2017 ORS 308.510¹
Real and personal property classified for ORS 308.505 to 308.681

For purposes of assessing property under ORS 308.505 (Definitions for ORS 308.505 to 308.681) to 308.681 (Annual report to legislature on ORS 308.677):

(1) All land of any railroad, logging road, electric rail or railroad switching and terminal company, including land used or held and claimed exclusively as right of way, with all the tracks and substructures and superstructures that support the right of way, together with all buildings or other structures or improvements, without separating the land and improvements, is real property. Vehicles and any other property is personal property.

(2) All land of any company is real property. Except as provided in subsection (1) of this section, all buildings, structures, improvements of any kind or fixtures of a permanent character of any kind that are located on land that is owned or used by a company is real property. All other property owned or used by a company is personal property.

(3)(a) Except as provided in ORS 308.517 (To whom property assessed) (2) and paragraphs (b) and (c) of this subsection, the renting, leasing, chartering or otherwise assigning of property exclusively for the use or benefit of another does not constitute a use by the lessor.

(b) A lessor shall be deemed the user of property rented, leased or otherwise furnished by the lessor to the employees of the lessor as an incident of employment.

(c) A rail transportation company shall be deemed the user of property located within the rail transportation company’s station ground reservations or rights of way, notwithstanding that the property may be leased, rented or otherwise assigned by the rail transportation company for the use or benefit of another.

(4) Property found by the Department of Revenue to have an integrated use for or in more than one business, service or sale, where at least one such business, service or sale is one enumerated in ORS 308.515 (Department to make annual assessment of designated utilities and companies), shall be classified by the department as being within or without the definition of property under ORS 308.505 (Definitions for ORS 308.505 to 308.681), according to the primary use of such property, as determined by the department.

(5) For purposes of determining the maximum assessed value of property under section 11, Article XI of the Oregon Constitution, “property” means all property assessed to each company that is subject to assessment under ORS 308.505 (Definitions for ORS 308.505 to 308.681) to 308.681 (Annual report to legislature on ORS 308.677). [Amended by 1957 c.711 §2; 1977 c.602 §2; 1997 c.154 §32; 1997 c.541 §203; 2003 c.46 §18; 2009 c.128 §4]

Notes of Decisions

The method used by the Depart­ment of Revenue to determine the assess­ment value of the taxpayers’ flatcars, which method took into account the “going concern” value attributable to the prop­erty, was within the require­ments of ORS 308.550 (Valuing property of company operating both within and without state). Trailer Train Co. v. Dept. of Rev., 5 OTR 170 (1973)

Where uncompleted plans and specifica­tions for nuclear and coal-fired generating plants of public utility were in ownership and control of out-of-state engineering firm preparing them, though plaintiff had unliquidated claim for damages if plans were not delivered, the claim did not have situs in state and was not used for plaintiff’s business as of assess­ment date. Portland Gen. Elec. Co. v. Dept. of Rev., 7 OTR 33 (1977)

A prop­erty connec­tion between corpora­tions is shown by the right of one company to control the opera­tions of the other company, and where Southern Pacific exerted executive control of Cottonbelt’s marketing, financing, manage­ment, opera­tions and labor, Southern Pacific was the owner of Cottonbelt for purposes of these sec­tions. Southern Pacific Trans. Co. v. Dept. of Revenue, 295 Or 47, 664 P2d 401 (1983)

Plaintiff’s use of wa­ter power constituted use of prop­erty subject to taxa­tion and must be added to value of plaintiff’s hydroelectric facility. Joseph Hydro Associates v. Dept. of Rev., 11 OTR 49 (1988)

In determining value of small hydroelectric plant, reasonable basis of comparisons and analysis is actual rather than projected produc­tion. Falls Creek H.P. Ltd. Partnership v. Dept. of Rev., 12 OTR 55 (1991)

To be user of prop­erty taxpayer must have some de­gree of control, but not necessarily absolute control, over prop­erty at issue. Pacificorp Power Marketing v. Dept. of Revenue, 340 Or 204, 131 P3d 725 (2006)

This sec­tion and ORS 308.515 (Department to make annual assessment of designated utilities and companies) do not prevent applica­tion of inventory tax exemp­tion under ORS 307.400 (Inventory) to inventory of centrally assessed companies. Northwest Natural Gas Co. v. Dept. of Revenue, 19 OTR 367 (2007), aff’d 347 Or 536, 226 P3d 28 (2010)

Notes of Decisions

The wa­ter system in a planned unit develop­ment was properly assessed by the Depart­ment of Revenue as having value for which taxes should have been assessed. Brooks Resources v. Dept. of Rev., 276 Or 1177, 538 P2d 312 (1976)

In valuing a railroad, the weight to be given each approach customarily used (cost, stock and debt, and income) and the varia­tion among appraisers in the minutiae of their methods, if in dispute, are left to the court to consider. Burlington Northern v. Dept. of Rev., 8 OTR 19 (1979), as modified by 291 Or 729, 635 P2d 347 (1981)

Land infested with tansy ragwort and therefore not used to obtain a profit was properly disqualified for special assess­ment at true cash value for farm use. Shepherd v. Dept. of Rev., 8 OTR 122 (1979)

While it is allowable to use only one approach in valuing prop­erty, whether in any given assess­ment one approach should be used exclusive of the others or is preferable to an­oth­er or to combina­tion of approaches is ques­tion of fact to be determined by the court. Pacific Power and Light Co. v. Dept. of Rev., 286 Or 529, 596 P2d 912 (1979)

Central assess­ment statutes create excep­tion to public prop­erty tax exemp­tion out­lined in ORS 307.090 (Property of the state, counties and other municipal corporations). Pacificorp Power Marketing v. Dept. of Revenue, 340 Or 204, 131 P3d 725 (2006)

Law Review Cita­tions

26 WLR 714 (1990)

Chapter 308

Notes of Decisions

Programs administered by Depart­ment of Revenue that allow preferential assess­ment for farm and forestland are not “programs affecting land use” and are not subject to require­ment of statewide goal and local comprehensive plan compliance under ORS 197.180 (State agency planning responsibilities). Springer v. LCDC, 111 Or App 262, 826 P2d 54 (1992), Sup Ct review denied

Atty. Gen. Opinions

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 308—Assessment of Property for Taxation, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors308.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2017, Chapter 308, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano308.­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.