Estate of Denton v. Dept. of Revenue, Tc-Md 080566d (or.tax 9-15-2010)

CourtOregon Tax Court
DecidedSeptember 15, 2010
DocketTC-MD 080566D.
StatusPublished

This text of Estate of Denton v. Dept. of Revenue, Tc-Md 080566d (or.tax 9-15-2010) (Estate of Denton v. Dept. of Revenue, Tc-Md 080566d (or.tax 9-15-2010)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Oregon Tax Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Estate of Denton v. Dept. of Revenue, Tc-Md 080566d (or.tax 9-15-2010), (Or. Super. Ct. 2010).

Opinion

DECISION
Plaintiff appeals Defendant's Notice of Assessment (Notice) dated February 28, 2008, for the 2005 tax year. The parties submitted cross-motions for summary judgment. Oral argument was held on May 10, 2010. After considering stipulated facts, memorandums, and oral arguments of the parties, the above entitled matter is now ready for decision.

I. STATEMENT OF FACTS
Plaintiff filed its original Oregon Inheritance Tax Return (Return) with Defendant on December 11, 2006. (Ptf s Cross Mot for Summ J at 2.) At the time Plaintiff filed its Return, Plaintiff filed a timely election to pay the self-assessed tax in installments, citing ORS 118.225. (Id.) On the Return, Plaintiff reported a tax liability of $17,858,578 and a payment on that tax of $4,800,000. (Id.) Plaintiffs self-assessed tax liability was the same tax liability assessed in Defendant's Notice. (Id) Plaintiffs appeal was timely filed from Defendant's Notice. *Page 2

II. ANALYSIS
The issue before the court is whether second tier interest may be imposed on deferred inheritance tax liabilities paid in installments pursuant to ORS 118.225.1 That question is a matter of statutory interpretation.

"In interpreting a statute, the court's task is to discern the intent of the legislature." PGE v. Bureau of Labor andIndustries (PGE), 317 Or 606, 610, 859 P2d 1143 (1993); ORS 174.020. The legislative intent is to be determined first from the text and context of the statute. PGE, 317 Or at 611;State v. Gaines (Gaines),346 Or 160, 171, 206 P3d 1042 (2009). "In trying to ascertain the meaning of a statutory provision, * * * the court considers rules of construction of the statutory text that bear directly on how to read the text. Some of those rules are mandated by statute, including * * * the statutory enjoinder `not to insert what has been omitted, or to omit what has been inserted.'" PGE, 317 Or at 611, citing ORS 174.010. Additionally, "words of common usage typically should be given their plain, natural, and ordinary meaning." Id.

"[A]fter examining text and context," the court may consider legislative history that "appears useful to the court's analysis."Gaines, 346 Or at 172. Under PGE, the court could not consider legislative history unless "the intent of the legislature [was] not clear from the text and context * * *." PGE,317 Or at 611. However, "in light of the 2001 amendments to ORS 174.020," the Oregon Supreme Court in Gaines overruled that requirement from PGE:

"[C]ontrary to this court's pronouncement in PGE, we no longer will require an ambiguity in the text of a statute as a necessary predicate to * * * consideration of pertinent legislative history * * *."

Gaines, 346 Or at 171-172; ORS 174.020. *Page 3

Finally, "[i]f the legislature's intent remains unclear after examining text, context, and legislative history, the court may resort to general maxims of statutory construction to aid in resolving the remaining uncertainty." Gaines, 346 Or at 172.

ORS 118.225 allows the Department of Revenue to extend the amount of time for payments of inheritance taxes for a period of up to 14 years upon application by the estate and acceptance of collateral. ORS 118.225(1), (2). ORS 118.260(5)(b) states that all extensions will be subject to interest, "at the rate established under ORS 305.220." ORS 118.260(5)(b). ORS 305.220(1) provides for an interest rate of five-sixths of one percent per month subject to adjustment by the Director of the Department of Revenue, "[u]nless specifically provided otherwise by statute * * *." ORS 305.220(1).

ORS 305.222 is a statute that provides "otherwise."2 ORS 305.220(2). ORS 305.222 specifically relates the two statutes: "For purposes of determining the interest rate established under ORS 305.220 * * *" ORS 305.222(2)(b) specifically provides that:

"In the case of an assessment under ORS 305.265(12), 3 if the delinquency is not paid within 60 days after the date of the assessment, the interest rate provided under ORS 305.220 shall be one-third of one percent greater than that so provided under ORS 305.220. The increased rate shall apply only for interest periods that begin 61 days after the date of notice of the delinquency."

ORS 305.222 (2)(b). The result is one rate for two different periods of time. ORS 305.220 sets the interest rate for a deficiency or delinquent payment of an assessed tax up to and including the sixth day.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

State v. Gaines
206 P.3d 1042 (Oregon Supreme Court, 2009)
Thomas Creek Lumber & Log Co. v. Department of Revenue
178 P.3d 217 (Oregon Supreme Court, 2008)
Robblee v. Department of Revenue
942 P.2d 765 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1997)
State v. Kelly
211 P.3d 932 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2009)
Portland General Electric Co. v. Bureau of Labor & Industries
859 P.2d 1143 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1993)
Log Co. v. Dept. of Rev.
19 Or. Tax 259 (Oregon Tax Court, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Estate of Denton v. Dept. of Revenue, Tc-Md 080566d (or.tax 9-15-2010), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/estate-of-denton-v-dept-of-revenue-tc-md-080566d-ortax-9-15-2010-ortc-2010.