Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 308A.703 (2026)

Additional taxes upon disqualification

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

      308A.703 Additional taxes upon disqualification. (1) This section applies to land upon the land’s disqualification from special assessment under any of the following sections:

      (a) Exclusive farm use zone farmland under ORS 308A.113 or 308A.117;

      (b) Nonexclusive farm use zone farmland under ORS 308A.116 or 308A.117;

      (c) Western Oregon designated forestland under ORS 321.359;

      (d) Eastern Oregon designated forestland under ORS 321.842;

      (e) Wildlife habitat special assessment under ORS 308A.430; or

      (f) Conservation easement special assessment under ORS 308A.465.

      (2) Following a disqualification listed in subsection (1) of this section, an additional tax shall be added to the tax extended against the land on the next assessment and tax roll, to be collected and distributed in the same manner as other ad valorem property tax moneys. The additional tax shall be equal to the difference between the taxes assessed against the land and the taxes that would otherwise have been assessed against the land, for each of the number of years determined under subsection (3) of this section.

      (3) The number of years for which additional taxes shall be calculated shall equal the lesser of the number of consecutive years the land had qualified for the special assessment program for which disqualification has occurred or:

      (a) Ten years, in the case of exclusive farm use zone farmland, but only if the land, immediately following disqualification, remains outside an urban growth boundary;

      (b) Ten years, in the case of wildlife habitat special assessment land within an exclusive farm use zone, but only if the land, immediately following disqualification, remains outside an urban growth boundary;

      (c) Ten years, in the case of conservation easement special assessment land within an exclusive farm use zone, but only if the land, immediately following disqualification, remains outside an urban growth boundary;

      (d) Five years, in the case of:

      (A) Nonexclusive farm use zone farmland;

      (B) Western Oregon designated forestland;

      (C) Eastern Oregon designated forestland;

      (D) Exclusive farm use zone farmland that is not described in paragraph (a) of this subsection;

      (E) Wildlife habitat special assessment land that is not described in paragraph (b) of this subsection; or

      (F) Conservation easement special assessment land that is not described in paragraph (c) of this subsection; or

      (e) Notwithstanding paragraphs (a) and (d) of this subsection, 10 years in the case of exclusive farm use zone farmland and nonexclusive farm use zone farmland disqualified under ORS 308A.117.

      (4)(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this subsection, if disqualification under subsection (1)(a) or (b) of this section occurs within five years after the end of a period of farm use special assessment pursuant to a remediation plan as defined in ORS 308A.053, the number of years for which the additional tax shall be calculated shall be the number of years determined under subsection (3) of this section plus the number of years during which farm use special assessment was granted pursuant to the remediation plan.

      (b) Additional tax may not be collected for the number of years during which farm use special assessment was granted pursuant to the remediation plan if the plan:

      (A) Is implemented in good faith; and

      (B) Fails to render continued farm use practicable.

      (5) The additional taxes described in this section shall be deemed assessed and imposed in the year to which the additional taxes relate.

      (6) If the disqualification of the land is the result of the sale or transfer of the land to an ownership making the land exempt from ad valorem property taxation, the lien for additional taxes shall attach as of the day preceding the sale or transfer.

      (7) The amount determined to be due under this section may be paid to the tax collector prior to the time of the next general property tax roll, pursuant to the provisions of ORS 311.370. [1999 c.314 §34; 2001 c.114 §21; 2003 c.454 §§23,25; 2003 c.539 §16; 2003 c.621 §85; 2005 c.400 §3; 2007 c.809 §10; 2009 c.776 §5; 2025 c.533 §3]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 30 cases (10 in the last 5 years), 2001–2026 · leading case: Boardman Acquisition, LLC v. Dep't of Revenue, 393 P.3d 1147 (Or. 2017).
Boardman Acquisition, LLC v. Dep't of Revenue, 393 P.3d 1147 (Or. 2017). · cites it 5× “709, which lists the situations in which the additional tax is eliminated, provides: “Notwithstanding that land may have been disqualified from special assessment, no additional taxes may be imposed under ORS 308A.703 if, as of the date the disqualification is taken into account…”
Boardman Acquisition LLC v. Dept. of Rev., 22 Or. Tax 183 (Or. T.C. 2015). · cites it 8× “068 for the tax years at issue regarding the Additional Taxes the county assessed pursuant to ORS 308A.703. (20) Effective on the Purchase Date (August 20, 2012), Boardman Acquisition acquired the Property from the Port.”
River Vale Ltd. P'ship v. Dept. of Rev., 24 Or. Tax 468 (Or. T.C. 2021). “Or Laws 1981, ch 720, § 8 (creating property tax exemption for locally designated riparian land, with additional tax upon withdrawal of up to five times “the amount of taxes that would have been assessed against the land had it been valued” according to its RMV “during the…”
Benton Habitat For Humanity v. Benton Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2018). · cites it 14× “Plaintiff (taxpayer) appeals the placement by Defendant (the county) of additional tax on the 2017–18 tax roll for property identified as Account 385848 (subject or subject property).”
Lindquist Holdings LLC v. Yamhill Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2022). · cites it 10× “) Defendant’s notice included the following explanatory paragraph: “As specified in ORS 308A.703, an additional tax must be extended following this disqualification.”
Deer Hill, Inc. v. Washington Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2021). · cites it 8× “Defendant thereupon imposed an additional tax for the preceding five-year lookback period pursuant to ORS 308A.703 and OAR 150-308-1500. 1 Plaintiff’s principals, Paul and Gail Parker, bought the subject for $359,000 in May 1991.”
Fazio v. Multnomah Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2025). · cites it 8× “To the extent any part of the subject properties did not qualify for farm use special assessment for the 2022-23 tax year, a second issue is whether that non-qualifying use was “incompatible with a purpose to return the land to farm use[,]” requiring imposition of additional…”
Aland v. Lincoln Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2013). · cites it 7× “113(5) and ORS 308A.703. “Use of the word ‘shall’ makes clear that the addition of the taxes is mandatory.”
Port of Morrow v. Morrow Cnty. Assessor, Tc-Md 091456d (or.tax 2-28-2011) (Or. T.C. 2011). · cites it 6× “709 contains a list of specific situations in which the additional property taxes that otherwise could be added under ORS 308A.703 may not *Page 6 be imposed. Plaintiff identifies one applicable subsection, ORS 308A.”
PeaceHealth v. Lane Cnty. Assessor & Dept. of Rev. (Or. T.C. 2017). · cites it 3× “706(1) forbids the imposition of the “additional taxes described under ORS 308A.703,” stating that such taxes “shall remain a potential tax liability.”
Murray v. Wasco Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2018). · cites it 3× “Thus, the general rule followed by this court is that where a party seeks a change to the real market value of a property and that change would not immediately change the tax obligation, the court will 2 ORS 308A.703 provides for further taxes owed upon disqualification from…”
Bailey v. Josephine Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2021). · cites it 3× “Having determined that Defendant here correctly imposed the additional taxes in accordance with ORS 308A.703, the court finds no basis for a different conclusion based on the facts presented in Teich.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 308A.703(1) — 1 case
Fazio v. Multnomah Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2025). “To the extent any part of the subject properties did not qualify for farm use special assessment for the 2022-23 tax year, a second issue is whether that non-qualifying use was “incompatible with a purpose to return the land to farm use[,]” requiring imposition of additional…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 308A.703(1)(a) — 1 case
Aland v. Lincoln Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2013). “113(5) and ORS 308A.703. “Use of the word ‘shall’ makes clear that the addition of the taxes is mandatory.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 308A.703(1)(b) — 1 case
Boardman Acquisition LLC v. Dept. of Rev., 22 Or. Tax 183 (Or. T.C. 2015). “068 for the tax years at issue regarding the Additional Taxes the county assessed pursuant to ORS 308A.703. (20) Effective on the Purchase Date (August 20, 2012), Boardman Acquisition acquired the Property from the Port.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 308A.703(1)(c) — 5 cases
Benton Habitat For Humanity v. Benton Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2018). “Plaintiff (taxpayer) appeals the placement by Defendant (the county) of additional tax on the 2017–18 tax roll for property identified as Account 385848 (subject or subject property).”
Bailey v. Josephine Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2021). “Having determined that Defendant here correctly imposed the additional taxes in accordance with ORS 308A.703, the court finds no basis for a different conclusion based on the facts presented in Teich.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 308A.703(2) — 14 cases
Boardman Acquisition LLC v. Dept. of Rev., 22 Or. Tax 183 (Or. T.C. 2015). “068 for the tax years at issue regarding the Additional Taxes the county assessed pursuant to ORS 308A.703. (20) Effective on the Purchase Date (August 20, 2012), Boardman Acquisition acquired the Property from the Port.”
Boardman Acquisition, LLC v. Dep't of Revenue, 393 P.3d 1147 (Or. 2017). “709, which lists the situations in which the additional tax is eliminated, provides: “Notwithstanding that land may have been disqualified from special assessment, no additional taxes may be imposed under ORS 308A.703 if, as of the date the disqualification is taken into account…”
Benton Habitat For Humanity v. Benton Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2018). “Plaintiff (taxpayer) appeals the placement by Defendant (the county) of additional tax on the 2017–18 tax roll for property identified as Account 385848 (subject or subject property).”
Deer Hill, Inc. v. Washington Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2021). “Defendant thereupon imposed an additional tax for the preceding five-year lookback period pursuant to ORS 308A.703 and OAR 150-308-1500. 1 Plaintiff’s principals, Paul and Gail Parker, bought the subject for $359,000 in May 1991.”
Lindquist Holdings LLC v. Yamhill Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2022). “) Defendant’s notice included the following explanatory paragraph: “As specified in ORS 308A.703, an additional tax must be extended following this disqualification.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 308A.703(3) — 2 cases
Murray v. Wasco Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2018). “Thus, the general rule followed by this court is that where a party seeks a change to the real market value of a property and that change would not immediately change the tax obligation, the court will 2 ORS 308A.703 provides for further taxes owed upon disqualification from…”
Aland v. Lincoln Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2013). “113(5) and ORS 308A.703. “Use of the word ‘shall’ makes clear that the addition of the taxes is mandatory.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 308A.703(3)(a) — 1 case
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 308A.703(3)(c) — 1 case
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 308A.703(3)(d) — 4 cases
Deer Hill, Inc. v. Washington Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2021). “Defendant thereupon imposed an additional tax for the preceding five-year lookback period pursuant to ORS 308A.703 and OAR 150-308-1500. 1 Plaintiff’s principals, Paul and Gail Parker, bought the subject for $359,000 in May 1991.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 308A.703(3)(d)(B) — 4 cases
Benton Habitat For Humanity v. Benton Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2018). “Plaintiff (taxpayer) appeals the placement by Defendant (the county) of additional tax on the 2017–18 tax roll for property identified as Account 385848 (subject or subject property).”
Bailey v. Josephine Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2021). “Having determined that Defendant here correctly imposed the additional taxes in accordance with ORS 308A.703, the court finds no basis for a different conclusion based on the facts presented in Teich.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 308A.703(4) — 1 case
Fazio v. Multnomah Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2025). “To the extent any part of the subject properties did not qualify for farm use special assessment for the 2022-23 tax year, a second issue is whether that non-qualifying use was “incompatible with a purpose to return the land to farm use[,]” requiring imposition of additional…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 308A.703(4)(b)(B) — 1 case
Fazio v. Multnomah Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2025). “To the extent any part of the subject properties did not qualify for farm use special assessment for the 2022-23 tax year, a second issue is whether that non-qualifying use was “incompatible with a purpose to return the land to farm use[,]” requiring imposition of additional…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 308A.703(5) — 3 cases
Benton Habitat For Humanity v. Benton Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2018). “Plaintiff (taxpayer) appeals the placement by Defendant (the county) of additional tax on the 2017–18 tax roll for property identified as Account 385848 (subject or subject property).”
Deer Hill, Inc. v. Washington Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2021). “Defendant thereupon imposed an additional tax for the preceding five-year lookback period pursuant to ORS 308A.703 and OAR 150-308-1500. 1 Plaintiff’s principals, Paul and Gail Parker, bought the subject for $359,000 in May 1991.”
Lindquist Holdings LLC v. Yamhill Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2022). “) Defendant’s notice included the following explanatory paragraph: “As specified in ORS 308A.703, an additional tax must be extended following this disqualification.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 308A.703(6) — 1 case
Benton Habitat For Humanity v. Benton Cnty. Assessor (Or. T.C. 2018). “Plaintiff (taxpayer) appeals the placement by Defendant (the county) of additional tax on the 2017–18 tax roll for property identified as Account 385848 (subject or subject property).”
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.