Case law

Dasmesh Darbar Sikh Temple v. Marion County Assessor

Oregon Tax Court · Jul 9, 2012

President testified that the Temple was established in Salem, Oregon, at its current site in October 2005. He testified that a change in the law no longer permits the priests to live in the Temple basement. … (Washington County), 18 OTR 409, 422 (2006) clearly stated that: “With regard to residences, it is neither the vows of poverty and obedience nor the promise of free housing, nor even substantial religious

Pearce v. Josephine County Assessor

Oregon Tax Court · Sep 18, 2018

Defendant contends that Pearce’s intent or “predominant purpose” for the subject property was clearly and unequivocally stated in his response to its January 19, 2017, questionnaire: “[The subject property] is not primarily … In cases before the court, the party seeking affirmative relief, here the Plaintiff, bears the burden of proof and must establish his case by a “preponderance” of the evidence. ORS 305.427.

Brueske v. Dept. of Revenue, Tc-Md 090020d (or.tax 3-3-2010)

Oregon Tax Court · Mar 3, 2010

He hoped to qualify for a pension and other benefits, so he accepted the position and moved to Washington, D.C. Id. … By 2003, Dewane had (1) clearly established a residence in Arizona; (2) formed the intent to abandon his Oregon domicile, as demonstrated by his dwindling connections with Oregon and by his decision to file his tax return

Farmers Direct, Inc. v. Yamhill County Assessor

Oregon Tax Court · Mar 20, 2018

Plaintiff has the burden of proof and must establish by a preponderance of the evidence. ORS 305.427. … The King Estate Winery language clearly makes Gilmour inapplicable in this case.

Oregon School Boards Association v. Marion County Assessor

Oregon Tax Court · Aug 31, 2015

“Much has been written in the cases and law reviews * * * about public purpose. * * * ‘The grounds for deciding such cases * * * are seldom articulated clearly. * * * [T]he relevant inquiry would seem to be whether the … There is no statute providing for attribution of an association’s members’ activities to permit the association to qualify its property for tax exemption.

Miles Laboratories, Inc. v. Department of Revenue

6 Or. Tax 82 · Oregon Tax Court · May 29, 1975

ORS 314.665 describes the “sales factor” used in the formula established by the Uniform Act. … The drafters of the Uniform Act clearly were seeking to avoid duplication of taxes by different states on the same income of foreign corporations.

AKS LLC v. Dept. of Rev.

23 Or. Tax 300 · Oregon Tax Court · Apr 18, 2019

The court determined that the term consisted of words of common usage and thus looked to dictionary definitions to establish their plain meaning. Id. at 332. … additional context, the court determined that the legislature inserted the term in order to limit the scope of the exemp- tion, ultimately concluding that property used on chicks was too attenuated from egg production to qualify

Brothers v. Department of Revenue

Oregon Tax Court · Apr 30, 2012

Dept. of Rev.,10 OTR 302, 307 (1986)), or whether Defendant‟s decision is “clearly wrong.” Martin Bros. v. Tax Cmm’n, 252 Or 331, 338, 449 P2d 430 (1969) (citing Richardson v. … ORS 305.427 (emphasis added).3 Plaintiffs must establish its claim “by a preponderance of the evidence, or the more convincing or greater weight of evidence.” Schaefer v.

Routledge v. Dept. of Rev.

Oregon Tax Court · Aug 6, 2018

Tax protester arguments, by themselves, do not establish fraud. Kotmair v. Comm’r, 86 TC 1253, 1262 (1986). … In this case, taxpayer’s filing history clearly shows he was once aware of his obligation to report income and pay income tax.

Martin v. Dept. of Rev.

Oregon Tax Court · Dec 28, 2017

ORS 316.007.2 Second, in cases before the court, the party seeking affirmative relief bears the burden of proof and must establish his or her case by a “preponderance” of the evidence. ORS 305.427. … Although the spreadsheet was not kept contemporaneously, it was produced using records that were kept contemporaneously to clearly reflect his travel for 2011.

Withnell v. Department of Revenue

Oregon Tax Court · Apr 7, 2014

A sporadic activity, a hobby, or an amusement diversion does not qualify.”). … Lora clearly has a passion for her dogs and sheep, and enjoys her small country acreage that she has developed over time by adding a barn, fencing, and other amenities.

Mughal v. Dept. of Rev.

Oregon Tax Court · Sep 27, 2024

filing dates, establishing statements made on the face of those documents, or establishing other facts “not subject to reasonable dispute.” … Nothing in the record suggests that they would have qualified as valuation experts or as experts on construction rules or techniques, or damage assessment.

Godard v. Dept. of Rev.

Oregon Tax Court · Apr 7, 2022

In general, terms have “the same meaning as when used in a comparable context in the laws of the United States relating to federal income taxes, unless a different meaning is clearly required or the term is specifically … Comm’r, 55 TCM (CCH) 817 (1988), the court looked to the regulation to determine whether property qualified for a depreciation deduction under the Accelerated Cost Recovery System (ACRS) under IRC section 168, which was

Time Warner v. Dept. of Rev.

Oregon Tax Court · Mar 31, 2025

A “List of Systems” was attached to the affiliate agreement, which reflected “Qualifying Systems” carrying HBO programming and subject to the agreement. (Id. at 5, 57-71.) … The networks were clearly aware of their viewers in Oregon: they received monthly subscriber reports from third-party affiliates, upon which payment was calculated.

Kaufmann v. Department of Revenue, State of Oregon

Oregon Tax Court · May 8, 2013

Certain other less common exceptions not here relevant are also included in that statute, including an exemption for qualified individuals with a tax home in a foreign country as provided in IRC § 911(d)(1), per ORS 316.027 … there until the person establishes a new domicile.”

Vesta Corporation v. Dept. of Rev.

Oregon Tax Court · Jun 19, 2015

Defendant stated in its Motion to Strike Plaintiff’s Post-Trial Memorandum and Attachments (Defendant’s Motion) that Plaintiff’s witness Uriarte “did not state that it was an ‘established practice’ in the payments industry … Henney defined direct costs as “closely tied and clearly linked to an activity * * * revenue generator” and indirect costs are “costs a company incurs no matter what, e.g. pencils, paper, telephone services, whether revenue

Hansen v. Department of Revenue, Tc-Md 081122d (or.tax 9-29-2009)

Oregon Tax Court · Sep 29, 2009

The parties agree that the home had nine occupants in 2005, but disagree as to the number of occupants that qualify for business expense deductions. … Thus, the court will allow $632 which is the clearly identified veterinary costs. This amount will be subject to allocation based on the occupancy of the home ratio. *Page 27 E. Hansen's Personal Deductions 1.

Dreiling v. Dept. of Rev.

Oregon Tax Court · Sep 19, 2016

A taxpayer is required to maintain records sufficient to establish the amount of any deduction claimed. IRC § 6001; Treas Reg § 1.6001–1(a). … That was clearly not the case.

Alaska Airlines, Inc. v. Dept. of Rev.

Oregon Tax Court · Dec 30, 2021

Irregular email exchanges and telephone conversations with an appraiser do not clearly fit within the timeline described in the statute. … Plaintiffs’ discussions with Defendant’s appraisers do not qualify as a conference under the statute. B.

O'Connor v. Dept. of Rev.

Oregon Tax Court · Nov 14, 2018

Clearly, some of the items are for both business and personal use. O’Connor offered no evidence upon which the court could allocate between personal and business use. … Comm’r, 111 TCM (CCH) 1087, 2016 WL 626043 at *3 (shirts embroidered with employer’s logo “might qualify for deduction as a uniform”); Mortrud v.