ENTRY FORM | ||
| CALENDAR STATUS: Active | ||
 | | |
SC Number: | | S059271 |
CA Number: | | |
Case Title: | | Crystal Communications, Inc. v. Department of Revenue |
Date: | | 09/18/2012 |
Time: | | 09:30 AM |
Location: | | Supreme Court |
Attorneys: | | Scott G. Seidman on behalf of Crystal Communications, Inc., C. G. McKeever, Myra McKeever, James E. Bryant Camella L. Ryan, Terry Pinna and Erica Pinna Darren Weirnick on behalf of Department of Revenue |
Comments: | | |
Statement of Issues: | | Crystal Communications, Inc. v. Department of Revenue (S059271) (direct review, pursuant to ORS 305.445, of a general judgment entered by the Oregon Tax Court). This case comes before the Oregon Supreme Court on direct review of a general judgment entered by the Oregon Tax Court that: (1) sustained the Oregon Department of Revenue's determination that gain from the sale of assets by Crystal Communications, Inc. during certain tax years is business income; (2) sustained notices of tax assessment as to certain nonresident shareholders during certain tax years; and (3) directed the Oregon Department of Revenue to issue a refund to certain nonresident shareholders for certain tax years. The issues on direct review are as follows: (1) Whether the Oregon Department of Revenue's business income rule, OAR 150-314.610(1)-(B)(2) (1999), conflicts with the statutory definition of business income under Oregon's enactment of the Uniform Division of Income for Tax Purposes Act, ORS 314.610(1), and therefore exceeds the department's authority. (2) Whether the Tax Court properly concluded that the business income rule is valid for taxpayers subject to ORS 314.280. (3) Whether the gain on a sale of property as part of a cessation of business meets the statutory requirement that the disposition constitute an "integral part[] of the taxpayer's regular trade or business operations." The foregoing summary of a Supreme Court case that is scheduled for oral argument has been prepared for the benefit of the public. Parties and practitioners should rely on neither the factual summary set out above, nor the statement of issues to be decided, as delineating the questions that the Supreme Court ultimately may consider on review. See generally Oregon Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.20 |
Justice(s) NOT Participating: | ||