Case law

Benton v. Department of Revenue

7 Or. Tax 162 · Oregon Tax Court · Jul 27, 1977

Since intent must be ascertained from overt acts, the assessor should consider many elements in reaching a conclusion as to whether the use of a particular parcel of land qualifies as farm-vise land. * * *” The provisions … Exhibits introduced by all parties illustrated clearly that the subject tenant housing was located in the orchards.

Haynie v. Dept. of Rev.

19 Or. Tax 488 · Oregon Tax Court · Jul 28, 2008

Accordingly, "disqualification" was understood to occur both because of "bad" acts and because of other causes, which clearly could be the expiration of the statutory period. … Other reasons could clearly include expiration of the special assessment time period. *Page 498 3.

Joseph Hydro Associates, Ltd. v. Department of Revenue

10 Or. Tax 277 · Oregon Tax Court · Aug 1, 1986

Norman’s testimony that these kinds of projects are “driven” by the income tax benefits is clearly true. … Income tax consequences to the seller should not be considered in establishing the amount that would justly compensate the owner for loss of the property.

Linder v. Department of Revenue

18 Or. Tax 11 · Oregon Tax Court · Sep 1, 2004

He clearly did connect the reductions to the girls’ ages. … Taxpayers state that Oregon law provides that child support orders are established by a state formula that is presumed to be correct. Taxpayers are not in error.

Portland Comm. v. Multnomah County Assr., Tc-Md 091615c (or.tax 2-9-2011)

Oregon Tax Court · Feb 9, 2011

Plaintiff clearly missed the one-year outside deadline. … CONCLUSION The court concludes that Plaintiffs appeal is untimely and that Plaintiff has failed to establish good and sufficient cause for the untimely appeal.

Piedmont Plaza Investors v. Department of Revenue

14 Or. Tax 440 · Oregon Tax Court · Dec 29, 1998

Such properties may be sold only to “qualified purchasers.” … That clearly removed some valuable rights, at least temporarily.

Collins v. Commission

3 Or. Tax 275 · Oregon Tax Court · Sep 25, 1968

Since no citizen enjoys immunity from that burden, its retroactive imposition does not necessarily infringe due process, and to challenge the present tax it is not enough to point out that the taxable event, the receipt of … However, the 1967 amendment by its terms was clearly intended to be retroactive to July 1, 1965.

Lewis & Clark College v. Commission

3 Or. Tax 429 · Oregon Tax Court · May 20, 1969

The evidence clearly supports the plaintiff’s contention that the residence is used primarily for the benefit of the college and that its use is reasonably necessary for the fulfillment of the functions of the college. … However, the decision herein makes it unnecessary to decide if plaintiff qualifies for such exemption under ORS 307.145.

Gorski v. Dept. of Rev.

20 Or. Tax 452 · Oregon Tax Court · May 23, 2012

However, the above quoted text clearly indicates that taxpayer was in the Tampa Bay area with a specific purpose in mind. … Taxpayer likewise did not establish a permanent place of abode in Florida.

Columbia River Egg Farm v. Department of Revenue

12 Or. Tax 418 · Oregon Tax Court · Apr 30, 1993

The evidence established that the confinement systems in some instances are bolted to the floor and in all instances are connected to the buildings with pipes, conveyors and wires. … There the washing system utilizes a water softener system and a boiler which are clearly affixed to and are part of the real property.

White v. Department of Revenue

14 Or. Tax 319 · Oregon Tax Court · May 20, 1998

By that time, he had 10 years of active duty and wanted to serve 10 more so he would qualify for a pension and a number of other significant benefits. … Clearly Mr. White established a residence in Washington, D.C. However, the court must determine whether he formed an intent to abandon his old domicile and to acquire a new one. If Mr.

Level 3 Communications LLC v. Dept. of Rev.

23 Or. Tax 87 · Oregon Tax Court · May 2, 2018

The parties are at odds over selection of the correct unit, and the instructions to Heaton clearly reflect Plaintiff’s legal position in that dispute,7 not a failure of qualification of Heaton. 7 As noted in the … Defendant’s appraisal expert Eyre testi- fied that, in his view, the CenturyLink Transaction corrob- orated certain trends identified in his appraisal, but that he did not rely on the CenturyLink Transaction to establish

Hazelden Foundation v. Yamhill County Assessor

21 Or. Tax 245 · Oregon Tax Court · Aug 30, 2013

However, whether taxpayer’s “doors are open to rich and poor alike” will be established at length in the following analysis. … Taxpayer is clearly an institution that has a noble purpose: it seeks to counter a dreadful blight on our society, and the evidence clearly shows it is prone to generosity in pursuing that mission.

Perry v. Department of Revenue

14 Or. Tax 395 · Oregon Tax Court · Nov 3, 1998

Taxpayer’s motor home clearly qualifies as a dwelling unit in that it is a “mobile home” or similar property. … Consequently, except for those professionals who have established their status by actually earning income, writers are required to capitalize their expenses until income is earned from the writing to offset those expenses

Kalishman v. Department of Revenue

8 Or. Tax 440 · Oregon Tax Court · Nov 6, 1980

That the income limitations of ORS 308.372 should be waived for pre-mature [sic] perennial crops if the property otherwise qualifies under ORS 215.203. "9. … It is a long-established rule of statutory construction that words of common use are to be given their natural, plain and obvious meaning. Blalock v.

Board of Publications of Methodist Church v. State Tax Commission

1 Or. Tax 413 · Oregon Tax Court · Jul 8, 1963

. *417 PARTIES’ CONTENTIONS Under the commission’s regulation, Reg. 7.080(4), upon which the commission relied in denying the exemption, the plaintiff clearly is not exempt because one of its primary purposes is to finance … To establish its religious character under the tax laws, the plaintiff cites and relies upon a long line of federal decisions interpreting federal statutory language substantially identical to that of ORS 317.080(4).

Linfoot v. Department of Revenue

4 Or. Tax 489 · Oregon Tax Court · Jul 27, 1971

It is clearly of minimal present utility. As has been said, the intention of the legislature is to shield bona fide farm operations from higher valuation “attributable to urban influences or speculative purchases.” … The policy established by the legislature is buttressed by such a conclusion.

Buras v. Department of Revenue

17 Or. Tax 282 · Oregon Tax Court · Jan 26, 2004

Application of income to charitable purposes may result in a tax benefit, but only where the donee is a qualified charity and the donor itemizes deductions. … Taxpayer’s statutory claims are based on federal statutes that clearly do not apply. That could have been established with a brief visit to a competent tax attorney.

Heiller v. Department of Revenue

14 Or. Tax 207 · Oregon Tax Court · Jul 1, 1997

The statutes are strictly construed and the applicant must bring itself clearly within the exemption. Bd. Pub., Meth. Church v. Tax Com., 239 Or 65, 68-69 , 396 P2d 212 (1964). … In addition, plaintiff no longer has the necessary standing to appeal any denial of a property tax exemption for the subject property because the evidence established that the property is now owned by Bruin Nature Conservancy

Rosalie Ridge LLC v. Dept. of Rev.

21 Or. Tax 434 · Oregon Tax Court · Jul 24, 2014

But in order to establish this predominant purpose, the county relies almost exclusively on the period following the transfer of the subject property from Lillian Logan to taxpayer. … The court heard testimony at trial from Daniel Logan and from Ken Everett, another witness qualified as an expert in forestry.