Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 305.895 (2026)

Action against property before issuance of warrant prohibited; prerequisites for warrant

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

      305.895 Action against property before issuance of warrant prohibited; prerequisites for warrant. (1) Except as provided in ORS 314.440 or other jeopardy assessment procedure, the Department of Revenue shall take no action against a taxpayer’s or transferee’s real or personal property before issuing a warrant for the collection of tax or an amount payable by a transferee under ORS 311.695 as provided in ORS 314.430, 320.080, 321.570, 323.390, 323.610, 324.190 and 475C.688.

      (2) At least 30 days before issuing a warrant for collection of any tax collected by the department or any amount payable under ORS 311.695, the department shall send the taxpayer or transferee a written notice and demand for payment. The notice shall:

      (a) Be sent by mail, addressed to the taxpayer or transferee at the taxpayer’s or transferee’s last-known address.

      (b) Inform the taxpayer or transferee that, even if the taxpayer or transferee is compliant with an installment agreement between the taxpayer or transferee and the department and is in communication with the department, if the tax or any portion of the tax or the amount payable under ORS 311.695 is not paid within 30 days after the date of the notice and demand for payment, a warrant may be issued and recorded as provided in ORS 314.430, 320.080, 321.570, 323.390, 323.610, 324.190 and 475C.688.

      (c) Describe in clear nontechnical terms the legal authority for the warrant.

      (d) Contain the name, office mailing address and office telephone number of the person issuing the warrant and advise the taxpayer or transferee that questions or complaints concerning the warrant, other than liability for the underlying tax or amount payable under ORS 311.695, may be directed to that person.

      (e) Include alternatives available to the taxpayer or transferee that would prevent issuance of the warrant.

      (f) Inform the taxpayer that certain types of income are exempt from garnishment.

      (g) Inform the taxpayer or transferee of possible consequences to the taxpayer or transferee of noncompliance, and of issuance of a warrant, including garnishment of wages or bank accounts and seizure and sale of real or personal property. [1989 c.625 §74; 2011 c.389 §7; 2011 c.723 §25; 2015 c.643 §4; 2015 c.699 §16]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 2017–2019 · leading case: Christensen v. Dept. of Rev., 22 Or. Tax 384 (Or. T.C. 2017).
Christensen v. Dept. of Rev., 22 Or. Tax 384 (Or. T.C. 2017). · cites it 3× “For example, consider ORS 305.895, which provides for several things, including that the department “shall take no action against a taxpayer’s * * * property before issu- ing a warrant for the collection of tax * * * under * * * [ORS] 321.”
Christensen II v. Dept. of Rev., 23 Or. Tax 155 (Or. T.C. 2018). · cites it 2× “See ORS 305.895. The court concludes, based on this statutory context, that “facilitate collection” means that the department must compare (1) the amount the department will likely collect by directly interacting with the taxpayer to negotiate an installment contract to which…”
Santa Fe Nat. Tobacco Co. v. Dept. of Rev. (Or. T.C. 2019). “; ORS 305.895(2). Subject to exceptions not pertinent here, collections proceedings are “stayed by the taking or pendency of any appeal to the tax court.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 305.895(2) — 1 case
Santa Fe Nat. Tobacco Co. v. Dept. of Rev. (Or. T.C. 2019). “; ORS 305.895(2). Subject to exceptions not pertinent here, collections proceedings are “stayed by the taking or pendency of any appeal to the tax court.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 305.895(2)(d) — 1 case
Christensen II v. Dept. of Rev., 23 Or. Tax 155 (Or. T.C. 2018). “See ORS 305.895. The court concludes, based on this statutory context, that “facilitate collection” means that the department must compare (1) the amount the department will likely collect by directly interacting with the taxpayer to negotiate an installment contract to which…”
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.