Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 285C.180 (2026)

Qualified property generally

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

      285C.180 Qualified property generally. (1) The following types of property are qualified for exemption under ORS 285C.175:

      (a) A newly constructed building or structure.

      (b) A new addition to or modification of an existing building or structure.

      (c) Any real property machinery or equipment or personal property, whether new, used or reconditioned, that is installed on property that is owned or leased by an authorized business firm, and:

      (A) Newly purchased or leased by the firm, unless the property is described in ORS 285C.175 (4)(a); or

      (B) Newly transferred into the enterprise zone from outside the county within which the site of the firm is located and installed.

      (2) Property described in subsection (1) of this section is qualified under this section only if:

      (a) The property meets or exceeds the minimum cost requirements established under ORS 285C.185;

      (b) The property satisfies applicable usage, lease or location requirements established under ORS 285C.185;

      (c) The property was constructed, added, modified or installed to further the production of income;

      (d) The property is owned or leased by an authorized business firm;

      (e) The location of the property corresponds to the location as set forth in the application for authorization of the business firm and consists of a single site or multiple sites adjacent to or having comparable proximity to each other, within the boundaries of the enterprise zone;

      (f) The property is the same general type of property as described in the application for authorization; and

      (g) In the case of an eligible business firm described in ORS 285C.135 (5)(b), the actual investment at the facility of the firm is consistent with the description set forth in the application for authorization.

      (3) Notwithstanding subsection (1) of this section, the following property is not qualified for exemption under ORS 285C.175:

      (a) Land.

      (b) Property that was not in use or occupancy for more than a 180-day period that ends during the preceding assessment year.

      (c) On-site developments that, consistent with ORS 307.010, are assessed as land.

      (d) Noninventory supplies, including but not limited to lubricants.

      (e) Any operator-driven item of machinery or equipment or any vehicle, if the item or vehicle moves by internal motorized power. An item or vehicle described in this paragraph includes but is not limited to an item or vehicle that moves within an enclosed space.

      (f) Any device or rolling stock that is pulled, pushed or carried by a vehicle that is suitable as a mode of transportation beyond the enterprise zone boundary.

      (4) Subsection (3)(b) of this section does not apply to the first assessment year for which the property is exempt under ORS 285C.175.

      (5) For purposes of this section and ORS 285C.175, property includes any portion or incremental unit of property that is newly constructed or installed, or that is a new addition to or modification of an existing building or structure. [Formerly 285B.713; 2015 c.648 §22]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2011–2022 · leading case: Seneca Sustainable Energy, LLC v. Dep't of Revenue, 429 P.3d 360 (Or. 2018).
Seneca Sustainable Energy, LLC v. Dep't of Revenue, 429 P.3d 360 (Or. 2018). · cites it 2× “The value of the land underlying the facility is not part of the "industrial property" and, therefore, it is not included in the enterprise zone exemption (ORS 285C.180(1) ; ORS 285C.180(3) ), and it is not exempt from taxation.”
United Streetcar, LLC v. Dept. of Rev., 23 Or. Tax 418 (Or. T.C. 2019). · cites it 2× “See ORS 285C.180. was first enacted in 1985, but as relevant to this order has been unchanged for the property tax years 2010-11 through 2016-17.”
Edgeconnex, Inc. v. Washington Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2022). · cites it 2× “175(1)(a); ORS 285C.180. 6 6 The court’s references to the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) are to 2017.”
Ferment Brewing Co. v. Hood River Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2022). · cites it 2× “” United Streetcar, 2019 WL 3034444 at *1 (citing ORS 285C.180). /// 17 While the property is under construction, the firm may seek CIP exemptions.”
Hynix Semiconductor v. Lane Cnty. Assessor, Tc-Md 091320b (or.tax 5-12-2011) (Or. T.C. 2011). “175 is claimed ceases to be qualified property under ORS 285C.180. "(3)(a) When an assessor receives written notice under subsection (1) or (2) of this section, the assessor shall disqualify the property for the assessment year following the disqualifying event and 100 percent…”
Hynix Semicond. Mfg. v. Lane Cnty. Assr., Tc-Md 091320b (or.tax 5-5-2011) (Or. T.C. 2011). “175 is claimed ceases to be qualified property under ORS 285C.180. * * * * * "(3)(a) When an assessor receives written notice under subsection (1) or (2) of this section, the assessor shall disqualify the property for the assessment year following the disqualifying event and 100…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 285C.180(1) — 2 cases
Seneca Sustainable Energy, LLC v. Dep't of Revenue, 429 P.3d 360 (Or. 2018). “The value of the land underlying the facility is not part of the "industrial property" and, therefore, it is not included in the enterprise zone exemption (ORS 285C.180(1) ; ORS 285C.180(3) ), and it is not exempt from taxation.”
United Streetcar, LLC v. Dept. of Rev., 23 Or. Tax 418 (Or. T.C. 2019). “See ORS 285C.180. was first enacted in 1985, but as relevant to this order has been unchanged for the property tax years 2010-11 through 2016-17.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 285C.180(2)(b) — 1 case
Ferment Brewing Co. v. Hood River Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2022). “” United Streetcar, 2019 WL 3034444 at *1 (citing ORS 285C.180). /// 17 While the property is under construction, the firm may seek CIP exemptions.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 285C.180(3) — 1 case
Seneca Sustainable Energy, LLC v. Dep't of Revenue, 429 P.3d 360 (Or. 2018). “The value of the land underlying the facility is not part of the "industrial property" and, therefore, it is not included in the enterprise zone exemption (ORS 285C.180(1) ; ORS 285C.180(3) ), and it is not exempt from taxation.”
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.