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

Or. Rev. Stat. § 307.400 (2026)

Inventory

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

      307.400 Inventory. Items of tangible personal property consisting of inventory, including but not limited to materials, supplies, containers, goods in process, finished goods and other personal property owned by or in possession of the taxpayer, that are or will become part of the stock in trade of the taxpayer held for sale in the ordinary course of business, are exempt from ad valorem property taxation. [Formerly 310.608; 1983 c.600 §2; 1987 c.691 §2; part renumbered 307.402 in 1991; 1995 c.379 §1; 1997 c.325 §22; 2001 c.753 §12]

 

(Beverage Containers)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 26 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1985–2023 · leading case: King Est. Winery, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 988 P.2d 369 (Or. 1999).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
King Est. Winery, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 988 P.2d 369 (Or. 1999). · cites it 148× “Although taxpayer did not identify explicitly the subsection of ORS 307.400 under which it claimed an exemption, we understand taxpayer's argument to be that it was entitled to an exemption under ORS 307.”
Nw. Nat. Gas Co. v. Dep't of Revenue, 226 P.3d 28 (Or. 2010). · cites it 41× “665 is exempt from ad valorem property taxation under ORS 307.400. The Tax Court concluded that the Department of Revenue (department) had incorrectly determined that, because Northwest Natural Gas Company (taxpayer) is subject to central assessment, its inventory is not exempt…”
Saunders v. Dep't of Revenue, 711 P.2d 961 (Or. 1985). · cites it 9× “” ORS 307.400 provides an exemption from ad valorem taxes for certain qualifying farm machinery and equipment.”
Farmer's Direct, Inc. v. Dept. of Rev., 24 Or. Tax 399 (Or. T.C. 2021). · cites it 8× “608(3), renumbered as ORS 307.400 (1981); 430 Farmer’s Direct, Inc.”
King Est. Winery, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 14 Or. Tax 169 (Or. T.C. 1997). · cites it 6× “Taxpayer contends that the property is exempt under ORS 307.400 as farm machinery and equipment.”
Enron Corp. v. Spring Indep. Sch. Dist., 922 S.W.2d 931 (Tex. 1996). “68, § 5401 (exempts farm equipment inventory from ad va-lorem taxation); Or.Rev.Stat. § 307.400 (exempts all inventory from ad valorem taxation); R.”
Anadromous, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 11 Or. Tax 272 (Or. T.C. 1989). · cites it 8× “The issue in this case is whether plaintiffs tangible personal property used in its operations qualifies for exemption as “farm machinery and equipment” under ORS 307.400. Plaintiff, as its name suggests, engages in the business of cultivating, raising and harvesting salmon.”
Simpson v. Dep't of Revenue, 702 P.2d 399 (Or. 1985). · cites it 5× “There are no defined minimum standards for an ordinary course of business for these purposes, but the Court assumes that any person or entity seeking the advantage of the exemption provisions of ORS 307.400 needs to establish that there is an ongoing enterprise which…”
Dept. of Rev. v. New Friends of the Beaverton City Library, 23 Or. Tax 512 (Or. T.C. 2019). “, 12 OTR 318, 320 (1992) (finding 24 Habitat for Humanity also is distinguishable because in taxpayer’s case the property at issue is not taxpayer’s inventory being held for sale (which con- sists of books that, as personal property, already would enjoy exemption under ORS…”
Willamette Egg Farms, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 14 Or. Tax 337 (Or. T.C. 1998). · cites it 4× “ORS 307.400 exempts from property taxation certain farm animals, inventory, and equipment.”
West Foods, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 10 Or. Tax 7 (Or. T.C. 1985). “608 (now ORS 307.400) provided in pertinent part: “(2) All inventory shall be exempt from ad valorem taxation.”
AKS LLC v. Dept. of Rev., 23 Or. Tax 300 (Or. T.C. 2019). “at 332 (quoting ORS 307.400(5)(e) (1995) (emphasis in original)).”
Show all 26 citing cases →
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 307.400(1) — 1 case
King Est. Winery, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 988 P.2d 369 (Or. 1999). “Although taxpayer did not identify explicitly the subsection of ORS 307.400 under which it claimed an exemption, we understand taxpayer's argument to be that it was entitled to an exemption under ORS 307.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 307.400(2) — 3 cases
King Est. Winery, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 988 P.2d 369 (Or. 1999). “Although taxpayer did not identify explicitly the subsection of ORS 307.400 under which it claimed an exemption, we understand taxpayer's argument to be that it was entitled to an exemption under ORS 307.”
Simpson v. Dep't of Revenue, 702 P.2d 399 (Or. 1985). “There are no defined minimum standards for an ordinary course of business for these purposes, but the Court assumes that any person or entity seeking the advantage of the exemption provisions of ORS 307.400 needs to establish that there is an ongoing enterprise which…”
Douglas Cnty. Assessor v. Dep't of Revenue, 12 Or. Tax 248 (Or. T.C. 1992).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 307.400(3) — 6 cases
King Est. Winery, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 988 P.2d 369 (Or. 1999). “Although taxpayer did not identify explicitly the subsection of ORS 307.400 under which it claimed an exemption, we understand taxpayer's argument to be that it was entitled to an exemption under ORS 307.”
Farmer's Direct, Inc. v. Dept. of Rev., 24 Or. Tax 399 (Or. T.C. 2021). “608(3), renumbered as ORS 307.400 (1981); 430 Farmer’s Direct, Inc.”
Saunders v. Dep't of Revenue, 711 P.2d 961 (Or. 1985). “” ORS 307.400 provides an exemption from ad valorem taxes for certain qualifying farm machinery and equipment.”
King Est. Winery, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 14 Or. Tax 169 (Or. T.C. 1997). “Taxpayer contends that the property is exempt under ORS 307.400 as farm machinery and equipment.”
Belozer Farms, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 10 Or. Tax 194 (Or. T.C. 1986).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 307.400(3)(6) — 1 case
King Est. Winery, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 988 P.2d 369 (Or. 1999). “Although taxpayer did not identify explicitly the subsection of ORS 307.400 under which it claimed an exemption, we understand taxpayer's argument to be that it was entitled to an exemption under ORS 307.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 307.400(3)(a) — 1 case
King Est. Winery, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 988 P.2d 369 (Or. 1999). “Although taxpayer did not identify explicitly the subsection of ORS 307.400 under which it claimed an exemption, we understand taxpayer's argument to be that it was entitled to an exemption under ORS 307.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 307.400(3)(b) — 3 cases
King Est. Winery, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 988 P.2d 369 (Or. 1999). “Although taxpayer did not identify explicitly the subsection of ORS 307.400 under which it claimed an exemption, we understand taxpayer's argument to be that it was entitled to an exemption under ORS 307.”
Willamette Egg Farms, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 14 P.3d 609 (Or. 2000).
Columbia River Egg Farm v. Dep't of Revenue, 12 Or. Tax 418 (Or. T.C. 1993).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 307.400(3)(c) — 2 cases
King Est. Winery, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 988 P.2d 369 (Or. 1999). “Although taxpayer did not identify explicitly the subsection of ORS 307.400 under which it claimed an exemption, we understand taxpayer's argument to be that it was entitled to an exemption under ORS 307.”
Farmers Direct, Inc. Dept. of Rev. (Or. T.C. 2023).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 307.400(3)(d) — 1 case
King Est. Winery, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 988 P.2d 369 (Or. 1999). “Although taxpayer did not identify explicitly the subsection of ORS 307.400 under which it claimed an exemption, we understand taxpayer's argument to be that it was entitled to an exemption under ORS 307.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 307.400(3)(f) — 2 cases
King Est. Winery, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 14 Or. Tax 169 (Or. T.C. 1997). “Taxpayer contends that the property is exempt under ORS 307.400 as farm machinery and equipment.”
Douglas Cnty. Assessor v. Dep't of Revenue, 12 Or. Tax 248 (Or. T.C. 1992).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 307.400(3)(q) — 1 case
King Est. Winery, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 988 P.2d 369 (Or. 1999). “Although taxpayer did not identify explicitly the subsection of ORS 307.400 under which it claimed an exemption, we understand taxpayer's argument to be that it was entitled to an exemption under ORS 307.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 307.400(5) — 4 cases
King Est. Winery, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 988 P.2d 369 (Or. 1999). “Although taxpayer did not identify explicitly the subsection of ORS 307.400 under which it claimed an exemption, we understand taxpayer's argument to be that it was entitled to an exemption under ORS 307.”
Anadromous, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 11 Or. Tax 272 (Or. T.C. 1989). “The issue in this case is whether plaintiffs tangible personal property used in its operations qualifies for exemption as “farm machinery and equipment” under ORS 307.400. Plaintiff, as its name suggests, engages in the business of cultivating, raising and harvesting salmon.”
Willamette Egg Farms, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 14 Or. Tax 337 (Or. T.C. 1998). “ORS 307.400 exempts from property taxation certain farm animals, inventory, and equipment.”
Farmers Direct, Inc. Dept. of Rev. (Or. T.C. 2023).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 307.400(5)(3) — 1 case
Willamette Egg Farms, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 14 P.3d 609 (Or. 2000).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 307.400(5)(a) — 1 case
King Est. Winery, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 988 P.2d 369 (Or. 1999). “Although taxpayer did not identify explicitly the subsection of ORS 307.400 under which it claimed an exemption, we understand taxpayer's argument to be that it was entitled to an exemption under ORS 307.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 307.400(5)(b) — 1 case
King Est. Winery, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 988 P.2d 369 (Or. 1999). “Although taxpayer did not identify explicitly the subsection of ORS 307.400 under which it claimed an exemption, we understand taxpayer's argument to be that it was entitled to an exemption under ORS 307.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 307.400(5)(c) — 1 case
King Est. Winery, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 988 P.2d 369 (Or. 1999). “Although taxpayer did not identify explicitly the subsection of ORS 307.400 under which it claimed an exemption, we understand taxpayer's argument to be that it was entitled to an exemption under ORS 307.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 307.400(5)(e) — 4 cases
King Est. Winery, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 988 P.2d 369 (Or. 1999). “Although taxpayer did not identify explicitly the subsection of ORS 307.400 under which it claimed an exemption, we understand taxpayer's argument to be that it was entitled to an exemption under ORS 307.”
AKS LLC v. Dept. of Rev., 23 Or. Tax 300 (Or. T.C. 2019). “at 332 (quoting ORS 307.400(5)(e) (1995) (emphasis in original)).”
Willamette Egg Farms, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 14 Or. Tax 337 (Or. T.C. 1998). “ORS 307.400 exempts from property taxation certain farm animals, inventory, and equipment.”
Willamette Egg Farms, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 14 P.3d 609 (Or. 2000).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 307.400(5Xe) — 1 case
Willamette Egg Farms, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 14 P.3d 609 (Or. 2000).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 307.400(6) — 1 case
King Est. Winery, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 988 P.2d 369 (Or. 1999). “Although taxpayer did not identify explicitly the subsection of ORS 307.400 under which it claimed an exemption, we understand taxpayer's argument to be that it was entitled to an exemption under ORS 307.”
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.