Allison v. Department of Revenue

6 Citing cases

  1. Baisch v. Oregon Department of Revenue

    12 OTR 177 (Or. T.C. 1992)   Cited 1 times

    In its opinions and orders, defendant found the transaction a sham and plaintiffs appealed to this court. The scenario in this case involves many of the same players as in Allison v. Dept. of Rev., 11 OTR 431 (1990). As in that case, Messrs. Fuhrer, Dunn and Doerr were shareholders of F. D. D. Realty Corporation, an Oregon corporation, which was, in turn, the general partner of Morgan Financial Group, Ltd. (Morgan), an Oregon limited partnership. Pacific X-Ray Profit Sharing Trust was the sole limited partner of Morgan, entitled to 99 percent of the profits from Morgan.

  2. Comptroller of the Treasury v. Gannett Co., Inc.

    356 Md. 699 (Md. 1999)   Cited 27 times
    Stating that this Court should not attribute such an illogical intent to the General Assembly

    However, until appellant obtains the authority to allocate income for tax enforcement purposes, it cannot assume that it has such authority from the provisions of the federal tax code. See Allison v. Department of Revenue, 11 OTR 431, 435 (1990) (holding that the state legislature had not adopted I.R.C. § 482 by reference); cf. Ex Parte Jones Mfg. Co., 589 So.2d 208, 210 (Ala. 1991) (noting that the state legislature had statutorily adopted I.R.C. § 337, which prevented gains made from a total liquidation of assets from being assessed, but not I.R.C. § 1245, which required any part of those gains that recaptured depreciation to be assessed); In re Estate of Armstrong, 133 Mont. 328, 331-32, 323 P.2d 595, 596-97 (1958) (holding that a state law authorizing taxpayers to use the "best accounting practice in the trade or business" did not incorporate by reference a federal tax provision granting special capital gains tax status to breeding animals and that, to hold otherwise, would "amount to judicial legislation."). In personal income tax matters, Oregon has adopted by reference all of the income-determining provisions of the I.R.C.

  3. Routledge v. Dep't of Revenue

    TC 5344 (Or. T.C. Apr. 9, 2020)

    Plaintiff overlooks the fact that Oregon does not automatically incorporate federal tax administrative or procedural requirements. See Allison v. Dept. of Rev., 11 OTR 431, 434-35 (1990). Plaintiff argues that there is a dispute of material fact that precludes summary judgment.

  4. Lamka v. Dep't of Revenue

    TC 5330 (Or. T.C. Dec. 11, 2019)

    A corresponding federal Treasury regulation, also in place at that time, states: See Allison v. Dept. of Rev., 11 OTR 431, 434-35 (1990) ("Oregon has its own administrative provisions * * *."). "The term 'undue hardship' means more than an inconvenience to the taxpayer.

  5. Peterson v. Dep't of Revenue

    TC 5329 (Or. T.C. Dec. 11, 2019)

    A corresponding federal Treasury regulation, also in place at that time, states: See Allison v. Dept. of Rev., 11 OTR 431, 434-35 (1990) ("Oregon has its own administrative provisions * * *.") "The term 'undue hardship' means more than an inconvenience to the taxpayer.

  6. Swarens v. Department of Revenue

    12 OTR 517 (Or. T.C. 1993)   Cited 3 times
    Requiring federal action be taken within limited times

    The Internal Revenue Service and the Department of Revenue are separate agencies which administer the income tax laws under separate systems. Allison v. Dept. of Rev., 11 OTR 431 (1990). IRS determinations are not binding on the state.