285C.210
Substantial curtailment of business operations. (1) For purposes of ORS 285C.175,
285C.200 and 285C.240, except as provided in subsection (3) of this section,
operations of a business firm within the enterprise zone are substantially
curtailed when:
(a) Pursuant to
the initial claim of exemption and satisfaction of ORS 285C.200 (1)(c), the
number of employees of the firm:
(A) Is reduced by
more than 85 percent from the highest number of employees of the firm; or
(B) Has been
reduced by more than 50 percent from the highest number of employees of the
firm over two consecutive annual filing periods under ORS 285C.220 (1); or
(b) The annual
average number of employees of the firm during the first assessment year for
which the exemption under ORS 285C.175 is granted, or any subsequently allowed
year of exemption, is reduced below the greater of:
(A) The annual
average number of employees of the firm, averaged over the 12 months preceding
the date of the application for authorization, plus one employee; or
(B) 110 percent
of the annual average number of employees of the firm, averaged over the 12
months preceding the date of the application for authorization.
(2) For the
purposes of this section:
(a) Except as
provided in paragraph (c)(A) of this subsection, the number of employees of the
firm is the employment of the firm, as defined in ORS 285C.200 (7)(b), on the
earlier of the date a claim for exemption is filed under ORS 285C.220 or April
1 of the year in which the exemption is initially claimed under ORS 285C.175
and following each assessment year of the exemption, including after the last
such assessment year.
(b) Except as
provided in paragraph (c)(B) of this subsection, the annual average number of
employees of the firm is the number of employees of the firm averaged over the
course of each assessment year in which an exemption under ORS 285C.175 is
allowed, using employment figures for no fewer than four equivalent periods
during the year.
(c) For the first
assessment year for which an authorized business firm that qualifies under ORS
285C.200 (5) claims an exemption under ORS 285C.175, substantial curtailment
under subsection (1)(a)(A) or (b) of this section shall be determined by:
(A) Combining the
number of employees of the firm and the number of employees at any applicable
site of the firm outside the enterprise zone; and
(B) Combining the
annual average number of employees of the firm with the annual average number
of employees at any applicable site of the firm outside the enterprise zone.
(3) Operations of
a business firm are not substantially curtailed under this section during a
period of suspension as otherwise provided in ORS 285C.203. [2003 c.662 §40;
2010 c.39 §5; 2017 c.83 §7]
Notes of Decisions
United Streetcar, LLC v. Dept. of Rev., 23 Or. Tax 418 (Or. T.C. 2019).
· cites it 2× “Thereafter, the firm must not “substantially curtail operations” within the zone, based on a multiprong test set forth in ORS 285C.210. To be counted toward the minimum, an employee generally must work 32 hours per week in a nontemporary and non- construction job and spend a…”
Hynix Semiconductor v. Lane Cnty. Assessor, Tc-Md 091320b (or.tax 5-12-2011) (Or. T.C. 2011).
· cites it 15× “First, the timing of disqualification: "Whether a suspension of manufacturing activities in the third year of a three-year exemption disqualifies a taxpayer for the enterprise zone exemption, where the suspension occurs in the latter half of the third assessment year, after the…”
Hynix Semicond. Mfg. v. Lane Cnty. Assr., Tc-Md 091320b (or.tax 5-5-2011) (Or. T.C. 2011).
· cites it 15× “First, the timing of disqualification: "Whether a suspension of manufacturing activities in the third year of a three-year exemption disqualifies a taxpayer for the enterprise zone exemption, where the suspension occurs in the latter half of the third assessment year, after the…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 285C.210(1) — 1 case
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 285C.210(1)(a) — 2 cases
Hynix Semicond. Mfg. v. Lane Cnty. Assr., Tc-Md 091320b (or.tax 5-5-2011) (Or. T.C. 2011).
“First, the timing of disqualification: "Whether a suspension of manufacturing activities in the third year of a three-year exemption disqualifies a taxpayer for the enterprise zone exemption, where the suspension occurs in the latter half of the third assessment year, after the…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 285C.210(1)(c) — 1 case
United Streetcar, LLC v. Dept. of Rev., 23 Or. Tax 418 (Or. T.C. 2019).
“Thereafter, the firm must not “substantially curtail operations” within the zone, based on a multiprong test set forth in ORS 285C.210. To be counted toward the minimum, an employee generally must work 32 hours per week in a nontemporary and non- construction job and spend a…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 285C.210(2) — 2 cases
Hynix Semicond. Mfg. v. Lane Cnty. Assr., Tc-Md 091320b (or.tax 5-5-2011) (Or. T.C. 2011).
“First, the timing of disqualification: "Whether a suspension of manufacturing activities in the third year of a three-year exemption disqualifies a taxpayer for the enterprise zone exemption, where the suspension occurs in the latter half of the third assessment year, after the…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 285C.210(2)(a) — 2 cases
Hynix Semicond. Mfg. v. Lane Cnty. Assr., Tc-Md 091320b (or.tax 5-5-2011) (Or. T.C. 2011).
“First, the timing of disqualification: "Whether a suspension of manufacturing activities in the third year of a three-year exemption disqualifies a taxpayer for the enterprise zone exemption, where the suspension occurs in the latter half of the third assessment year, after the…”
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.