PacifiCorp v. Dept. of Rev.

No. 21 	August 23, 2023 	367
IN THE OREGON TAX COURT
REGULAR DIVISION
PACIFICORP,
Plaintiff,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
State of Oregon,
Defendant.
(TC 5411)
In this centrally assessed property case, the parties raised constitutional
issues on cross-motions for partial summary judgment. The court generally
incorporated its decision in Delta Air Lines, Inc. v. Dept. of Rev., No. TC 5409
(Aug 23, 2023). However, in contrast to Delta, the court denied Plaintiff’s motion
and granted Defendant’s motion because the court concluded that a conceivable
rationale supported the legislature’s decision to tax the intangible property of a
rate-regulated public utility.
Oral argument on cross-motions for partial summary
judgment was held remotely on January 18, 2022.
David J. Crapo, Crapo Deeds LLP, Bountiful UT filed the
motion and argued the cause for Plaintiff.
Marilyn J. Harbur, Senior Assistant Attorney General,
Department of Revenue, Salem, filed the cross-motion and
argued the cause for Defendant.
Decision rendered August 23, 2023.
ROBERT T. MANICKE, Judge.
After trial in this case, the court ruled on Plaintiff’s
first claim for relief regarding the value of its centrally
assessed property. PacifiCorp v. Dept. of Rev., __ OTR __
(Jul 17, 2023). The matter now before the court is Plaintiff’s
second and final claim for relief, regarding the constitution-
ality of Defendant’s taxation of Plaintiff’s intangible prop-
erty. The parties presented this matter on cross-motions
for partial summary judgment in proceedings held concur-
rently with proceedings in Delta Air Lines, Inc. v. Dept. of
Rev., No. TC 5409, which involved a similar issue.1
1 The arguments made by the parties in this case are found in the record
of oral argument held January 18, 2022, in Delta, and in the following briefs

368 	PacifiCorp v. Dept. of Rev.
The court issued a decision this day in Delta. (Delta,
___ OTR ___ (Aug 23, 2023) (Order on Cross-Motions for
Partial Summary Judgment).) The court hereby incorpo-
rates the Delta decision in this order. The Delta decision
includes a more detailed explanation of the procedural
background in this case, as well as the court’s substantive
reasoning. (See id., slip op at 2-3, 44-48.) In consideration
of the foregoing, the court will deny Plaintiff’s motion for
partial summary judgment and grant Defendant’s motion
for partial summary judgment. This order is dispositive of
the case. Now, therefore,
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for partial
summary judgment is denied.
IT 	IS 	FURTHER 	ORDERED 	that 	Defendant’s
motion for partial summary judgment is granted.
filed in this case: (1) Plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment, styled
as PacifiCorp’s Response to the Court’s Request for Additional Briefing re
Constitutionality of Taxing only Intangible Property that Is Centrally Assessed
(Mar 2, 2022); (2) Defendant’s cross-motion for partial summary judgment,
styled as Defendant’s Response to PacifiCorp’s Response to the Court’s January
19, 2022, Request for Additional Briefing (Intangible Property) (Apr 6, 2022); (3)
Plaintiff’s response and reply, styled as PacifiCorp’s Reply Brief Regarding the
Constitutionality of Taxing Only Intangible Property that Is Centrally Assessed
(May 4, 2022); (4) Defendant’s response and reply, styled as Defendant’s Surreply
to PacifiCorp’s Reply to Court’s January 19, 2022, Request for Additional Briefing
(Intangible Property) (May 18, 2022).