Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 305.820 (2026)

Date when writing, remittance or electronic filing deemed received by tax officials

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

      305.820 Date when writing, remittance or electronic filing deemed received by tax officials. (1) Any writing or remittance required by law to be filed with or made to the Department of Revenue, county property value appeals board, county assessor or tax collector (designated in this section as the “addressee”) which is:

      (a) Transmitted through the United States mail or by private express carrier, shall be deemed filed or received on the date shown by the cancellation mark or other record of transmittal, or on the date it was mailed or deposited if proof satisfactory to the addressee establishes that the actual mailing or deposit occurred on an earlier date.

      (b) Filed electronically pursuant to a rule of the department adopted under ORS 306.265 and 309.104 that authorizes the electronic filing and that meets the specifications and requirements of the rule, shall be deemed to be filed and received on the date actually received by the addressee, or on the date stated on the electronic acknowledgment of receipt that is sent by the addressee.

      (c) Lost in transmission through the United States mail or private express carrier, shall be deemed filed and received on the date it was mailed or deposited for transmittal if the sender:

      (A) Can establish by competent evidence satisfactory to the addressee that the writing or remittance was deposited on or before the date due for filing in the United States mail, or with a private express carrier, and addressed correctly to the addressee; and

      (B) Files with the addressee a duplicate of the lost writing or remittance within 30 days after written notification is given by the addressee of its failure to receive such writing or remittance.

      (2) Whenever any writing or remittance is required by law to be filed or made on a day which falls on a Saturday, or on a Sunday or any legal holiday, the time specified shall be extended to include the next business day.

      (3) As used in this section:

      (a) “Private express carrier” means a carrier described under ORS 293.660.

      (b) “Writing or remittance” includes, but is not limited to, “report,” “tax return,” “claim for credit,” “claim for refund,” “statement,” “notice of appeal,” “petition for review,” “notice of election,” “documentary proof,” a claim for exemption, a claim for deferral, a return of property, a claim for cancellation of an assessment, an application for a special assessment, and remittances. [Formerly 306.440; 1965 c.344 §27; 1993 c.44 §2; 1993 c.270 §23; 1997 c.154 §11; 1997 c.541 §87; 2023 c.29 §8]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1969–2025 · leading case: Mid-Willamette Valley Comm. Action Agcy. v. Dept. of Rev., 24 Or. Tax 214 (Or. T.C. 2020).
Mid-Willamette Valley Comm. Action Agcy. v. Dept. of Rev., 24 Or. Tax 214 (Or. T.C. 2020). · cites it 2× “162(2)(a)(A), which in 2017 fell on a Sunday and immediately preceded a holiday, and thus was extended to January 2, 2018, by operation of ORS 305.820(2). 216 Mid-Willamette Valley Comm.”
Jackson Cnty. Tax Collector v. Dep't of Revenue, 12 Or. Tax 498 (Or. T.C. 1993). “ORS 305.820(1)(a) provides that any remittance sent through the United States mail: “[S]hall be deemed filed or received on the date shown by the post-office cancellation mark stamped upon the envelope containing it, or on the date it was mailed if proof satisfactory to the…”
Egusa v. Dep't of Revenue, 13 Or. Tax 1 (Or. T.C. 1994). “ORS 305.820 (1987 Replacement Part) provides in part: “(1) Any writing or remittance required by law to be filed with or made to the Department of Revenue, * * * which is: “(a) Transmitted through the United States mail, shall be deemed filed or received on the date shown by the…”
Proud Truck Sales, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 4 Or. Tax 566 (Or. T.C. 1971). “ORS 305.820 provides: “(1) Any writing or remittance required by law to be filed with or made to the Department of Revenue, county board of equalization, county assessor or tax collector (designated in this section as the ‘addressee’) which is: U# * * # * “(b) Lost in…”
Day v. Dep't of Revenue, Tc 4892 (or.tax 11-30-2010) (Or. T.C. 2010). · cites it 8× “ORS 305.820 provides, in relevant part that: "(1) Any writing or remittance required by law to be filed with * * * the Department of Revenue * * * which is: "* * * * * *Page 7 "(c) Lost in transmission through the United States mail * * * shall be deemed filed and received on…”
Stone v. Dep't of Revenue, 5 Or. Tax 503 (Or. T.C. 1974). · cites it 3× “010 (2); ORS 305.820 (2). During the course of April 16, while examining, personal records, it occurred to the plaintiff that the extension of time for filing the personal income tax return might not be applicable to the special requirement of filing the ORS 310.”
Dennis v. Dep't of Revenue, Tc-Md 091424d (or.tax 9-8-2010) (Or. T.C. 2010). · cites it 4× “Derickson testified that Defendant allowed all extrinsic evidence provided by Plaintiffs, carefully reviewed it in accordance with ORS 305.820, and that she does not believe Defendant abused its discretion in determining that Plaintiffs' 2005 Oregon return and refund claim were…”
Bernard Chevrolet Co. v. Comm'n, 3 Or. Tax 411 (Or. T.C. 1969). “The plaintiff relies on ORS 305.820 which provides that any writing required by law to be filed with the county assessor (among others) and transmitted through the United States mail shall be deemed filed or received on the date shown on the cancellation mark on the envelope or…”
Schytz v. Yamhill Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2024). · cites it 2× “ORS 305.820(1)(a) provides guidance for determining the date a payment mailed through the USPS is deemed filed or received: “(1) Any writing or remittance required by law to be filed with or made to the Department of Revenue, county board of property tax appeals, county assessor…”
Tillamook Lodging LPI v. Tillamook Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2025). · cites it 2× “) Defendant disagrees because “Plaintiff’s payment was postmarked after the November 15th due date per ORS 305.820(1)(a).” (Ans at 1.) Defendant provided a photograph of the envelope it marked as received from Plaintiff (disputed envelope).”
O'Neill v. Multnomah Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2012). · cites it 2× “ORS 305.820(1)(a) permits a taxpayer to prove that a document was mailed on a date other than the date stated by a post office cancellation mark.”
St. Vincent de Paul Soc'y of Lane Cnty., Inc. v. Lane Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2018). “See ORS 305.820(2). Thus, advice received on or after January 22, 2018, could not have had an impact on taxpayer’s failure to apply by the late-filing deadline.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 305.820(1)(a) — 4 cases
Jackson Cnty. Tax Collector v. Dep't of Revenue, 12 Or. Tax 498 (Or. T.C. 1993). “ORS 305.820(1)(a) provides that any remittance sent through the United States mail: “[S]hall be deemed filed or received on the date shown by the post-office cancellation mark stamped upon the envelope containing it, or on the date it was mailed if proof satisfactory to the…”
Schytz v. Yamhill Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2024). “ORS 305.820(1)(a) provides guidance for determining the date a payment mailed through the USPS is deemed filed or received: “(1) Any writing or remittance required by law to be filed with or made to the Department of Revenue, county board of property tax appeals, county assessor…”
Tillamook Lodging LPI v. Tillamook Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2025). “) Defendant disagrees because “Plaintiff’s payment was postmarked after the November 15th due date per ORS 305.820(1)(a).” (Ans at 1.) Defendant provided a photograph of the envelope it marked as received from Plaintiff (disputed envelope).”
O'Neill v. Multnomah Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2012). “ORS 305.820(1)(a) permits a taxpayer to prove that a document was mailed on a date other than the date stated by a post office cancellation mark.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 305.820(1)(a)(B) — 1 case
Day v. Dep't of Revenue, Tc 4892 (or.tax 11-30-2010) (Or. T.C. 2010). “ORS 305.820 provides, in relevant part that: "(1) Any writing or remittance required by law to be filed with * * * the Department of Revenue * * * which is: "* * * * * *Page 7 "(c) Lost in transmission through the United States mail * * * shall be deemed filed and received on…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 305.820(1)(c) — 1 case
Day v. Dep't of Revenue, Tc 4892 (or.tax 11-30-2010) (Or. T.C. 2010). “ORS 305.820 provides, in relevant part that: "(1) Any writing or remittance required by law to be filed with * * * the Department of Revenue * * * which is: "* * * * * *Page 7 "(c) Lost in transmission through the United States mail * * * shall be deemed filed and received on…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 305.820(1)(c)(B) — 1 case
Day v. Dep't of Revenue, Tc 4892 (or.tax 11-30-2010) (Or. T.C. 2010). “ORS 305.820 provides, in relevant part that: "(1) Any writing or remittance required by law to be filed with * * * the Department of Revenue * * * which is: "* * * * * *Page 7 "(c) Lost in transmission through the United States mail * * * shall be deemed filed and received on…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 305.820(2) — 8 cases
Mid-Willamette Valley Comm. Action Agcy. v. Dept. of Rev., 24 Or. Tax 214 (Or. T.C. 2020). “162(2)(a)(A), which in 2017 fell on a Sunday and immediately preceded a holiday, and thus was extended to January 2, 2018, by operation of ORS 305.820(2). 216 Mid-Willamette Valley Comm.”
Dennis v. Dep't of Revenue, Tc-Md 091424d (or.tax 9-8-2010) (Or. T.C. 2010). “Derickson testified that Defendant allowed all extrinsic evidence provided by Plaintiffs, carefully reviewed it in accordance with ORS 305.820, and that she does not believe Defendant abused its discretion in determining that Plaintiffs' 2005 Oregon return and refund claim were…”
St. Vincent de Paul Soc'y of Lane Cnty., Inc. v. Lane Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2018). “See ORS 305.820(2). Thus, advice received on or after January 22, 2018, could not have had an impact on taxpayer’s failure to apply by the late-filing deadline.”
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.