IN THE OREGON TAX COURT
MAGISTRATE DIVISION
Withholding Tax
JOSEPH ZAMANI,
Plaintiff,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
State of Oregon,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
TC-MD 060514B
DECISION OF DISMISSAL
Plaintiff first filed an appeal on May 9, 2006, seeking review of certain withholding tax
matters for two tax years: 1998 and 1999.
An Amended Complaint was filed on May 23, 2006, which mentioned only years 2001,
2002, 2003, and 2004.
A case management conference was held on August 24, 2006. Subsequently, written
submissions were received from the parties. The record closed November 22, 2006.
This matter is now before the court on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, filed
October 13, 2006. Defendant requests the case be dismissed because Plaintiff failed to appeal
within the 90 days required by ORS 316.207(3)(c).
This appeal concerns ORS 316.1671 and its requirement that employers withhold taxes
from an employee’s wages and remit those withheld amounts to Defendant. Defendant made its
determination that Plaintiff was a responsible party as an officer, employee or other member
relating to two businesses. A review of the record reveals that four separate Notices of Liability
(Notices) were mailed to Plaintiff on the following dates:
1
All references to the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) are to 2005.
DECISION OF DISMISSAL TC-MD 060514B
1
Notice Date
Firm
Tax Year
Quarters
April 24, 2000
JT & Associates, Inc.
October 8, 2002
December 11, 2002
JT & Associates, Inc.
JT & Associates, Inc.
December 6, 2005
Sayreh Associates, Inc.
1998
1999
1999
1998
1999
2001
2002
2003
2004
1st and 2nd
1st
2nd
1st and 2nd
1st and 2nd
3rd and 4th
4th
1st and 4th
1st, 2nd, and 3rd
Those individual Notices started the running of the limited appeal timeline.
ORS 316.207(3)(c) states that:
“(c) If neither payment nor written objection to the notice of liability is received
by the department within 30 days after the notice of liability has been mailed, the
notice of liability becomes final. In such an event, the officer, employee or
member may appeal the notice of liability to the tax court within 90 days after it
became final in the manner provided for an appeal from a notice of assessment.”
(Emphasis added.)
Plaintiff did not request any conferences with Defendant nor otherwise timely respond to the
Notices.
The following analysis applies to the years included in the Amended Complaint: tax years
2001 through 2004. If the earlier years (1998 and 1999) had also been included with the
Amended Complaint, a similar analysis would have been done. The most current Notice was
sent by Defendant on December 12, 2005. That underlying liability then became final on
January 11, 2006. From that date, Plaintiff had a maximum of 90 days to appeal to this court.
The first Complaint was not filed until May 9, 2006. This interval is longer than the maximum
90 days.
There are no circumstances in this case that would extend the statutory limit of 90 days.
See Fackler v. Dept. of Rev., 18 OTR 67 (2004). Defendant’s motion is granted. Now,
therefore,
DECISION OF DISMISSAL TC-MD 060514B
2
IT IS THE DECISION OF THIS COURT that Defendant’s Motion for Summary
Judgment is granted. The Complaint is dismissed.
Dated this _____ day of December 2006.
________________________________
JEFFREY S. MATTSON
MAGISTRATE
If you want to appeal this Decision, file a Complaint in the Regular Division of
the Oregon Tax Court, by mailing to: 1163 State Street, Salem, OR 97301-2563;
or by hand delivery to: Fourth Floor, 1241 State Street, Salem, OR.
Your Complaint must be submitted within 60 days after the date of the Decision
or this Decision becomes final and cannot be changed.
This document was signed by Magistrate Jeffrey S. Mattson on December 12,
2006. The Court filed and entered this document on December 12, 2006.
DECISION OF DISMISSAL TC-MD 060514B
3
