276 U.S. 394, 48 S. Ct. 348, 72 L. Ed. 624 (1928)
J. W. Hampton, Jr., & Company imported barium dioxide into New York.1 The collector of customs assessed the importation at a dutiable rate of six cents per pound.2 This was two cents per pound more than that fixed by statute under a presidential proclamation issued pursuant to section 315 of the Tariff Act of September 21, 1922.3
The proclamation was issued by President Calvin Coolidge on May 19, 1924, after the United States Tariff Commission conducted an investigation into differences in costs of production between the United States and Germany, the principal competing country.4 The investigation included a public hearing at which interested parties could present evidence.5 The proclamation recited that the statutory duty did not equalize those cost differences and raised the rate on barium dioxide to six cents per pound, within the fifty-percent limit allowed by the statute.6
Hampton protested the assessment and appealed under section 514 of the Tariff Act.7 The United States Customs Court heard the case and a majority upheld the assessment.8 Hampton then appealed to the United States Court of Customs Appeals, which affirmed the Customs Court judgment on October 16, 1926.9
The Attorney General certified that the case warranted Supreme Court review.10 Hampton petitioned for certiorari on May 10, 1927, and the Supreme Court granted the writ.11
Whether section 315 of the Tariff Act of 1922 is invalid because it delegates legislative power to the President?12
The Federal Constitution divides governmental power into three branches with legislative power vested in Congress.13 Congress cannot transfer its legislative power to the President.14 Yet Congress may authorize executive officers to carry out declared policies by finding facts and applying the law within intelligible principles and defined limits.15 The extent of assistance from the executive must be fixed according to common sense and the inherent necessities of governmental coordination.16
No. J. W. Hampton, Jr., & Company imported barium dioxide into New York.17 The collector assessed six cents per pound based on the presidential proclamation.18
The proclamation followed the Tariff Commission's investigation and hearing.19 Section 315 sets forth the policy of equalizing cost differences and directs the President to ascertain those differences and proclaim rate changes within fifty percent.20 This is the execution of congressional policy rather than the exercise of legislative power.21 The process involved the Commission giving notice and opportunity to be heard before the President acted.22
Such a framework has been upheld in analogous contexts like rate making by the Interstate Commerce Commission.23
Section 315 does not invalidly delegate legislative power to the President.24
Whether section 315 is invalid because it authorizes the imposition of customs duties for the purpose of protecting domestic industries rather than solely for raising revenue?25
Congress possesses the power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises.26 From the earliest revenue laws Congress has included protective purposes in tariff legislation.27 The existence of other motives in the selection of the subjects of taxes cannot invalidate congressional action so long as the motive and effect are to secure revenue for the general government.28 Taxes do not lose their character as taxes because of an incidental motive of discouraging them by making their continuance onerous.29
No. The Tariff Act of 1922 declares among its purposes the encouragement of industries of the United States.30 Section 315 operates by adjusting duties to equalize production costs so that domestic producers can compete.31 This protective effect is incidental to the revenue raising function.32 The first Congress in 1789 enacted tariff duties with the express aim of protecting manufactures. The assessment here was collected as a duty under the act and therefore remains valid.33
Section 315 is not invalid on the ground that it serves a protective purpose.34