2015 ORS 305.275¹
Persons who may appeal due to acts or omissions

(1) Any person may appeal under this subsection to the magistrate division of the Oregon Tax Court as provided in ORS 305.280 (Time for filing appeals) and 305.560 (Appeals procedure generally), if all of the following criteria are met:

(a) The person must be aggrieved by and affected by an act, omission, order or determination of:

(A) The Department of Revenue in its administration of the revenue and tax laws of this state;

(B) A county board of property tax appeals other than an order of the board;

(C) A county assessor or other county official, including but not limited to the denial of a claim for exemption, the denial of special assessment under a special assessment statute, or the denial of a claim for cancellation of assessment; or

(D) A tax collector.

(b) The act, omission, order or determination must affect the property of the person making the appeal or property for which the person making the appeal holds an interest that obligates the person to pay taxes imposed on the property. As used in this paragraph, an interest that obligates the person to pay taxes includes a contract, lease or other intervening instrumentality.

(c) There is no other statutory right of appeal for the grievance.

(2) Except as otherwise provided by law, any person having a statutory right of appeal under the revenue and tax laws of the state may appeal to the tax court as provided in ORS 305.404 (Oregon Tax Court) to 305.560 (Appeals procedure generally).

(3) If a taxpayer may appeal to the board of property tax appeals under ORS 309.100 (Petitions), then no appeal may be allowed under this section. The appeal under this section is from an order of the board as a result of the appeal filed under ORS 309.100 (Petitions) or from an order of the board that certain corrections, additions to or changes in the roll be made.

(4) A county assessor who is aggrieved by an order of the county board of property tax appeals may appeal from the order as provided in this section, ORS 305.280 (Time for filing appeals) and 305.560 (Appeals procedure generally). [1977 c.870 §5; 1985 c.85 §10; 1987 c.512 §4; 1991 c.459 §12; 1993 c.270 §7; 1995 c.79 §107; 1995 c.650 §7; 1997 c.541 §§52,52a,53,53a; 1999 c.314 §62; 1999 c.340 §2; 2011 c.111 §3]

Notes of Decisions

Under Former Similar Statute

Plaintiffs were entitled to ap­peal to Depart­ment of Revenue under this sec­tion when significant change of posi­tion by assessor affecting their prop­erty occurred too late to allow them to ap­peal to board of equaliza­tion. Moore v. Dept. of Rev., 4 OTR 573 (1971)

Jurisdic­tion over ques­tion of ap­pli­ca­bil­i­ty of partial exemp­tion lies not with board of equaliza­tion under ORS 309.100 (Petitions), but pursuant to pro­vi­sions of [former] ORS 306.520. Heenan and Domogalla v. Dept. of Rev., 5 OTR 78 (1972)

Completed Cita­tions

Emanuel Lutheran Charity Bd. v. Dept. of Rev., 4 OTR 410 (1971), affd 263 Or 287, 502 P2d 251 (1972)

In General

Appealing party from an order of Multnomah County Board of Equaliza­tion reducing true cash value must be Depart­ment of Administrative Services of Multnomah County, acting through its appropriate of­fi­cer. Multnomah County v. Dept. of Revenue, 8 OTR 422 (1980)

After valua­tion of prop­erty is placed on tax rolls and affirmed by a board of equaliza­tion, assessor may not correct value judg­ment and is not aggrieved party for purposes of this sec­tion. Wynne v. Dept of Revenue, 9 OTR 378 (1983)

Appeal under this sec­tion of alleged overvalua­tion of prop­erty in one tax year was insufficient to invoke depart­ments supervisory authority under ORS 306.115 (General supervision over property tax system) to correct erroneous valua­tions made in earlier years. ESCO Corp. v. Dept. of Rev., 307 Or 639, 772 P2d 413 (1989)

Where legislature recognized taxpayers interest in [former] ORS 311.215 and assessor denied relief plaintiff was seeking, plaintiff-taxpayer was aggrieved by act or omission of assessor and has standing to seek writ of mandamus against county assessor. NW Medical Lab. v. Good Samaritan Hospital, 309 Or 262, 786 P2d 718 (1990)

Appeal of disqualifica­tion for special farm use assess­ment must be made directly to depart­ment. Glancy v. Dept. of Rev., 12 OTR 117 (1991)

Where taxpayer challenges prop­erty assess­ment, de novo nature of pro­ceed­ing permits assessor to introduce evidence es­tab­lishing market value higher than ap­pealed valua­tion and to obtain increased assess­ment. Clark v. Dept. of Revenue, 14 OTR 221 (1997)

To be aggrieved, taxpayer must have immediate claim of wrong. Kaady v. Dept. of Revenue, 15 OTR 124 (2000)

Law Review Cita­tions

In General

48 WLR 147 (2011)

Chapter 305

Notes of Decisions

Policy of efficient and effective tax collec­tion makes doctrine of estoppel against govern­ment in tax cases one of rare applica­tion. Pacific Conference v. Dept. of Rev., 7 OTR 429 (1978)

Law Review Cita­tions

9 WLJ 193-260 (1973); 48 WLR 147 (2011)


1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 305—Administration of Revenue and Tax Laws; Appeals, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors305.­html (2015) (last ac­cessed Jul. 16, 2016).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2015, Chapter 305, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano305.­html (2015) (last ac­cessed Jul. 16, 2016).
 
3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections. Each listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text. The result reveals relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent.