Chapter 321

NOTES OF DECISIONS

Programs administered by Department of Revenue that allow preferential assessment for farm and forestland are not “programs affecting land use” and are not subject to requirement of statewide goal and local comprehensive plan compliance under ORS 197.180. Springer v. LCDC, 111 Or App 262, 826 P2d 54 (1992), Sup Ct review denied

ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Validity of ad valorem and severance taxation of logs destined for export, (1975) Vol 37, p 427

LAW REVIEW CITATIONS: 16 WLR 397 (1979)

321.005

NOTES OF DECISIONS

In light of this section, ballot title for legislative measure amending state Constitution to prohibit sale or export of timber from state lands is dissatisfactory because “it is not permissible to reach beyond the unambiguous subject (‘timber’) chosen by legislature and substitute a word that appears in the accompanying preamble.” Glerum v. Roberts, 308 Or 22, 774 P2d 1093 (1989)

321.015

NOTES OF DECISIONS

Forest product is “merchantable” if salable, regardless of whether sold for profit or loss. Ellingson Lumber Co. v. Department of Revenue, 8 OTR 273 (1980)

321.045

NOTES OF DECISIONS

Where lumber company was required to pay forest products harvest tax on harvest of “cull logs,” company was ordered to determine salable percentage of harvest and file returns under this section. Ellingson Lumber Co. v. Dept. of Rev., 8 OTR 273 (1980)

321.257

NOTES OF DECISIONS

Land for which highest and best use is growing of trees does not qualify as forestland absent application for designation as forestland. Marchel v. Dept. of Revenue, 9 OTR 317 (1983)

In determining whether isolated opening is forestland, consideration is given to effect of opening on forestland, but not effect of forestland on opening. Dept. of Revenue v. Rankin, 17 OTR 124 (2003)

321.272

NOTES OF DECISIONS

Where State Land Board sold state land to private company but retained timber and harvest rights, timber sold by Department of Forestry to private harvester was not exempt from severance tax. Murphy Sales Co. v. Dept. of Rev., 12 OTR 448 (1993), aff’d 319 Or 1, 871 P2d 1013 (1994)

“Land” refers to physical ground, not incorporeal property rights. Murphy Sales Co. v. Dept. of Rev., 319 Or 1, 871 P2d 1013 (1994)

Tax imposed on harvesting of timber from privately owned land applies regardless of whether land is designated as forestland. Irwin v. Dept. of Revenue, 15 OTR 24 (1999)

Privilege tax on harvesting of timber is not tax on property for purposes of section 11b, Article XI, Oregon Constitution. Irwin v. Dept. of Revenue, 15 OTR 24 (1999)

321.282

NOTE: Repealed as of January 2, 2004

NOTES OF DECISIONS

Under this section only typical costs for type of harvest could be used to determine net stumpage recovery, even though landowner’s actual costs were greater. Engelien v. Dept. of Rev., 8 OTR 396 (1980)

Logging costs reflected by written agreement entered into in connection with logging operation are not subject to reasonableness requirement. Van Natta v. Dept. of Revenue, 323 Or 62, 913 P2d 305 (1996)

Department may look beyond face of written agreement setting logging costs to determine whether costs claimed are actually connected with logging, log hauling and marketing timber. Van Natta v. Dept. of Revenue, 323 Or 62, 913 P2d 305 (1996)

321.352

NOTE: Repealed as of January 2, 2004

NOTES OF DECISIONS

In assessing bare forest land for purpose of ad valorem taxation, Department of Revenue’s utilization of “abstraction” approach to establishing market value was appropriate, however Department erred in failing to give consideration to prepurchase valuation of merchantable timber by knowledgeable parties to sales transactions of timber land in area. Publishers Paper v. Dept. of Rev., 292 Or 836, 644 P2d 1089 (1982)

Notice provisions of this section satisfied due process requirements of United States Constitution. Mt. Sexton Properties v. Dept. of Rev., 306 Or 465, 760 P2d 1320 (1988)

321.358

(formerly 321.618)

See also annotations under ORS 321.618 in permanent edition.

NOTES OF DECISIONS

Application for forestland designation is required only for those owners whose lands did not have such designation prior to 1968-1969. Lymp v. Dept. of Rev., 4 OTR 466 (1971)

Assessor acted properly in excluding from “forestland” designation portions of tract that were incapable of bearing any forest product, wholly or predominantly bearing nonmarketable species of trees, or land containing less than poor stocking of established seedlings of marketable variety. Dayton v. Dept. of Rev., 5 OTR 56 (1972)

County assessor can revoke once approved classification of forestland only prospectively, unless fraud, bribery or other illegal acts resulted in classification. Rogers v. Dept. of Rev., 6 OTR 139 (1975)

Existence of plat was not conclusive in determining whether land was being held for predominant purpose of growing trees. Rogers v. Dept. of Rev., 6 OTR 139 (1975)

321.359

See also annotations under ORS 321.619 in permanent edition.

NOTES OF DECISIONS

When forest land is declassified, assessor should have used the notice required by this section instead of [former] ORS 308.280. Lymp v. Dept. of Rev., 4 OTR 466 (1971)

Declassification of land under the Western Oregon Ad Valorem Timber Tax Act and subsequent reclassification of same under Western Oregon Small Tract Optional Tax Act gives rise to the imposition of adjustment taxes under both [former] ORS 321.621 and [former] ORS 321.750. Wood v. Ore. State Bd. of Forestry, 5 OTR 193 (1973)

The county assessor can revoke a once approved classification of forest land only prospectively, unless fraud, bribery or other illegal acts resulted in the classification. Rogers v. Dept. of Rev., 6 OTR 139 (1975)

321.405

NOTE: Repealed as of January 2, 2004; but see sec. 36, c. 621, Oregon Laws 2003

NOTES OF DECISIONS

Where taxpayer harvested timber pursuant to stumpage agreements with landowners, he was “owner” of timber within meaning of this section and thus liable for severance tax. McClung v. Dept. of Rev., 8 OTR 175 (1979)

321.435

NOTE: Repealed as of January 2, 2004; but see sec. 36, c. 621, Oregon Laws 2003

NOTES OF DECISIONS

Time when timber is to be considered harvested under this section is not intended to define when party will be found to be “owner” of timber under [former] ORS 321.405. McClung v. Dept. of Rev., 8 OTR 175 (1979)

321.560

NOTES OF DECISIONS

ORS 305.280 limitation of extended appeal period to taxes imposed under ORS chapters 314, 316, 317 and 318 prevents applying extended appeal period under this section to determination of timber taxes. Patton v. Dept. of Revenue, 18 OTR 111 (2004)

Interest rate described in ORS 305.222 applies to Forest Products Harvest Tax and Western Oregon Privilege Tax deficiencies for period beyond 60 days’ delinquency. Thomas Creek Lumber and Log Co. v. Dept. of Revenue, 19 OTR 259 (2007), aff’d 344 Or 131, 178 P3d 217 (2008)

321.618

See annotations under ORS 321.358.

321.705 to 321.765

NOTE: Subject sections all subsequently repealed

ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Effect of acquisition or transfer of land upon classification, (1975) Vol 37, p 510; effect of reclassification of forest land, (1975) Vol 37, p 532; effect of 1 1/2 percent property tax limitation, (1984) Vol 44, p 85

LAW REVIEW CITATIONS: 16 WLR 403 (1979)

321.725