Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 314.380 (2026)

Furnishing copy of federal or other state return or report; action required when return filed or changed or tax assessed

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

      314.380 Furnishing copy of federal or other state return or report; action required when return filed or changed or tax assessed. (1) Every taxpayer shall, upon request of the Department of Revenue, furnish a copy of the return for the corresponding year, which the taxpayer has filed or may file with the federal government, showing the taxpayer’s net income and how obtained and the several sources from which derived. Every taxpayer shall, upon request of the department, furnish a copy of any federal revenue agent’s report or other audit report made upon any audit or adjustment of the taxpayer’s federal income tax return or income tax return of another state.

      (2)(a) The taxpayer shall report to the department any change in the taxpayer’s taxable income that is subject to tax by this state or any change in the taxpayer’s tax liability paid to or owing this state because:

      (A) The Internal Revenue Service or other competent authority has changed or corrected the amount of a taxpayer’s taxable income, tax credit or other amount taken into account in determining the taxpayer’s tax liability as reported on a federal income tax return or an income tax return of another state for any taxable year; or

      (B) The taxpayer:

      (i) Files an original or amended return that is accepted by the Internal Revenue Service or the taxing authority of another state; or

      (ii) Is assessed tax by the Internal Revenue Service or the taxing authority of another state for the failure to file a return as required.

      (b) In the case of a change or correction made by the Internal Revenue Service or by the taxing authority of another state, the report shall either concede the accuracy of the determination or state wherein the taxpayer believes it to be erroneous. The report may be treated by the department as a claim for refund pursuant to ORS 314.415 if the department determines that the taxpayer’s correct Oregon tax liability is a reduction from the taxpayer’s Oregon tax liability prior to the filing of the report. Notwithstanding the limitations of ORS 314.415, a claim for refund under this paragraph shall be deemed timely if received by the department within two years after the federal or other state correction was made.

      (c) In the case of a taxpayer filing an original or amended federal or other state return that reports a change in the taxpayer’s taxable income that is subject to tax by this state or that results in a change in the taxpayer’s tax liability paid to or owing this state, the report required by this subsection shall be an amended Oregon return. The taxpayer shall file the amended return with the department within 90 days thereafter.

      (3) For purposes of this section:

      (a) A change or correction of a taxpayer’s taxable income is deemed to be made on the date of the audit report making the change or correction; and

      (b) The date on which an original or amended return is accepted by the Internal Revenue Service or other state taxing authority is the date the original or amended return is filed if the return is subsequently accepted by the Internal Revenue Service or other state taxing authority.

      (4) The provisions of ORS 305.305 shall constitute the exclusive remedy of a person whose notice of deficiency or assessment is based upon a change or correction of the person’s taxable income under this section. [1957 c.632 §11 (enacted in lieu of 316.565 and 317.380); 1963 c.509 §1; 1985 c.602 §3; 1989 c.414 §7; 1997 c.100 §2; 1999 c.74 §1; 2001 c.9 §4]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 25 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1968–2021 · leading case: Dept. of Rev. v. Washington Fed., Inc., 20 Or. Tax 507 (Or. T.C. 2012).
Dept. of Rev. v. Washington Fed., Inc., 20 Or. Tax 507 (Or. T.C. 2012). · cites it 29× “5 The linkage that the department points to in ORS 314.380 and ORS 314.410 is a procedural rather than substantive linkage.”
Tektronix, Inc. v. Dept. of Rev., 20 Or. Tax 468 (Or. T.C. 2012). · cites it 15× “” ORS 314.380 and ORS 314.410 are important in the discussion of the statute of limitations issue.”
U.S. Bancorp & Subsidiaries v. Dep't of Revenue, 17 Or. Tax 232 (Or. T.C. 2003). · cites it 6× “410, specifically ORS 314.380. ORS 314.380 imposes a duty on taxpayer to notify the department of federal changes at the time they are proposed.”
Swarens v. Dep't of Revenue, 883 P.2d 853 (Or. 1994). · cites it 4× “Second, a related provision, ORS 314.380, provides in part: “(2) If the amount of a taxpayer’s federal taxable income reported on a federal income tax return for any taxable year is changed or corrected by the United States Internal Revenue Service or other competent authority,…”
U.S. Bancorp v. Dep't of Revenue, 103 P.3d 85 (Or. 2004). · cites it 3× “Although the IRS had issued a correction to taxpayer’s 1988 and 1989 federal taxable income in June 1995, taxpayer does not dispute the Tax Court’s finding that the parties had executed the extension agreement within two years after taxpayer first notified the department of…”
Int'l Health & Life Ins. v. Dep't of Revenue, 523 P.2d 223 (Or. 1974). · cites it 2× “ORS 314.380. The defendant must give notice of any proposed additional assessment within three years after the return is filed.”
Gender v. State Tax Comm'n, 3 Or. Tax 260 (Or. T.C. 1968). · cites it 6× “The commission auditor refused to consider the claim for refund on the grounds that it was not filed within the time allowed by ORS 314.380 which permits the filing of a refund *263 claim within one year following a correction by the Internal Revenue Service.”
Smurfit Newsprint Corp. v. Dep't of Revenue, 14 Or. Tax 434 (Or. T.C. 1998). “Likewise, the department is not attempting to use a federal audit report to reopen a closed year under ORS 314.380. What is involved is whether the department has the power or authority to recalculate a taxpayer’s liability for a closed year and thereby affect the taxpayer’s…”
Tomseth v. Dept. of Rev. (Or. T.C. 2016). · cites it 13× “) In a similar vein, Plaintiffs argued that if the legislature had intended to mean “Oregon return” it would have included those words in the statute and that the purposeful omission of “Oregon” from the statutory text evinces the legislature’s intent not to create such a…”
Bed Bath & Beyond Inc. v. Dept. of Rev. (Or. T.C. 2021). · cites it 13× “STATEMENT OF FACTS Plaintiff and its subsidiaries (collectively “Plaintiff”) filed an Oregon corporation excise tax return on December 4, 2015, for the tax year ending February 28, 2015. (Stip Facts, ¶ 2.) On its own initiative, Plaintiff filed an amended federal return with the…”
Int'l Health & Life Ins. Co. v. Dep't of Revenue, 5 Or. Tax 320 (Or. T.C. 1973). · cites it 3× “Since 1963, ORS 314.380 has provided: “(2) If the amount of a taxpayer’s federal taxable income reported on his federal income tax re *325 turn for any taxable year is changed or corrected by the United States Internal Revenue Service * * *, resulting in recognition of $250 or…”
Indus. Air Prods. Co. v. Dep't of Revenue, 4 Or. Tax 103 (Or. T.C. 1970). · cites it 13× “410(3) is directly related to ORS 314.380. Because of the facts of this case ORS 314.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 314.380(2) — 5 cases
Swarens v. Dep't of Revenue, 883 P.2d 853 (Or. 1994). “Second, a related provision, ORS 314.380, provides in part: “(2) If the amount of a taxpayer’s federal taxable income reported on a federal income tax return for any taxable year is changed or corrected by the United States Internal Revenue Service or other competent authority,…”
U.S. Bancorp v. Dep't of Revenue, 103 P.3d 85 (Or. 2004). “Although the IRS had issued a correction to taxpayer’s 1988 and 1989 federal taxable income in June 1995, taxpayer does not dispute the Tax Court’s finding that the parties had executed the extension agreement within two years after taxpayer first notified the department of…”
U.S. Bancorp & Subsidiaries v. Dep't of Revenue, 17 Or. Tax 232 (Or. T.C. 2003). “410, specifically ORS 314.380. ORS 314.380 imposes a duty on taxpayer to notify the department of federal changes at the time they are proposed.”
Case v. Dep't of Revenue, 11 Or. Tax 1 (Or. T.C. 1988).
Indus. Air Prods. Co. v. Dep't of Revenue, 4 Or. Tax 103 (Or. T.C. 1970). “410(3) is directly related to ORS 314.380. Because of the facts of this case ORS 314.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 314.380(2)(a) — 1 case
Dept. of Rev. v. Washington Fed., Inc., 20 Or. Tax 507 (Or. T.C. 2012). “5 The linkage that the department points to in ORS 314.380 and ORS 314.410 is a procedural rather than substantive linkage.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 314.380(2)(a)(1997) — 1 case
Dept. of Rev. v. Washington Fed., Inc., 20 Or. Tax 507 (Or. T.C. 2012). “5 The linkage that the department points to in ORS 314.380 and ORS 314.410 is a procedural rather than substantive linkage.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 314.380(2)(a)(A) — 4 cases
Dept. of Rev. v. Washington Fed., Inc., 20 Or. Tax 507 (Or. T.C. 2012). “5 The linkage that the department points to in ORS 314.380 and ORS 314.410 is a procedural rather than substantive linkage.”
Tektronix, Inc. v. Dept. of Rev., 20 Or. Tax 468 (Or. T.C. 2012). “” ORS 314.380 and ORS 314.410 are important in the discussion of the statute of limitations issue.”
Tomseth v. Dept. of Rev. (Or. T.C. 2016). “) In a similar vein, Plaintiffs argued that if the legislature had intended to mean “Oregon return” it would have included those words in the statute and that the purposeful omission of “Oregon” from the statutory text evinces the legislature’s intent not to create such a…”
Bros. v. Dep't of Revenue (Or. T.C. 2012).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 314.380(2)(a)(B) — 1 case
Tektronix, Inc. v. Dept. of Rev., 20 Or. Tax 468 (Or. T.C. 2012). “” ORS 314.380 and ORS 314.410 are important in the discussion of the statute of limitations issue.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 314.380(2)(b) — 4 cases
Bed Bath & Beyond Inc. v. Dept. of Rev. (Or. T.C. 2021). “STATEMENT OF FACTS Plaintiff and its subsidiaries (collectively “Plaintiff”) filed an Oregon corporation excise tax return on December 4, 2015, for the tax year ending February 28, 2015. (Stip Facts, ¶ 2.) On its own initiative, Plaintiff filed an amended federal return with the…”
Tomseth v. Dept. of Rev. (Or. T.C. 2016). “) In a similar vein, Plaintiffs argued that if the legislature had intended to mean “Oregon return” it would have included those words in the statute and that the purposeful omission of “Oregon” from the statutory text evinces the legislature’s intent not to create such a…”
McCarter v. Dept. of Rev. (Or. T.C. 2015).
Badi'i v. Dep't of Revenue (Or. T.C. 2012).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 314.380(2)(c) — 4 cases
Bed Bath & Beyond Inc. v. Dept. of Rev. (Or. T.C. 2021). “STATEMENT OF FACTS Plaintiff and its subsidiaries (collectively “Plaintiff”) filed an Oregon corporation excise tax return on December 4, 2015, for the tax year ending February 28, 2015. (Stip Facts, ¶ 2.) On its own initiative, Plaintiff filed an amended federal return with the…”
Tomseth v. Dept. of Rev. (Or. T.C. 2016). “) In a similar vein, Plaintiffs argued that if the legislature had intended to mean “Oregon return” it would have included those words in the statute and that the purposeful omission of “Oregon” from the statutory text evinces the legislature’s intent not to create such a…”
Badi'i v. Dep't of Revenue (Or. T.C. 2012).
Ivelia v. Dept. of Rev. (Or. T.C. 2018).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 314.380(3)(a) — 2 cases
Dept. of Rev. v. Washington Fed., Inc., 20 Or. Tax 507 (Or. T.C. 2012). “5 The linkage that the department points to in ORS 314.380 and ORS 314.410 is a procedural rather than substantive linkage.”
McCarter v. Dept. of Rev. (Or. T.C. 2015).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 314.380(3)(b) — 1 case
Badi'i v. Dep't of Revenue (Or. T.C. 2012).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 314.380(a) — 1 case
Dept. of Rev. v. Washington Fed., Inc., 20 Or. Tax 507 (Or. T.C. 2012). “5 The linkage that the department points to in ORS 314.380 and ORS 314.410 is a procedural rather than substantive linkage.”
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.