Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 317.660

Allocation of net income where insurer has both in-state and out-of-state business

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      317.660 Allocation of net income where insurer has both in-state and out-of-state business. (1)(a) If the income of an insurer is derived from business done both within and without this state, the determination of Oregon taxable income shall be arrived at by multiplying the insurer’s net income by the insurance sales factor.

      (b) The insurance sales factor shall consist of a fraction, the numerator of which is the amount of direct premiums (excluding reinsurance accepted and without deduction of reinsurance ceded) received or earned by the insurer during the tax year on policies and contracts that are allocated to this state and to other jurisdictions in which the insurer is not authorized to do business, and the denominator of which is the total of such premiums received or earned by the insurer during the tax year on policies and contracts that had been sold within and without this state.

      (2) For purposes of this section:

      (a) “Net income” means net income properly recorded in the statement of income reported in the annual statement filed by the insurer with the Director of the Department of Consumer and Business Services.

      (b) “Premiums” means sums properly included in those schedules of the annual statement filed by the insurer with the Director of the Department of Consumer and Business Services that appropriately allocate premiums by jurisdiction. If the exclusion of reinsurance premiums results in an insurance sales factor that does not fairly represent the extent of the taxpayer’s activity in this state, the taxpayer may petition for and the Department of Revenue may permit, or the Department of Revenue may require, the inclusion of reinsurance premiums in the insurance sales factor. If the annual statement of the insurer does not report received premiums then the insurance sales factor shall be determined based on earned premiums.

      (3) If application of the apportionment formula described in subsection (1) of this section results in an apportionment that does not fairly and equitably represent the taxpayer’s insurance business activity in this state, the taxpayer may petition the Department of Revenue for and the department may permit, or the department may require, to achieve an apportionment that fairly and equitably represents the taxpayer’s insurance business activity:

      (a)(A) The exclusion of the insurance sales factor; and

      (B) The inclusion of one or more additional factors that will fairly and equitably represent the taxpayer’s business activity in this state;

      (b) The inclusion of the insurance sales factor and one or more additional factors that will fairly and equitably represent the taxpayer’s business activity in this state; or

      (c) The employment of any other method to achieve a fair and equitable apportionment of the taxpayer’s income. [Formerly 317.199; 1995 c.786 §17; 1999 c.143 §11; 2007 c.716 §§1,3]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2006–2021 · leading case: Stonebridge Life Insurance v. Department of Revenue
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Stonebridge Life Insurance v. Department of Revenue (2006) ortc · cites it 35× “In determining taxpayer’s insurance excise tax liability for 2003, the Department of Revenue (the department) applied the three-factor apportionment formula prescribed by ORS 317.660. Following that formula, the department determined that $12,787,485 of taxpayer’s total 2003…”
Stonebridge Life Insurance v. Department of Revenue (2006) ortc · cites it 11× “280, or ORS 317.660 to reapportion taxpayer’s income using any method other than that set out in ORS 317.”
Health Net Life Ins. Co. v. Dept. of Rev. (2021) ortc · cites it 5× “010(11)), as provided in ORS 317.660(1) * * *.” OAR 150-317-0170(4)(m).”
Oracle Corp. and Subsidiaries I v. Dept. of Rev. (2020) ortc “280 (authorizing department to adopt apportionment formulas by rule for public utilities and financial organiza- tions); ORS 317.660 (apportionment of insurer income); ORS 314.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 317.660(1) — 2 cases
Stonebridge Life Insurance v. Department of Revenue (2006) ortc “In determining taxpayer’s insurance excise tax liability for 2003, the Department of Revenue (the department) applied the three-factor apportionment formula prescribed by ORS 317.660. Following that formula, the department determined that $12,787,485 of taxpayer’s total 2003…”
Health Net Life Ins. Co. v. Dept. of Rev. (2021) ortc “010(11)), as provided in ORS 317.660(1) * * *.” OAR 150-317-0170(4)(m).”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 317.660(1)(a) — 1 case
Health Net Life Ins. Co. v. Dept. of Rev. (2021) ortc “010(11)), as provided in ORS 317.660(1) * * *.” OAR 150-317-0170(4)(m).”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 317.660(1)(b) — 1 case
Health Net Life Ins. Co. v. Dept. of Rev. (2021) ortc “010(11)), as provided in ORS 317.660(1) * * *.” OAR 150-317-0170(4)(m).”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 317.660(2)(a) — 1 case
Stonebridge Life Insurance v. Department of Revenue (2006) ortc “In determining taxpayer’s insurance excise tax liability for 2003, the Department of Revenue (the department) applied the three-factor apportionment formula prescribed by ORS 317.660. Following that formula, the department determined that $12,787,485 of taxpayer’s total 2003…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 317.660(2)(b) — 2 cases
Stonebridge Life Insurance v. Department of Revenue (2006) ortc “In determining taxpayer’s insurance excise tax liability for 2003, the Department of Revenue (the department) applied the three-factor apportionment formula prescribed by ORS 317.660. Following that formula, the department determined that $12,787,485 of taxpayer’s total 2003…”
Health Net Life Ins. Co. v. Dept. of Rev. (2021) ortc “010(11)), as provided in ORS 317.660(1) * * *.” OAR 150-317-0170(4)(m).”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 317.660(3) — 1 case
Stonebridge Life Insurance v. Department of Revenue (2006) ortc “In determining taxpayer’s insurance excise tax liability for 2003, the Department of Revenue (the department) applied the three-factor apportionment formula prescribed by ORS 317.660. Following that formula, the department determined that $12,787,485 of taxpayer’s total 2003…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 317.660(3)(a) — 1 case
Stonebridge Life Insurance v. Department of Revenue (2006) ortc “In determining taxpayer’s insurance excise tax liability for 2003, the Department of Revenue (the department) applied the three-factor apportionment formula prescribed by ORS 317.660. Following that formula, the department determined that $12,787,485 of taxpayer’s total 2003…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 317.660(3)(b) — 1 case
Stonebridge Life Insurance v. Department of Revenue (2006) ortc “In determining taxpayer’s insurance excise tax liability for 2003, the Department of Revenue (the department) applied the three-factor apportionment formula prescribed by ORS 317.660. Following that formula, the department determined that $12,787,485 of taxpayer’s total 2003…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 317.660(l)(a) — 1 case
Stonebridge Life Insurance v. Department of Revenue (2006) ortc “In determining taxpayer’s insurance excise tax liability for 2003, the Department of Revenue (the department) applied the three-factor apportionment formula prescribed by ORS 317.660. Following that formula, the department determined that $12,787,485 of taxpayer’s total 2003…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 317.660(l)(b) — 1 case
Stonebridge Life Insurance v. Department of Revenue (2006) ortc “In determining taxpayer’s insurance excise tax liability for 2003, the Department of Revenue (the department) applied the three-factor apportionment formula prescribed by ORS 317.660. Following that formula, the department determined that $12,787,485 of taxpayer’s total 2003…”
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.