2017 ORS 307.475¹
Hardship relief for failure to file for exemption, cancellation of assessment or redetermination of value

(1) Any taxpayer may apply to the Director of the Department of Revenue for a recommendation that the value of certain property be:

(a) Stricken from the assessment roll and that any taxes assessed against such property be stricken from the tax roll on the grounds of hardship; or

(b) Redetermined pursuant to ORS 308.146 (Determination of maximum assessed value and assessed value) (6).

(2) As used in this section, “hardship” means a situation where property is subject to taxation but would have received relief had there been a timely filing of a valid claim for exemption, for cancellation of assessment or for a redetermination of value pursuant to ORS 308.146 (Determination of maximum assessed value and assessed value) (6), and where the failure to make timely application for the exemption, cancellation or change in assessment date was by reason of good and sufficient cause.

(3) An application to the director for a recommendation of tax relief on the grounds of hardship must be made not later than December 15 of the year in which the failure to timely file a valid claim for exemption, for cancellation of assessment or for a redetermination of value pursuant to ORS 308.146 (Determination of maximum assessed value and assessed value) (6) occurred.

(4) If the director, in the discretion of the director, finds that tax relief should be granted on the grounds of hardship, the director shall send the written recommendation of the director to the assessor of the county in which the property is located. If the assessor agrees with the recommendation, the assessor shall note approval thereon. The person in charge of the roll shall:

(a) Enter an assessment consistent with a redetermination of the value of the property as of July 1 of the assessment year;

(b) Strike all or a portion of taxes on the tax roll; or

(c) Issue a refund of taxes already paid. A refund of taxes paid shall be treated as any refund granted under ORS 311.806 (Refund of taxes on real and personal property). [1973 c.218 §1; 1979 c.689 §8; 1999 c.398 §3; 2007 c.449 §1; 2011 c.83 §7; 2015 c.92 §3]

Notes of Decisions

A late filing caused by plaintiff’s employe’s ignorance of the filing require­ment was not good and sufficient cause to grant a hardship exemp­tion under this sec­tion. Pratum Co-Op Whse. v. Dept. of Rev., 6 OTR 130 (1975)

The court will not con­duct a de novo review of the discre­tionary power given to the Depart­ment of Revenue under this sec­tion. Rogue River Packing Corp. v. Dept. of Rev., 6 OTR 293 (1976)

Director did not abuse discre­tion in denying relief under hardship pro­vi­sion of this sec­tion to automobile dealer who failed to timely file applica­tion for cancella­tion of assess­ment of unlicensed motor vehicles. Jim Fisher Motors, Inc. v. Dept. of Rev., 7 OTR 90 (1977)

Statutory standard of “good and sufficient cause” of this sec­tion is not analogous to terms “excusable neglect” or “reasonable cause” used in statutes that do not involve exercise of discre­tion by administrative of­fi­cer in determining whether important rule should be supervened. Nat’l Metallurgical Corp. v. Dept. of Rev., 7 OTR 142 (1977)

To es­tab­lish hardship under this sec­tion, taxpayer has to prove that assessed prop­erty would have been exempt if there had been timely filing of free port exemp­tion claim and that failure to make timely applica­tion for exemp­tion was by reason of good and sufficient cause. Liquid Air Inc. v. Dept. of Rev., 8 OTR 159 (1979)

Where assessor’s af­firm­a­tive acts prevented taxpayer from timely applying for hardship relief, taxpayer could not be denied opportunity to ap­peal for hardship relief. Liquid Air Inc. v. Dept. of Rev., 8 OTR 159 (1979); Southern Oregon Drydock, Inc. v. Dept. of Rev., 12 OTR 344 (1992)

This sec­tion does not authorize Depart­ment of Revenue to override filing require­ments of senior citizens’ prop­erty tax deferral. Phelps v. Dept. of Rev., 10 OTR 162 (1985)

Although “good and sufficient cause” includes reasonable reliance on misin­for­ma­­tion provided by certain assess­ment or taxa­tion staff, taxpayer cannot be misinformed unless he provides tax authority with enough in­for­ma­­tion to be led awry. New Testa­ment Baptist Church v. Dept. of Rev., 10 OTR 286 (1986)

Disqualifica­tion of prop­erty from special farm use assess­ment during pendency of bankruptcy pro­ceed­ing did not violate automatic stay but was “notice” permitted by federal statute and this sec­tion could not rescue taxpayers from their untimely ap­peal of disqualifica­tion. Sanderson v. Dept. of Rev., 11 OTR 74 (1988)

Chapter 307

Atty. Gen. Opinions

Validity of ad valorem and severance taxa­tion of logs destined for export, (1975) Vol 37, p 427; applica­tion of Article XI, sec­tion 11b of Oregon Constitu­tion to this chapter, (1990) Vol 46, p 388

Law Review Cita­tions

5 EL 516 (1975)

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 307—Property Subject to Taxation; Exemptions, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors307.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2017, Chapter 307, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano307.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
 
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.