Revised Code of Washington
Wash. Rev. Code § 82.32.180 (2026)
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Any person, except one who has failed to keep and preserve books, records, and invoices as required in this chapter and chapter 82.24 RCW, having paid any tax as required and feeling aggrieved by the amount of the tax may appeal to the superior court of Thurston county, within the time limitation for a refund provided in chapter 82.32 RCW or, if an application for refund has been made to the department within that time limitation, then within thirty days after rejection of the application, whichever time limitation is later. In the appeal the taxpayer shall set forth the amount of the tax imposed upon the taxpayer which the taxpayer concedes to be the correct tax and the reason why the tax should be reduced or abated. The appeal shall be perfected by serving a copy of the notice of appeal upon the department within the time herein specified and by filing the original thereof with proof of service with the clerk of the superior court of Thurston county.
The trial in the superior court on appeal shall be de novo and without the necessity of any pleadings other than the notice of appeal. At trial, the burden shall rest upon the taxpayer to prove that the tax as paid by the taxpayer is incorrect, either in whole or in part, and to establish the correct amount of the tax. In such proceeding the taxpayer shall be deemed the plaintiff, and the state, the defendant; and both parties shall be entitled to subpoena the attendance of witnesses as in other civil actions and to produce evidence that is competent, relevant, and material to determine the correct amount of the tax that should be paid by the taxpayer. Either party may seek appellate review in the same manner as other civil actions are appealed to the appellate courts.
It shall not be necessary for the taxpayer to protest against the payment of any tax or to make any demand to have the same refunded or to petition the director for a hearing in order to appeal to the superior court, but no court action or proceeding of any kind shall be maintained by the taxpayer to recover any tax paid, or any part thereof, except as herein provided.
The provisions of this section shall not apply to any tax payment which has been the subject of an appeal to the board of tax appeals with respect to which appeal a formal hearing has been elected.
[ 1997 c 156 s 4; 1992 c 206 s 4; 1989 c 378 s 23; 1988 c 202 s 67; 1971 c 81 s 148; 1967 ex.s. c 26 s 51; 1965 ex.s. c 141 s 5; 1963 ex.s. c 28 s 9; 1961 c 15 s 82.32.180. Prior: 1951 1st ex.s. c 9 s 12; 1939 c 225 s 29, part; 1935 c 180 s 199, part; RRS s 8370-199, part.]
Notes:
Effective date—1992 c 206: See note following RCW 82.04.170.
Severability—1988 c 202: See note following RCW 2.24.050.
Appeal to board of tax appeals, formal hearing: RCW 82.03.160.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 128
cases (21 in the last 5 years), 1956–2026 · leading case: Lacey Nursing Ctr., Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 905 P.2d 338 (Wash. 1995).
Lacey Nursing Ctr., Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 905 P.2d 338 (Wash. 1995). “Question Presented The question presented in this case is whether an action by nursing homes for refund of Business and Occupation taxes under RCW 82.32.180 may be maintained as a class action.”
Oda v. State, 44 P.3d 8 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002). “They proceeded under RCW 82.32.180. That statute imposes specific conditions upon taxpayers seeking excise tax refunds.”
Oda v. State, 44 P.3d 8 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002). “They proceeded under RCW 82.32.180. That statute imposes specific conditions upon taxpayers seeking excise tax refunds.”
Del Pettit v. Bd. of Tax Appeals, 538 P.2d 501 (Wash. 1975). “That statute provides: Judicial review of a decision of the board of tax appeals shall be de novo in accordance with the provisions of RCW 82.32.180 or 84.68.020 as applicable except when the decision has been rendered pursuant to a formal hearing elected under RCW 82.”
Gartner, Inc. v. Wa State Dept. Of Revenue, 455 P.3d 1179 (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). “Gartner paid the assessment and filed a refund lawsuit in Thurston County Superior Court pursuant to RCW 82.32.180. The parties both moved for summary judgment.”
Seattle FilmWorks, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 106 Wash. App. 448 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). “FilmWorks paid the tax due and sought a refund under RCW 82.32.180 by appealing to the Thurston County Superior Court.”
FILMWORKS v. State Dept. of Revenue, 24 P.3d 460 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). “FilmWorks paid the tax due and sought a refund under RCW 82.32.180 by appealing to the Thurston County Superior Court.”
Imaging Servs. v. State Dept. of Revenue, 252 P.3d 885 (Wash. 2011). “¶ 10 The Department audited Washington Imaging for the period January 2000 through July 2005 and issued B & O tax assessments on the amounts that Washington Imaging paid to Overlake.”
Booker Auction Co. v. Dept. of Revenue, 241 P.3d 439 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010). “05 RCW and, (2) RCW 82.32.180 (requiring an aggrieved taxpayer to appeal to the superior court of Thurston County) is unconstitutional.”
Activate, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 150 Wash. App. 807 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “, filed a refund claim under RCW 82.32.180 1 after paying an assessment of $131,794.”
Peters v. Sjoholm, 631 P.2d 937 (Wash. 1981). “170, or appealed to the Superior Court for Thurston County for a refund, RCW 82.32.180. In the area of tax collection, it is constitutionally sound to postpone the opportunity for a hearing until after the payment of the delinquent taxes.”
AOL, LLC v. Dep't of Revenue, 149 Wash. App. 533 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “*544 ¶18 Second, under RCW 82.32.180, a taxpayer, “having paid any tax as required and feeling aggrieved by the amount of the tax,” may appeal to the Thurston County Superior Court for a refund.”
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.