Turner v. Dept. of Rev.

CourtOregon Tax Court
DecidedAugust 20, 2025
DocketTC-MD 250077R
StatusUnpublished

This text of Turner v. Dept. of Rev. (Turner v. Dept. of Rev.) 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
Turner v. Dept. of Rev., (Or. Super. Ct. 2025).

Opinion

IN THE OREGON TAX COURT MAGISTRATE DIVISION Income Tax

STEVEN D. TURNER ) and LINDA B. TURNER, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) TC-MD 250077R ) v. ) ) DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, ) State of Oregon, ) ) Defendant. ) DECISION

Plaintiffs appealed Defendant’s written objection determination, dated January 2, 2025,

which concluded that Plaintiffs had irrevocably elected to donate their 2023 “kicker” credit

refund to the State School Fund. (Compl at 3.) That determination also found that Plaintiffs’

subsequent amended tax return was ineffective in revoking that election. The parties submitted

cross-motions for summary judgment with supporting written briefs.

I. STATEMENT OF FACTS

Under ORS 291.349, 1 in odd-number years, the state must return surplus funds (kicker

credit) to personal income taxpayers when actual revenues exceed the biennial revenue forecasts

by at least two percent. To be eligible to receive a tax kicker credit, taxpayers must have filed a

return for the tax year immediately preceding the kicker year and have minimal to no current tax

liability. ORS 291.349(5)(f). If a taxpayer meets these eligibility requirements, then the kicker

is automatically applied or refunded to the taxpayer. ORS 291.349(4), (5)(f), (8); OAR 150-291-

0300. 2

1 The court’s references to the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) are to 2022. 2 The court’s references to the Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) are to 2022.

DECISION TC-MD 250077R 1 Taxpayers may elect to donate their kicker credit to the State School Fund. ORS

305.792(1). Once the election has been made, it may not be revoked by filing an amended tax

return. ORS 305.792(2)(c). There were three required steps for a taxpayer to elect to donate

their kicker credit for the 2023 tax year. 3 The first step is to enter a “0” on Line 38 – the amount

of the kicker credit. (Def’s Ex at 5.) The second step is to check the box on Line 55(a)

indicating a “[k]icker donation.” (Def’s Ex at 6.) The third step is to enter the donated kicker

amount on Line 55(b). The instructions for Line 55(b) state “This election is irrevocable.” Id.

Plaintiffs filed their joint 2023 tax return on March 21, 2024. (Def’s Ex 1.) Plaintiffs

were eligible to receive a tax kicker credit of $3,340. (Compl at 1; Ans at 1.) They left Lines 38

and 55(a) blank but entered $3,340 on Line 55(b). (Compl at 1; Def’s Ex 6.) On May 1, 2024,

they filed an amended tax return removing the Line 55(b) entry. (Def’s Rpt at 1.) Defendant

denied the amended tax return as untimely and treated the kicker as donated. (Compl at 1; Def

Rpt at 1.)

II. ANALYSIS

The issues before the court are whether Plaintiffs validly elected to donate their 2023

kicker credit and, if so, whether their amended tax return could alter that election.

Summary judgment is proper where, construing the facts in the light most favorable to

the non-moving party, “there is no genuine issue as to any material fact” such that “the moving

party is entitled to prevail as a matter of law.” See Tax Court Rule-Magistrate Division (TCR-

MD) 13; Tax Court Rule (TCR) 47 C; Tektronix, Inc. v. Dept. of Rev., 354 Or 531, 533, 316 P3d

276 (2013). The court begins its analysis by determining whether the Plaintiffs made a valid

3 Or. Dept. of Rev., 2023 Form OR-40 Instructions (Rev. Mar. 20, 2024), https://www.oregon.gov/dor/forms/FormsPubs/form-or-40-inst_101-040-1_2023.pdf (providing official instructions for completing the 2023 Oregon Form OR-40 individual income tax return)

DECISION TC-MD 250077R 2 election to donate their kicker credit.

A. Whether Plaintiffs Made A Valid Tax Election

This court has held that a tax election must be manifested “by words or figures or both in

such manner that no interpretation reasonably can be made other than that an election has been

made.” Hanson Bros. Logging Co. v. Commission, 1 OTR 230, 240 (1962). If a taxpayer’s

contrary intent is reasonably discernable, “then the election has not been clearly manifested.”

Hanson Bros., 1 OTR at 240; Ramsey v. State Tax Commission, 2 OTR 394 (1966). The

requirement is not that no other interpretation is possible, but that no other interpretation is

reasonably probable under the circumstances. (Id.)

Plaintiffs completed only one of the three required steps: they entered their kicker amount

on Line 55(b). The omission of “0” on Line 38 and the absence of a check on Line 55(a) cast

doubt on the taxpayers’ intent and renders the tax return ambiguous on its face.

B. Effect of Mistaken or Incomplete Election

The Regular Division of this court has held that a taxpayer’s mistaken intent about their

elections does not invalidate an otherwise valid election. Schmidt v. Dept. of Rev., 19 OTR 502,

503 (2008); Coleman v. Dept. of Rev., 19 OTR 511, 512 (2008). In a case involving the 2007 tax

year kicker credit, the court found that a taxpayer’s inadvertent checking of the election box in

their electronically filed tax return created an unambiguous election that was irreversible under

ORS 305.792. Schmidt, 19 OTR at 505. This decision was reinforced in another case involving

the 2007 tax year kicker credit wherein a professional tax preparer’s inadvertent checking of the

election box did not invalidate the tax election. Coleman, 19 OTR at 513. The Regular Division

of this court has treated the presence of the checked box as conclusive evidence of a valid

election, regardless of the taxpayer’s subsequent claims or actual intentions. (Id.) In both cases,

DECISION TC-MD 250077R 3 the court analyzed the legislative and statutory intent of ORS 305.792, finding that the statute

purposefully made a valid election to donate irrevocable once the taxpayer’s tax return was

finalized. See Schmidt, 19 OTR at 505; Coleman, 19 OTR at 513.

Plaintiffs here contend that their entry on Line 55(b) of the 2023 OR-40 was made by

mistake and does not constitute a valid election to donate its kicker credit. (Ptfs’ Mot Summ J at

1-2.) Defendant argues that Plaintiffs’ entry of the full kicker credit amount on Line 55(b) was

sufficient to manifest a valid election under ORS 305.792 and that such election is irrevocable

regardless of Plaintiffs’ claimed mistake. (Def’s Mot Summ J at 1.) In Schmidt and Coleman,

the taxpayers made complete, unambiguous elections using a simpler form that required just one

checkbox. See Schmidt, 19 OTR at 505; Coleman, 19 OTR at 513. By contrast, the process for

the 2023 tax year required three discrete actions, making this case materially different.

C. Conclusion Regarding Tax Kicker Donation Validity

This court has consistently upheld mistaken elections that were complete and

unambiguous, but not incomplete elections.

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

Related

Schmidt v. Dept. of Revenue
19 Or. Tax 502 (Oregon Tax Court, 2008)
Coleman v. Dept. of Rev.
19 Or. Tax 511 (Oregon Tax Court, 2008)
Ramsey v. State Tax Commission
2 Or. Tax 394 (Oregon Tax Court, 1966)
Hanson Bros. Logging Co. v. State Tax Commission
1 Or. Tax 230 (Oregon Tax Court, 1962)
Tektronix, Inc. & Subsidiaries v. Department of Revenue
316 P.3d 276 (Oregon Supreme Court, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Turner v. Dept. of Rev., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/turner-v-dept-of-rev-ortc-2025.