308.156
Subdivision or partition; rezoning; omitted property; disqualification from
exemption, partial exemption or special assessment; rules. (1) If property is subdivided or
partitioned after January 1 of the preceding assessment year and on or before
January 1 of the current assessment year, then the property’s maximum assessed
value shall be established as provided under this section.
(2) If property
is rezoned and, after January 1 of the preceding assessment year and on or
before January 1 of the current assessment year, the property is used
consistently with the rezoning, the property’s maximum assessed value shall be
established under this section.
(3)(a) For the
first tax year for which property is added to the property tax account as
omitted property, the property’s maximum assessed value shall be established
under this section.
(b) For tax years
subsequent to the first tax year for which property is added to the property
tax account as omitted property, the property’s maximum assessed value shall be
determined as otherwise provided by law, taking into account the maximum
assessed value of the property as determined under this section.
(4)(a) If
property was subject to exemption, partial exemption or special assessment as
of the January 1 assessment date of the preceding assessment year and is
disqualified from exemption, partial exemption or special assessment as of the
January 1 of the current assessment year, the property’s maximum assessed value
shall be established under this section.
(b) If property
described in this subsection is eligible for a different type of exemption,
partial exemption or special assessment as of January 1 of the current
assessment year, the property’s maximum assessed value shall be established
under the provision granting the partial exemption or special assessment.
(5) The property’s
maximum assessed value shall be the sum of:
(a) The maximum
assessed value determined under ORS 308.146 that is allocable to that portion
of the property not affected by an event described in subsection (1), (2), (3)
or (4)(a) of this section; and
(b) The product
of the real market value of that portion of the property that is affected by an
event described in subsection (1), (2), (3) or (4)(a) of this section
multiplied by the ratio, not greater than 1.00, of the average maximum assessed
value over the average real market value for the assessment year.
(6) The property’s
assessed value for the year shall equal the lesser of:
(a) The property’s
maximum assessed value; or
(b) The property’s
real market value.
(7) The
Department of Revenue shall provide by rule the method by which the allocations
described in subsection (5) of this section are to be made. [1997 c.541 §13;
1999 c.500 §1; 1999 c.579 §21; 2001 c.509 §10; 2005 c.213 §1; 2017 c.414 §4]
Notes of Decisions
AKS LLC v. Dept. of Rev., 23 Or. Tax 300 (Or. T.C. 2019).
· cites it 10× “The principal implementing statute involved in this case is ORS 308.156. The principles and terms used in this overview paragraph are discussed in greater detail below.”
Living Enrichment Ctr. Prop. v. Dept. of Rev, 19 Or. Tax 324 (Or. T.C. 2007).
“It implies the inclusion of a period of time after the relevant date here the period of time in which changes in exempt status may be taken into account.”
Clifford Parsons, Tr. v. Dept. of Rev., 21 Or. Tax 331 (Or. T.C. 2013).
“113 the assessor calculated a real market value based on the industrial zon- ing, and calculated a new maximum assessed value under ORS 308.156, and taxes began to collect on the subject property.”
Waldo Block Partners v. Motion for Summary Jud., 16 Or. Tax 33 (Or. T.C. 2002).
“2 ORS 308.156(4) provides: “(a) If property was subject to exemption, partial exemption or special assessment as of the January 1 assessment date of the preceding assessment year and is disqualified from exemption, partial exemption or special assessment as of the January 1 of…”
Dunne v. Dept. of Rev. (Or. T.C. 2024).
· cites it 4× “146(3)(d), ORS 308.156(3) and (5), unless: b. Their value was deemed to have been included in the property’s overall value pursuant to Village at Main Street because they were listed on a prior year’s roll, the exception for new property or new improvements.”
Force v. Jackson Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2016).
· cites it 3× “” Defendant alleges that the subject property was partitioned and its maximum assessed value was therefore subject to redetermination according to ORS 308.156. See ORS 308.146(3)(b). ORS 308.”
Nardi v. Multnomah Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2020).
· cites it 3× “Other events that trigger exceptions to subsection (a) and (b) include “new property or new improvements to property”; property that is partitioned or subdivided; omitted 5 ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT…”
Pippenger v. Lane Cnty. Assessor, Tc-Md 100141d (or.tax 8-19-2010) (Or. T.C. 2010).
· cites it 4× “706(1)(e) will no longer be specially assessed and will be assessed based on market value as calculated under ORS 308.156." ( Id. ) The second page of the letter, in a section entitled "Additional Tax Information," explained that the potential additional taxes have been…”
Rosemary Gebert Living Trust v. Lane Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2012).
· cites it 4× “ORS 308.156(3) states that, “[f]or the first tax year for which property is added to the property tax account as omitted property, the property‟s maximum assessed value shall be established under this section.”
Lee v. Hood River Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2020).
· cites it 2× “See ORS 308.156(5). In this case, the subjects were recently removed from special assessment, and the three- percent limit on increases to maximum assessed value does not apply.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 308.156(1) — 3 cases
AKS LLC v. Dept. of Rev., 23 Or. Tax 300 (Or. T.C. 2019).
“The principal implementing statute involved in this case is ORS 308.156. The principles and terms used in this overview paragraph are discussed in greater detail below.”
Force v. Jackson Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2016).
“” Defendant alleges that the subject property was partitioned and its maximum assessed value was therefore subject to redetermination according to ORS 308.156. See ORS 308.146(3)(b). ORS 308.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 308.156(2) — 1 case
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 308.156(3) — 4 cases
Dunne v. Dept. of Rev. (Or. T.C. 2024).
“146(3)(d), ORS 308.156(3) and (5), unless: b. Their value was deemed to have been included in the property’s overall value pursuant to Village at Main Street because they were listed on a prior year’s roll, the exception for new property or new improvements.”
Rosemary Gebert Living Trust v. Lane Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2012).
“ORS 308.156(3) states that, “[f]or the first tax year for which property is added to the property tax account as omitted property, the property‟s maximum assessed value shall be established under this section.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 308.156(3)(a) — 2 cases
Dunne v. Dept. of Rev. (Or. T.C. 2024).
“146(3)(d), ORS 308.156(3) and (5), unless: b. Their value was deemed to have been included in the property’s overall value pursuant to Village at Main Street because they were listed on a prior year’s roll, the exception for new property or new improvements.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 308.156(3)(b) — 1 case
Dunne v. Dept. of Rev. (Or. T.C. 2024).
“146(3)(d), ORS 308.156(3) and (5), unless: b. Their value was deemed to have been included in the property’s overall value pursuant to Village at Main Street because they were listed on a prior year’s roll, the exception for new property or new improvements.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 308.156(4) — 4 cases
Living Enrichment Ctr. Prop. v. Dept. of Rev, 19 Or. Tax 324 (Or. T.C. 2007).
“It implies the inclusion of a period of time after the relevant date here the period of time in which changes in exempt status may be taken into account.”
Waldo Block Partners v. Motion for Summary Jud., 16 Or. Tax 33 (Or. T.C. 2002).
“2 ORS 308.156(4) provides: “(a) If property was subject to exemption, partial exemption or special assessment as of the January 1 assessment date of the preceding assessment year and is disqualified from exemption, partial exemption or special assessment as of the January 1 of…”
Nardi v. Multnomah Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2020).
“Other events that trigger exceptions to subsection (a) and (b) include “new property or new improvements to property”; property that is partitioned or subdivided; omitted 5 ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 308.156(4)(a) — 2 cases
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 308.156(5) — 4 cases
AKS LLC v. Dept. of Rev., 23 Or. Tax 300 (Or. T.C. 2019).
“The principal implementing statute involved in this case is ORS 308.156. The principles and terms used in this overview paragraph are discussed in greater detail below.”
Lee v. Hood River Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2020).
“See ORS 308.156(5). In this case, the subjects were recently removed from special assessment, and the three- percent limit on increases to maximum assessed value does not apply.”
Rosemary Gebert Living Trust v. Lane Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2012).
“ORS 308.156(3) states that, “[f]or the first tax year for which property is added to the property tax account as omitted property, the property‟s maximum assessed value shall be established under this section.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 308.156(5)(b) — 4 cases
Dunne v. Dept. of Rev. (Or. T.C. 2024).
“146(3)(d), ORS 308.156(3) and (5), unless: b. Their value was deemed to have been included in the property’s overall value pursuant to Village at Main Street because they were listed on a prior year’s roll, the exception for new property or new improvements.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 308.156(7) — 1 case
AKS LLC v. Dept. of Rev., 23 Or. Tax 300 (Or. T.C. 2019).
“The principal implementing statute involved in this case is ORS 308.156. The principles and terms used in this overview paragraph are discussed in greater detail below.”
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.