Kolwitz v. Dept. of Rev.

DECISION TC-MD 260038R 1 of 5
IN THE OREGON TAX COURT
MAGISTRATE DIVISION
Income Tax
JEFFREY A. KOLWITZ
and HEIDE M. GOERTZEN,
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiffs, TC-MD 260038R
v.
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
State of Oregon,
DECISION	Defendant.
Plaintiffs appealed Defendant’s Conference Decision Letter dated November 12, 2025,
which denied their claim for a refund for the 2021 tax year. The issue is whether Plaintiffs’
unsuccessful attempt to electronically file their 2021 Oregon return in October 2022 constituted a
filing for that year. Because the record does not show that Defendant actually received the return
or issued an electronic acknowledgement of receipt, Plaintiffs have not established that the return
was filed in 2022. Their paper return was filed after the statutory three-year period, and the
record shows no payments made within the applicable two-year lookback period. The requested
refund is therefore time-barred.
At a case management conference on June 23, 2026, the parties agreed that Plaintiffs
would submit written argument by July 10, 2026, and Defendant would respond by July 27,
2026. The court memorialized that schedule in a Journal Entry mailed the same day. Plaintiffs
did not submit additional argument or evidence. The court therefore decides the appeal on the
Complaint and its attachments.
/ / /
/ / /

DECISION TC-MD 260038R 2 of 5
I. STATEMENT OF FACTS
Plaintiffs used TaxAct software to prepare their 2021 federal and Oregon personal
income tax returns and obtained an extension of time to file. (Decl of Jeffrey Kolwitz.) A
TaxAct record states that their federal return was e-filed on October 17, 2022, at 12:00 a.m., and
their Oregon return was e-filed on October 16, 2022, at 11:21 p.m. (Ptfs’ Ex B.) Defendant’s
Conference Decision Letter states that the Oregon submission was rejected because the federal
submission was rejected. (Compl at 1.)
Plaintiff Jeffrey Kolwitz declares that he did not know the e-filed returns had been
rejected and first learned that Defendant considered the Oregon return unfiled when Defendant
contacted him on or about May 2025. (Decl of Jeffrey Kolwitz.) Plaintiffs submitted a paper
Oregon personal tax return on June 26, 2025, claiming a refund for 2021. (Id.) Plaintiffs’ IRS
transcript reflects that their 2021 federal income tax return was filed on March 6, 2023. (Ptfs’ Ex
D at 3.)
II. ANALYSIS
The issues are (1) whether Plaintiffs proved they timely filed their 2021 tax return
electronically and (2) whether ORS 314.415(2)(a)1 bars Defendant from refunding a 2021
overpayment to Plaintiffs. The court also addresses whether equitable tolling applies to this
matter.
A. Attempted Electronic Filing
Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 150-305-0016(3) provides that “[a] return, statement,
other document or report that is filed in electronic form is deemed to be filed and received on the
date actually received by the department, the IRS, or on the date stated in the electronic
1 The court’s references to the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) are to 2019.

DECISION TC-MD 260038R 3 of 5
acknowledgment of receipt issued by the department.” The rule makes actual receipt or an
acknowledgment of receipt the operative evidence. A software record showing that a taxpayer
initiated or attempted a transmission does not, by itself, establish that the return was received.
Plaintiffs’ TaxAct records show an attempted electronic transmission in October 2022,
but those records are not an acknowledgment of receipt issued by Defendant. Plaintiffs offered
no acceptance acknowledgment or other evidence showing that Defendant actually received their
Oregon return. Defendant’s Conference Decision Letter states that the Oregon submission was
rejected, and the IRS transcript does not reflect an October 2022 filing of the federal return; it
reflects a filing date of March 6, 2023.
The party seeking affirmative relief in the Tax Court bears the burden of proof by a
preponderance of the evidence. ORS 305.427. On the evidence presented here, Plaintiffs have
not proved that their 2021 Oregon return was filed or received in October 2022. The first proved
filing of the Oregon personal income tax return is the paper return received on June 26, 2025.
B. Statutory Limit on Refunds
ORS 314.415(2)(a) limits both the time for claiming a refund and the amount that may be
refunded. As relevant here, if the original return is not filed within three years of the return’s due
date, excluding extensions, Defendant may refund only amounts paid within two years preceding
the filing of the refund claim.2
/ / /
2 ORS 314.415(2)(a) states: “The department may not allow or make a refund after three years from the
time the return was filed, or two years from the time the tax (or a portion of the tax) was paid, whichever period
expires later, unless before the expiration of this period a claim for refund is filed by the taxpayer in compliance
with ORS 305.270. In any case, if the original return is not filed within three years of the due date, excluding
extensions, of the return, the department may allow or make a refund only of amounts paid within two years from
the date of the filing of the claim for refund. If a refund is disallowed for the tax year during which excess tax was
paid for any reason set forth in this subsection, the department may not allow the excess as a credit against any tax
occurring on a return filed for a subsequent year.”

DECISION TC-MD 260038R 4 of 5
Plaintiffs’ 2021 return was due April 18, 2022. The three-year period therefore expired
April 18, 2025. Defendant received Plaintiffs’ paper return and refund claim on June 26, 2025,
after that deadline had expired. Plaintiffs do not allege, and the evidence does not show, that
they paid any taxes for 2021 during the two years preceding June 26, 2025. ORS 314.415(2)(a)
therefore bars Defendant from allowing or making the requested refund.
C. Equitable Tolling
Plaintiffs maintain that they did not learn of the rejected electronic filing until May 2025.
The March 2023 filing date reflected on the IRS transcript undercuts the claim that Plaintiffs
remained unaware of any filing problem until 2025. The court need not resolve that factual
question, however, because neither the electronic filing rule nor the refund statute makes the
filing date depend on a taxpayer’s knowledge that a submission was rejected.
Even accepting Plaintiffs’ allegations as true, the court may not extend the refund
limitation period on equitable grounds. See DeArmond v. Dept. of Rev., 14 OTR 112, 117
(1997), aff’d, 328 Or 60, 968 P2d 1280 (1998) (declining to apply equitable tolling to a tax
refund limitation period); see also United States v. Brockamp, 519 US 347, 352, 117 S Ct 849,
136 L Ed 2d 818 (1997) (holding that federal tax refund limitation periods are not subject to
equitable tolling). The court recognizes that Plaintiffs intended to timely file their returns and
may have believed they had done so. That circumstance does not permit the court to disregard
the limitation enacted by the legislature.
III. CONCLUSION
Plaintiffs have not met their burden of proof that their 2021 Oregon personal income tax
return and refund claim were received within three years after the return’s due date, excluding
extensions. Plaintiffs do not allege any payment for tax year 2021 within two years of filing the

DECISION TC-MD 260038R 5 of 5
refund claim. ORS 314.415(2)(a) therefore bars Defendant from allowing or making the claimed
refund. Now, therefore,
IT IS THE DECISION OF THIS COURT that Plaintiffs’ appeal for the 2021 tax year is
denied.
RICHARD D. DAVIS
MAGISTRATE
To appeal this Decision, file a complaint in the Regular Division of the Oregon
Tax Court. Appeals are accepted by electronic filing; by mail at 1163 State
Street, Salem, OR 97301-2563; and by hand delivery to 1241 State Street, Salem,
OR, Floor 4R.
Your complaint must be submitted within 60 days after the date of this Decision
or this Decision cannot be changed. TCR-MD 19 B.
This document was signed by Magistrate Richard D. Davis and entered on
August 3, 2026.