at the Supreme Court and in Congress. To the contrary, however, that litigation might represent nothing more than another blip on the nexus radar. This article evaluates those possibilities and how the DMA decision has impacted the debates regarding state taxing power going forward.

Keywords: state tax, nexus, Quill, Marketplace Fairness Act

JEL Classification: H2, H7

Suggested Citation

Thimmesch, Adam B., State Taxing Power after Direct Marketing Association v. Brohl (April 25, 2016). State Tax Notes, Vol. 80, No. 4, 2016. Available at SSRN:

Adam B. Thimmesch (Contact Author)

University of Nebraska College of Law ( email )

103 McCollum Hall
P.O. Box 830902
Lincoln, NE 68583-0902
United States

Here is the Coronavirus
related research on SSRN

Paper statistics

Abstract Views
PlumX Metrics