The opinion
IN THE OREGON TAX COURT
MAGISTRATE DIVISION
Property Tax
JUNG P. LEE, )
)
Plaintiff, ) TC-MD 150431N
)
v. )
)
MARION COUNTY ASSESSOR, )
)
Defendant. ) FINAL DECISION OF DISMISSAL
This Final Decision of Dismissal incorporates without change the court’s Decision of
Dismissal, entered January 15, 2016. The court did not receive a statement of costs and
disbursements within 14 days after its Decision of Dismissal was entered. See TCR-MD 16 C(1).
This matter came before the court on Defendant’s Answer, filed October 7, 2015, moving
the court to dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint for failure to timely appeal to the Marion County
Board of Property Tax Appeals. Plaintiff filed his Complaint on September 23, 2015, appealing
the real market value of personal property identified as Account P324326 (subject property) for
the 2014–15 tax year.1 On December 7, 2015, Plaintiff filed a letter responding to Defendant’s
motion to dismiss (Response). On December 17, 2015, Defendant filed a letter replying to
Plaintiff’s response (Reply).
I. STATEMENT OF FACTS
The pertinent facts are shown in Plaintiff’s submissions. In the personal property return
he submitted to Defendant on March 10, 2014, Plaintiff identified the business at which the
subject property was located as a “restaurant” with the assumed business name of “Sunny’s
1
The Complaint stated the “assessed value” was incorrect and requested a reduction in value. Because the
subject property’s assessed value was equal to its real market value, this is a real market value appeal. See
ORS 308.146(2) (with exceptions, assessed value equals lesser of maximum assessed value and real market value).
FINAL DECISION OF DISMISSAL TC-MD 150431N 1
Burgers & Teriyaki.” (Ptf’s Response at 6.) Defendant’s Personal Property Report, dated
February 5, 2015, included the name “Sunny’s Burgers & Teriyaki” on the second line of the
address. (Id. at 4.) That report listed the total real market value of the subject property as
$24,072, of which nearly all—$23,112—was included on a row labeled “Misc Equipment Coin
Laundry.” (Id.) Defendant’s 2014–15 Personal Property Tax Statement also included “DBA:
Sunny’s Burgers & Ter” in Plaintiff’s address. (Id. at 5.)
II. ANALYSIS
The preliminary issue is whether this court has jurisdiction to consider Plaintiff’s appeal
of the 2014–15 real market value of the subject property.
A. Taxpayer’s Right to Appeal
A taxpayer who has a claim that might be brought before a county board of property tax
appeals generally must exercise that right before appealing to the Magistrate Division. See
ORS 305.275(3); ORS 309.110(7).2 Among the claims that may be brought before boards of
property tax appeals are petitions for the reduction of a property’s real market value. See
ORS 309.100(1); ORS 309.026(2)(b). Such petitions must be filed no later than December 31 of
the tax year appealed. ORS 309.100(2). A tax year is a 12-month period from July 1 through
June 30. See ORS 308.007(1)(c).
Here, Plaintiff has not appealed an order of the board of property tax appeals, although he
was eligible to appeal the value of the subject property to the board. Plaintiff’s appeal of the
subject property’s 2014–15 real market value was due at the board of property tax appeals on
December 31, 2014. See ORS 309.100(2). Because Plaintiff was eligible to appeal to the board
///
2
The court’s references to the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) are to 2013.
FINAL DECISION OF DISMISSAL TC-MD 150431N 2
of property tax appeals, he has no right to appeal directly to this court under ORS 305.275. See
ORS 305.275(3).
B. Court’s Authority to Grant Relief under ORS 305.288
Where a taxpayer has not timely pursued a statutory right to appeal, this court has limited
authority to order a correction to the tax rolls. The court orders a correction to the tax roll where
certain kinds of dwellings are overvalued by at least 20 percent. ORS 305.288(1). The court has
discretion to order a correction to the tax roll for any type of property where it determines that
the taxpayer’s failure to timely appeal was due to “good and sufficient cause.” ORS 305.288(3).
Here, because the subject property was not a dwelling described in ORS 305.288(1)(a), the court
could only have authority to order a tax roll correction if Plaintiff had good and sufficient cause
for not timely appealing to the board of property tax appeals.
Good and sufficient cause is defined by ORS 305.288(5)(b):
“(b) ‘Good and sufficient cause’:
“(A) Means an extraordinary circumstance that is beyond the control of the
taxpayer, or the taxpayer’s agent or representative, and that causes the taxpayer,
agent or representative to fail to pursue the statutory right of appeal; and
“(B) Does not include inadvertence, oversight, lack of knowledge, hardship or
reliance on misleading information provided by any person except an authorized
tax official providing the relevant misleading information.”
The two subparagraphs quoted immediately above show that an extraordinary circumstance—
such as the provision of misleading information by an authorized tax official—is not by itself
“good and sufficient cause” unless it “causes the taxpayer * * * to fail to pursue the statutory
right of appeal[.]” ORS 305.288(5)(b)(A).
Here, Plaintiff’s Response stated that a letter it received from Defendant dated
November 27, 2015, “brought to [his] attention” that the subject property tax account “was for
FINAL DECISION OF DISMISSAL TC-MD 150431N 3
the coin laundry and not for the restaurant.” (Ptf’s Response at 1.) Plaintiff stated that
Defendant’s “misfiling of the coin laundry and the restaurant * * * caused serious confusion on
[his and his representative’s] part.” (Id.) Plaintiff stated that he “did not feel the need to write an
appeal” for the subject property because he had “already file[d] the taxes for the restaurant.”
(Id.)
Defendant, in its Reply, stated that the subject property tax account was “the only
property tax account Plaintiff ever had in Marion County. There are no, nor were there ever,
separate tax accounts for the coin laundry and the restaurant.” (Def’s Reply at 1 (emphasis in
original.) Defendant further stated that the restaurant name in the address of the property tax
statement was provided to it by Plaintiff on the subject property’s 2014–15 personal property
return. (Id. at 2; see also Ptf’s Response at 6.)
The circumstances alleged by Plaintiff do not amount to “good and sufficient cause” for
failing to timely appeal. Any confusion caused by a restaurant name appearing in the address of
the subject property’s tax statement was due to Plaintiff, not Defendant, because it was Plaintiff
who provided that restaurant name in the subject property’s 2014–15 personal property return.
(See Ptf’s Response at 6.) Furthermore, Plaintiff appealed the tax roll values as found on the
subject property’s 2014–15 tax statement to this court—Plaintiff clearly was able to determine
that he objected to those values, with or without the restaurant name in the address. Plaintiff has
not explained why he did not timely appeal those values to the board of property tax appeals
instead of this court.
III. CONCLUSION
Upon consideration, the court grants Defendant’s motion to dismiss. Plaintiff did not
timely petition the board of property tax appeals for the 2014–15 tax year, and has not shown
FINAL DECISION OF DISMISSAL TC-MD 150431N 4
good and sufficient cause for failing to do so. The court lacks jurisdiction to order relief in this
case. Now, therefore,
IT IS THE DECISION OF THIS COURT that Defendant’s motion to dismiss is granted.
Plaintiff’s Complaint is dismissed.
Dated this day of February, 2016.
ALLISON R. BOOMER
MAGISTRATE
If you want to appeal this Final Decision of Dismissal, file a complaint in the
Regular Division of the Oregon Tax Court, by mailing to: 1163 State Street,
Salem, OR 97301-2563; or by hand delivery to: Fourth Floor, 1241 State Street,
Salem, OR.
Your complaint must be submitted within 60 days after the date of the Final
Decision of Dismissal or this Final Decision of Dismissal cannot be changed.
TCR-MD 19 B.
This document was filed and entered on February 1, 2016.
FINAL DECISION OF DISMISSAL TC-MD 150431N 5