Tax Legal Services · Primary-source case analysis

Direct Marketing Association: Tax Reporting Is Not Assessment, Levy, or Collection

By Aneeta Mishra and Timothy Chan

Published April 16, 2026 · Updated October 18, 2026

Decision: Direct Marketing Ass’n v. Brohl, Executive Director, Colorado Dep’t of Revenue, 575 U.S. 1 (2015).

Direct Marketing Association defines the Tax Injunction Act’s jurisdictional terms narrowly enough to separate information gathering from the later assessment and collection of state tax.

Colorado required notices and reports

Colorado required retailers that did not collect state sales or use tax to notify customers of their use-tax obligations and report tax-related information to customers and the Department of Revenue. A retailer association sought to enjoin those requirements in federal court.

The Tenth Circuit found a jurisdictional bar

The Tax Injunction Act prevents federal district courts from enjoining, suspending, or restraining the assessment, levy, or collection of state tax when an adequate state remedy exists. The Tenth Circuit read restrain broadly to include relief that would limit or hold back tax collection. The Supreme Court rejected that effects-based interpretation: A reporting injunction merely inhibiting future collection was not the same as stopping assessment, levy or collection itself. Direct Marketing Association, 575 U.S. at 12–14.

Information gathering is an earlier phase

The Supreme Court held that assessment, levy, and collection are technical phases of tax administration that do not encompass informational notices and private reports. Although better information may facilitate later assessment or collection, that indirect effect does not make the reporting command one of the listed activities.

Disposition and comity

The unanimous Court reversed and remanded. It took no position on the nonjurisdictional comity doctrine. Colorado had not sought comity in either lower court; the Court left open on remand whether that argument remained available, not merely whether it would succeed. Nor did the Court decide the underlying Commerce Clause merits. Direct Marketing Association, 575 U.S. at 15–16.

Key takeaways

• The Tax Injunction Act uses technical terms with defined tax-administration meanings.
• Notice and reporting duties precede assessment and collection.
• An indirect effect on future collection does not automatically trigger the jurisdictional bar.
• Comity remains a separate possible limitation.