Gua v. Dept. of Rev.

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO
DISMISS 	TC 5453 	Page 1 of 2
IN THE OREGON TAX COURT
REGULAR DIVISION
Income Tax
CINDY GUA,
Plaintiff,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
State of Oregon,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
TC 5453
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S
MOTION TO DISMISS
This personal income tax case is before the court on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss
dated September 28, 2023. The basis for Defendant’s motion is that Plaintiff has failed to pay
the tax, penalty, and interest assessed to her, or to establish that doing so would be an undue
hardship, as required by ORS 305.419(3). (Def’s Mot to Dismiss at 1-2.) In a December 8,
2023, order on Plaintiff’s motion to stay the requirement to pay her assessment, the court:
(1) 	Recited the proceedings and the parties’ arguments;
(2) 	Found that Plaintiff had failed to establish that payment of the assessed tax,
penalty, and interest would be an undue hardship under ORS 305.419(3);
(3) 	Denied Plaintiff’s motion to stay the requirement to pay the assessment;
(4) 	Allowed Plaintiff until January 8, 2024, to pay the assessment; and
(5) 	Directed Defendant to report on or before January 17, 2024, whether Plaintiff
had paid the amounts assessed.
On January 17, 2024, Defendant filed its report, stating that Plaintiff had made payments
totaling $4,000 for certain of the tax years at issue. The total amount assessed, not counting
those payments, was $871,426.72. Defendant added: “Plaintiff does not have an agreed upon

and 	accepted 	payment 	plan 	with 	the 	defendant 	regarding 	payment 	of the 	taxes, penalties, 	and
interest assessed 	in 	this 	case." 	Defendant 	urged 	the 	court 	to 	grant 	its 	motion 	to 	dismiss.
On 	January 	31, 	2024, 	Plaintiff filed 	a 	"Motion 	to 	Vacate" 	the 	court's 	December 	8, 	2023,
order. 	The 	motion 	declares 	the 	proceedings 	to 	date 	to 	be 	a 	"substantive 	and 	procedural 	nullity,"
fraudulent, 	and 	the 	result 	of a 	"conspiracy" 	to 	violate 	provisions 	of the 	federal 	Internal 	Revenue
Code. 	Nothing 	in 	the 	motion 	disputes 	Defendant's 	report 	regarding 	the 	amount 	of Plaintiff's
payments 	or 	the 	non-existence 	of an 	agreed 	payment 	plan.
Based 	on 	the 	foregoing, 	the 	court 	finds 	that 	Plaintiff has 	failed 	to 	pay 	the 	tax, 	penalty,
and 	interest 	assessed, 	to 	the 	extent 	of the 	difference 	between 	the 	total 	assessment 	($871,426.72
including 	interest 	as 	of September 	28, 	2021), 	and 	the 	payments 	made 	($4,000 	as 	of January 	l7,
2024). 	Plaintiff having 	neither 	paid 	the 	assessment 	nor 	established 	hardship, 	now, 	therefore,
1T 	1S 	ORDERED 	that 	Defendant's 	Motion 	to 	Dismiss 	is 	granted; and
1T 	IS 	FURTHER 	ORDERED 	that 	Plaintiff" s 	Motion 	to 	Vacate 	Order 	Denying 	Plaintiff" s
Motion 	for 	Stay 	of Payment 	of Income 	Tax 	and 	Denying 	Plaintiff's 	Second 	Motion 	for
Abeyance 	is 	denied.
Dated 	this 	31st 	day 	of January, 	2024.
1I31I2024 2:11:25 	PM
(7
Judge 	Robert T. 	Mantcke
ORDER 	GRANTING 	DEFENDANT'S 	MOTION 	TO
DISMISS 	TC 	5453 	Page 	2 	of2