Case law

Dayton v. Department of Revenue

5 Or. Tax 56 · Oregon Tax Court · Jun 2, 1972

Subsection (4) of ORS 321.618 clearly shows that the legislature contemplated *66 the possibility of a part of the land being denied the designation as forest land. ③ Further points were raised by witnesses of the intervenor … The actual tax involved was $1.73 per acre, an amount insufficient to establish tax hardship, and irrelevant in any event.

Salgado v. Department of Revenue

Oregon Tax Court · Jul 24, 2012

Plaintiffs acknowledge that they may not have “followed the letter of the law,” but believe the donations themselves qualify as charitable contributions and the value can be easily established. … Dept. of Rev., TC-MD 050026C, 2005 WL 3047248 (2005) (denying a deduction for the donation of a manufactured home where there was clearly no dispute about the existence of the donation, but no appraisal to substantiate

Dept. of Rev. v. New Friends of the Beaverton City Library

23 Or. Tax 512 · Oregon Tax Court · Nov 26, 2019

The court concludes that taxpayer fully satisfies the entity-level requirements and qualifies as a charitable institution. D. … (discussing the 1864 Act incorpo- rating “literary and charitable societies” (citing the Supreme Court’s rejection of the destination-of-income theory in Benevolent Society to justify stripping nonprofit corporations of immunity

Lewis v. Department of Revenue

9 Or. Tax 85 · Oregon Tax Court · Jun 1, 1981

Questions have been raised, made difficult because of long-established social preconceptions which there is good reason to believe are outmoded. A number of important decisions have been made by the U. S. … support its views that different preferential treatment in fact saved the government any money and, on the other hand, there was substantial evidence that, if put to the test, many of the spouses of male members failed to qualify

Moore v. Jackson County Assessor

Oregon Tax Court · Jul 24, 2024

The Oregon Constitution lists situations that qualify as exceptions to the general rule that MAV increases by no more than three percent per year. … When a law itself establishes a class – that is, a “nontrue class” – the privileges and immunities clause does not apply. See MacPherson v. Dept. of Admin.

Estate of Helene J. Evans v. Dept. of Rev.

24 Or. Tax 126 · Oregon Tax Court · May 28, 2020

Donald’s will established a testamentary trust and named his son Con Gillam as trustee. … The court agrees that Helene clearly lacked those rights or other rights equiva- lent to ownership.

Lauer v. Grant County Assessor

Oregon Tax Court · Dec 1, 2020

Accepting as true Plaintiff’s allegation that the subject property is held by land patent title, that does not qualify the subject property for exemption. … Oregon’s power to impose property taxes is well-established.

Serenity Lane, Inc. v. Lane County Assessor

21 Or. Tax 229 · Oregon Tax Court · Aug 30, 2013

on the same basis as it took on other patients weighs against it on the second of the “gift or giving” factors, Serenity’s undertaking to provide outpatient treatment for indigent patients through its “New Hope” program clearly … Serenity’s expert sought to establish that Serenity offers detox at below-market rates by comparing the cost of detox for patients of Serenity to the rates other hospitals in this state charge for “uncomplicated detox.”

Department of Revenue v. Hoyt

8 Or. Tax 367 · Oregon Tax Court · May 20, 1980

Unless the Government seeks testimony that will subject its giver to criminal liability, the constitutional right to remain silent absent immunity does not arise. … United States, 340 US 367 , ante, 344, 71 S Ct 438 , 19 ALR2d 378 (1951), and to require him to answer if 'it clearly appears to the comb that he is mistaken.’ Temple v. Commonwealth, 75 Va 892, 899 (1881).

Paullus v. Department of Revenue

7 Or. Tax 181 · Oregon Tax Court · Sep 9, 1977

License fees for self-propelled mobile cranes are established in ORS 481.210(2)(a), and for fixed load vehicles, in ORS 481.210(5). … The legislative intent to grant an exemption for self-propelled mobile cranes, against patent opposition, is clearly illustrated by this history of revocation and renewal.

Equitable Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Department of Revenue

5 Or. Tax 661 · Oregon Tax Court · Nov 25, 1974

The plaintiff is qualified to do business in these states, except California where it is registered to transact business. … It is not established that the new formula is less correct or more discriminatory than the preceding formula.

White v. Hood River County Assessor

16 Or. Tax 309 · Oregon Tax Court · Jan 18, 2001

Defendant argues, however, that the activities are not sufficient to qualify the land for farm use special assessment. … At the time of the subject property’s disqualification, Plaintiffs were preparing the land for future farm use and clearly qualified for the deferral.

Southwestern Oregon Public Defender Services, Inc. v. Department of Revenue

11 Or. Tax 339 · Oregon Tax Court · Apr 4, 1990

The burden of establishing entitlement to an exemption is on the taxpayer claiming the exemption. Methodist Homes, Inc. v. Tax Com., 226 Or 298, 307 , 360 P2d 293 (1961).” Dove Lewis Mem. Emer. Vet. Clinic v. … Nevertheless, if the legislature intends to equate government funding of a project with “charity” it must say so more clearly than it has in ORS 307.130(2). 8 In Parr v.

Lush v. Department of Revenue

5 Or. Tax 489 · Oregon Tax Court · Mar 28, 1974

It has qualified under ORS 307.375 as a corporation organized and operated only for the purpose of furnishing permanent residential, recreational and social facilities primarily for elderly persons; not organized for profit … The principles established in the two cases require this court to rule that Cascade Manor, Inc., is not presently a charitable corporation.

Palandech v. Department of Revenue, Tc-Md 100015c (or.tax 3-23-2011)

Oregon Tax Court · Mar 23, 2011

Plaintiffs insist that special protections afforded certain qualifying military personnel under federal law change the complexion of this appeal. … Residence Applying the three-part test laid out in White , Thomas clearly established a "residence" in several other states after leaving Oregon, the first of which was Washington, where he moved to 1989.

Lebow v. Department of Revenue Champion International, Inc.

10 Or. Tax 53 · Oregon Tax Court · Apr 18, 1985

Thus, the appraisal hardly qualifies as a replacement cost used appraisal. Second, it appears that the county’s view as to what equipment was available influenced its basic cost estimates. … Deductions for functional obsolescence can only be allowed where they are clearly supported by specific measurable inutility. Publishers Paper Co. v. Dept. of Rev., 270 Or 737 , 530 P2d 88 (1974).

Equitable Savings & Loan Ass'n v. State Tax Commission

3 Or. Tax 1 · Oregon Tax Court · May 5, 1967

Plaintiff has been qualified to do business in Idaho since 1906. … The evidence clearly indicated that from the beginning the plaintiff was fully cognizant of the legal issues involved and the basis for the proposed assessment. It was not misled in any way.

Hyster Co. v. Department of Revenue

4 Or. Tax 351 · Oregon Tax Court · Mar 31, 1971

The decision stated: “The evidence clearly establishes that plaintiff *356 is in the business of manufacturing trucks; it is not in the business of warehousing or being a storage and distribution center for goods brought … for transshipment to an out-of-state destination (other than the county of origin) and (5) is being shipped or is being held in storage.awaiting further shipment. *357 The evidence shows that plaintiff’s property does not qualify

Pierson v. Dept. of Revenue, Tc 4886 (or.tax 1-13-2010)

Oregon Tax Court · Jan 13, 2010

See Or Laws 2003, ch 806 , § 1. 6 What the legislature intended to do, and in fact did, was to immunize the Oregon inheritance tax system from the 2001 federal changes by: (1) Continuing, in ORS 118.010 , the basic provision … The invalidity of that premise has been established above. The Oregon legislature has incorporated into ORS 118.010 "the maximum state death tax credit *Page 14 allowable."

Helms Deep, LLC v. Dept. of Rev.

25 Or. Tax 210 · Oregon Tax Court · Feb 13, 2023

The court had no occasion to decide whether a particular structure qualified as a dwelling. … The only reference to an ear- lier date is a shot discussing the establishment of a founda- tion in 2017, the relevance of which is not apparent from the admissible evidence. C.