Find Laws Find Lawyers Free Legal Forms USA State Laws
Laws-info.com » Cases » Oregon » Tax Court Magistrate Division » 2007 » Photo Solutions, Inc. v. Columbia County Assessor
Photo Solutions, Inc. v. Columbia County Assessor
State: Oregon
Court: Oregon District Court
Docket No: 070592C
Case Date: 08/31/2007
Judge: Dan Robinson
Plaintiff: Photo Solutions, Inc.
Defendant: Columbia County Assessor
Preview:IN THE OREGON TAX COURT MAGISTRATE DIVISION Property Tax PHOTO SOLUTIONS, INC., Plaintiff, v. COLUMBIA COUNTY ASSESSOR, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

TC-MD 070592C

DECISION

Plaintiff appeals the penalty assessed by Defendant for Plaintiff's failure to file personal property tax returns for tax years 2001-02 through 2005-06. The August 20, 2007, case management conference was converted to a trial at the request of the parties. Brad Curtis (Curtis), owner of Photo Solutions, Inc., represented Plaintiff and testified on behalf of the company. Defendant was represented by Sue Poling, Columbia County Assessor. I. STATEMENT OF FACTS Curtis began operating a business out of his home in 1989. He incorporated as Photo Solutions, Inc., in 1994, with the assistance of a Vancouver, Washington, CPA firm. The company purchased land in 2004 and completed construction of a building in May 2005. Operations shifted to the new locale after the building was completed. Defendant audited the business after Plaintiff moved into the new building and discovered that Plaintiff had untaxed personal property for which no personal property tax returns were filed through the 2005-06 tax year. Defendant thereafter added the personal property to the assessment and tax rolls as omitted property for tax years 2001-02 through 2005-06, as provided in ORS 311.216.1 The property was assigned Account 04-01 P 10892, Tax ID #428316. Defendant also assessed penalties for those years totaling nearly $3,500. The
1

Unless noted otherwise, all references to the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) are to 2005.

DECISION TC-MD 070592C

1

penalty imposed was equal to 100 percent of the tax for the 2001-02 tax year and 50 percent of the tax for the remaining years. Plaintiff does not challenge the values Defendant ascribed to the property, but Plaintiff requests relief from all of the penalties imposed. II. ANALYSIS Every person or business that owns "taxable personal property" is required to file a personal property tax return by "March 1" of each year. ORS 308.290(1)(a). Plaintiff's business-use personal property is taxable. Plaintiff was therefore required to file returns. If a party fails to file a required return by the March 1 annual deadline, it "shall be * * * subject to the provisions of ORS 308.296." Id. ORS 308.296(4) provides that any taxpayer responsible for filing a personal property return who or which has not done so "shall be subject to a penalty equal to 50 percent of the tax attributable to the taxable personal property of the taxpayer." Prior to a statutory amendment in 2001, which took effect in 2002,2 the penalty was equal to 100 percent of the tax. ORS 308.296(4) (1999) (providing for a 100 percent penalty for returns filed after August 1); Or Laws 2001, ch 925,
Download 070592CDECPhotoSolutions.pdf

Oregon Law

Oregon State Laws
Oregon Tax
Oregon Court
    > Muller v. Oregon
Oregon Labor Laws
Oregon Agencies
    > DMV Oregon

Comments

Tips