Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes
Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 285C.160 (2026)

Agreement between firm and sponsor for additional period of exemption; requirements

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      285C.160 Agreement between firm and sponsor for additional period of exemption; requirements. (1) An eligible business firm seeking authorization under ORS 285C.140 and the sponsor of the enterprise zone in which the firm intends to invest may enter into a written agreement to extend the period during which the qualified property is exempt from taxation under ORS 285C.175 if the firm complies with the terms of the agreement.

      (2) The period for which the qualified property is to continue to be exempt must be set forth in the agreement and may not exceed two additional tax years for which a school support fee must be paid in accordance with ORS 285C.162.

      (3) In order for an agreement under this section to extend the period of exemption, the agreement must be executed on or before the date on which the firm is authorized, and:

      (a) If the enterprise zone is a rural enterprise zone or an urban enterprise zone located inside a metropolitan statistical area of fewer than 400,000 residents, the agreement must require that the firm:

      (A)(i) Annually compensate all new employees hired by the firm at an average rate of at least 150 percent of the county average annual wage for each assessment year during the tax exemption period, as determined at the time of authorization; or

      (ii) If the enterprise zone is located in a qualified rural county, annually compensate all new employees hired by the firm at an average rate of at least 130 percent of the county average annual wage for each assessment year during the tax exemption period, as determined at the time of authorization; and

      (B) Meet any additional requirement that the sponsor may reasonably request.

      (b) Notwithstanding paragraph (a)(A) of this subsection, the average wage received by the newly hired employees must equal or exceed 100 percent of the average wage in the county.

      (c) If the enterprise zone is an urban enterprise zone located inside a metropolitan statistical area of 400,000 residents or more, the agreement must require that the firm meet any additional requirement the sponsor may reasonably require.

      (4) If a firm enters into an agreement under this section that includes a compensation requirement under subsection (3)(a)(A) of this section and the firm subsequently submits one or more statements of continued intent under ORS 285C.165, notwithstanding the terms of the agreement made under this section, for each statement of continued intent submitted, the county average annual wage under subsection (3)(a)(A) of this section shall be adjusted to a level that is current with the statement. [2003 c.662 §34; 2005 c.94 §9; 2017 c.610 §23; 2023 c.298 §46]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 2011–2019 · leading case: United Streetcar, LLC v. Dept. of Rev., 23 Or. Tax 418 (Or. T.C. 2019).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
United Streetcar, LLC v. Dept. of Rev., 23 Or. Tax 418 (Or. T.C. 2019). · cites it 5× “Consistent with ORS 285C.160(1)(a), how- ever, the court reads the term to refer to the parties’ authority to lengthen the duration of the exemption period beyond the default period of three years.”
Hynix Semiconductor v. Lane Cnty. Assessor, Tc-Md 091320b (or.tax 5-12-2011) (Or. T.C. 2011). · cites it 3× “205 or any term of an agreement entered into with the sponsor under ORS 285C.160 with which the firm had agreed to comply; "(e) The qualified business firm uses the property to conduct activities in the enterprise zone that are not eligible activities; or "(f) Property of the…”
Hynix Semicond. Mfg. v. Lane Cnty. Assr., Tc-Md 091320b (or.tax 5-5-2011) (Or. T.C. 2011). · cites it 3× “205 or any term of an agreement entered into with the sponsor under ORS 285C.160 with which the firm had agreed to comply; "(e) The qualified business firm uses the property to conduct activities in the enterprise zone that are not eligible activities; or "(f) Property of the…”
United Streetcar, LLC v. Clackamas Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2017). “]” (d) “the qualified business firm fails to meet * * * any term of an agreement entered into with the sponsor under ORS 285C.160 with which the firm had agreed to comply[.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 285C.160(1)(a) — 1 case
United Streetcar, LLC v. Dept. of Rev., 23 Or. Tax 418 (Or. T.C. 2019). “Consistent with ORS 285C.160(1)(a), how- ever, the court reads the term to refer to the parties’ authority to lengthen the duration of the exemption period beyond the default period of three years.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 285C.160(2) — 1 case
United Streetcar, LLC v. Dept. of Rev., 23 Or. Tax 418 (Or. T.C. 2019). “Consistent with ORS 285C.160(1)(a), how- ever, the court reads the term to refer to the parties’ authority to lengthen the duration of the exemption period beyond the default period of three years.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 285C.160(3) — 1 case
United Streetcar, LLC v. Dept. of Rev., 23 Or. Tax 418 (Or. T.C. 2019). “Consistent with ORS 285C.160(1)(a), how- ever, the court reads the term to refer to the parties’ authority to lengthen the duration of the exemption period beyond the default period of three years.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 285C.160(3)(a)(B) — 1 case
United Streetcar, LLC v. Dept. of Rev., 23 Or. Tax 418 (Or. T.C. 2019). “Consistent with ORS 285C.160(1)(a), how- ever, the court reads the term to refer to the parties’ authority to lengthen the duration of the exemption period beyond the default period of three years.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 285C.160(3)(b) — 1 case
United Streetcar, LLC v. Dept. of Rev., 23 Or. Tax 418 (Or. T.C. 2019). “Consistent with ORS 285C.160(1)(a), how- ever, the court reads the term to refer to the parties’ authority to lengthen the duration of the exemption period beyond the default period of three years.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.