Dish Network Corp. v. Dep't of Revenue
434 P.3d 379
Or.2019Background
- DISH (satellite TV provider) had limited tangible property in Oregon (set-top boxes etc.); most assets located outside Oregon. Department of Revenue shifted DISH from local county assessment to central assessment for 2009–10, valuing the business as a unit (unit valuation) and allocating $34.9 million to Oregon.
- Under Measure 50 and implementing statutes (ORS chapter 308), assessed value (AV) growth is capped (generally 3%/year) but six exceptions permit different valuation rules, including for "new property or new improvements." ORS 308.153 supplies the formula for "new property."
- DISH sued in Tax Court arguing central assessment (and the resultant AV jump) could not be treated as "new property;" Tax Court granted summary judgment for DISH relying on Comcast (Tax Court) and Douglas County v. Crawford reasoning that "new" means newly created or acquired within the prior assessment year.
- The Department appealed, arguing the statutory definition at ORS 308.149(5) and context allow "new property" to include property newly added to a property tax account (including on the central roll) by the assessor.
- The Oregon Supreme Court reviewed statutory meaning first, concluded ORS 308.149(5)(a)(C) can encompass assessor additions to a property tax account (including central accounts), and held the department properly treated DISH’s centrally assessed unit as "new property" subject to ORS 308.153 valuation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (DISH) | Defendant's Argument (Department) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether moving property from local to central assessment qualifies as "new property or new improvements" under Measure 50 and ORS chapter 308 | "New" means property newly created or acquired by the taxpayer within the relevant time period; assessor's unilateral addition cannot make existing property "new" | ORS 308.149(5)(a)(C) refers to the addition of property to the property tax account and includes assessor additions (central accounts) — thus assessor action can render property "new" | Held for Department: "New property" includes property lawfully added by an assessor to a property tax account (including central/unit accounts) that was not previously assessed as that account/unit. |
| Whether the Tax Court’s temporal definition (property must have "come into existence" during prior assessment year) controls | The Tax Court and DISH: "new" implies recent creation/acquisition in the immediately preceding assessment year | Department: ordinary meanings of "new" are relational and need not be confined to a strict prior-year creation test; statutory context supports assessor-driven addition | Held for Department: Crawford/Tax Court temporal rule is unpersuasive; "new" not limited to an item created/acquired in prior assessment year. |
| Whether unit valuation creates a distinct "unit" that is "new property" even if components were previously locally assessed | DISH: unit valuation is merely a different appraisal method applied to the same tangible property; cannot create "new" property | Department: unit valuation assesses the business as a going concern (a different unit), and that unit (or its Oregon-allocated share) may never have been previously assessed — thus it can be "new" | Held for Department: the unit added for central/unit valuation was a categorically different assessment unit and thus constituted "new property." |
Key Cases Cited
- DIRECTV, 360 Or. 1, 377 P.3d 568 (Ore. 2016) (held satellite TV providers are "communication" businesses subject to central assessment)
- Haynes v. Board of Parole, 362 Or. 15, 403 P.3d 394 (Ore. 2017) (describing approach to addressing subconstitutional before constitutional arguments)
- Shilo Inn v. Multnomah County, 333 Or. 101, 36 P.3d 954 (Ore. 2001) (guidance on interpreting initiated and referred constitutional provisions)
- Roehm v. County of Orange, 32 Cal.2d 280, 196 P.2d 550 (Cal. 1948) (discussing reflection of intangible values in valuation of taxable tangible property)