Loading policy item
SB 1511
This proposal did not become law. The bill would have replaced Oregon’s $1 million estate tax exemption with a $2.5 million deduction, would have raised the filing threshold to $2.5 million, would have established a progressive rate structure starting at 12.75%, and introduces a phase-in mechanism for estates between $2.5 million and $3 million. It also indexes both thresholds to inflation beginning in 2028. Material consequence: Estates valued below $2.5 million would have noed longer owe tax or file returns, significantly reducing state estate tax revenue (estimated at a $35.4 million reduction in the 2029-31 biennium) while shielding middle-to-upper-middle-class estates from taxation and compliance costs.
Generated explanation · A-Engrossed · Analyzed 8/20/2026 · Open official A-Engrossed text
This proposal did not become law.
Generated analysis of A-Engrossed text; it does not establish that the bill applies to you. Read the full decision brief.
No upcoming event is verified in the available records.
Plain-language analysis
Generated analysis, not an official summary or legal advice. Confirm with linked Oregon documents.
This proposal did not become law. The generated effects below describe what it would have required if enacted.
The bill would have replaced Oregon’s $1 million estate tax exemption with a $2.5 million deduction, would have raised the filing threshold to $2.5 million, would have established a progressive rate structure starting at 12.75%, and introduces a phase-in mechanism for estates between $2.5 million and $3 million. It also indexes both thresholds to inflation beginning in 2028. Material consequence: Estates valued below $2.5 million would have noed longer owe tax or file returns, significantly reducing state estate tax revenue (estimated at a $35.4 million reduction in the 2029-31 biennium) while shielding middle-to-upper-middle-class estates from taxation and compliance costs.
Basis: Bill text · Sources: A-Engrossed; IS_Impact SB 1511 3; Revenue Impact Statement A
Official sources do not state why this measure was proposed.
Sponsor testimony, staff summaries, committee materials, or statutory findings may explain it.
Inferred from cited text; not a stated purpose.
The measure aims to prevent inflation-driven estate values from triggering tax liabilities on assets that have not increased in real purchasing power, thereby protecting family wealth and reducing administrative burdens.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: A-Engrossed; Staff Measure Summary A
Exempt from filing and taxation; would have eliminated compliance costs and professional fees for probate administration.
Basis: Bill text · Source: A-Engrossed
Potential effect if enacted: Subject to a graduated phase-in multiplier rather than full statutory rates, requiring precise calculation of the fraction applied to tax liability.
Basis: Bill text · Source: A-Engrossed
Potential effect if enacted: Subject to new progressive marginal rates (12.75% to 19.90%) applied to the taxable estate after the $2.5 million deduction.
Basis: Bill text · Source: A-Engrossed
Potential effect if enacted: Responsible for implementing inflation adjustments, updating tax forms and GenTax systems, and processing returns under the new phase-in rules.
Basis: Bill text · Source: Fiscal Impact Statement A
Behavior: Heirs and advisors might have delayed asset transfers or finalizing valuations until after January 1, 2027, to utilize the higher threshold.
Basis: Inferred · Source: A-Engrossed
Obligations: Executors of estates exceeding $2.5 million would have had to file returns and apply a complex phase-in fraction for values between $2.5M and $3M.
Basis: Bill text · Source: A-Engrossed
Costs: State revenue declines; DOR incurs approximately $149,000 in implementation costs and would have required 0.42 FTE of temporary staff. Estates under the threshold save on professional filing fees.
Basis: Official analysis · Source: Fiscal Impact Statement A
Enforcement/Risk: The phase-in formula and CPI indexing require accurate DOR calculations; misapplication could have resulted in over- or under-taxation near the threshold.
Basis: Inferred · Source: A-Engrossed
Estates valued at exactly $2.49 million (adjusted for inflation)
Potential effect if enacted: Pays zero tax, files no return, and preserves full liquidity for heirs without forcing asset liquidation during probate.
Basis: Inferred · Source: A-Engrossed
Estates valued at $3.01 million
Faces the highest marginal rate (~19.9%) on the portion above $2.5 million plus phase-in calculations, potentially forcing the sale of illiquid family assets (e.g., timberland or farms) to meet tax obligations before distributions could have been made.
Basis: Inferred · Source: A-Engrossed
Duty creep or misclassification of intangible vs. tangible property in apportionment ratios might have been exploited to lower Oregon-situs valuations without violating statutory language.
Sources · A-Engrossed
Potential effect if enacted: The measure trades an estimated $35.4 million in biennial state revenue for reduced compliance burdens and tax liability on middle-to-upper-middle-class estates.
Potential effect if enacted: Shields family assets from inflation-driven taxation.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Staff Measure Summary A
Potential effect if enacted: Simplifies filing for most estates by eliminating returns for values under $2.5 million.
Basis: Bill text · Source: A-Engrossed
Potential effect if enacted: Aligns thresholds with economic reality through CPI indexing starting in 2028.
Basis: Bill text · Source: A-Engrossed
Would have reduced state estate tax revenue, potentially increasing reliance on other tax sources.
Basis: Official analysis · Source: IS_Impact SB 1511 3
Introduces complex phase-in calculations that might have confused executors near the threshold.
Basis: Inferred · Source: A-Engrossed
The A-Engrossed version completely replaces the Introduced version. The Introduced bill contained only a directive for the Legislative Revenue Officer to study estate tax options and repeal that section on January 2, 2028. The A-Engrossed version removes the study requirement and enacts substantive statutory changes: converting the $1 million exemption to a $2.5 million deduction, raising the filing threshold to $2.5 million, establishing a progressive rate structure with a phase-in mechanism, indexing thresholds to inflation starting in 2028, and clarifying nonresident apportionment ratios.
Exemption converted to $2.5 million deduction; filing threshold raised from $1 million to $2.5 million.
Eliminates tax liability and filing requirements for estates under $2.5 million.
Sources · A-Engrossed
Introduction of a phase-in multiplier for taxable estates between $1.5 million and $2.0 million (gross estate roughly $2.5M to $3M).
Gradually imposes tax liability rather than applying full rates abruptly at the threshold.
Sources · A-Engrossed
Addition of CPI-based inflation indexing for both the subject threshold and filing threshold starting in 2028.
Prevents bracket creep and automatically adjusts thresholds to maintain real-value alignment.
Sources · A-Engrossed
Removal of the Legislative Revenue Officer study mandate and its January 2, 2028 repeal clause.
Shifts from a research directive to immediate statutory implementation.
Sources · A-Engrossed; Introduced
Tradeoff: The measure trades an estimated $35.4 million in biennial state revenue for reduced compliance burdens and tax liability on middle-to-upper-middle-class estates.
Model self-rating: high. Analysis is grounded exclusively in the A-Engrossed bill text and official Legislative Revenue Office and Fiscal Office impact statements for this exact version. No external speculation or unverified claims are included. This is the model’s assessment of its own analysis, not independent verification or human review.
Possible effects if adopted; not current bill text.
This proposal has not become law. The generated effects below describe what it would require if enacted.
If adopted, the amendment would replace Oregon’s graduated estate tax with a flat 10% rate, raise the filing threshold and statutory exemption to $2.5 million, and create a portability mechanism allowing surviving spouses to claim unused exclusion amounts from their deceased spouse’s estate. Estates with gross values under $2.5 million would generally avoid filing requirements starting in 2027, while fiduciaries would face new mandatory election deadlines to preserve spousal wealth transfers.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -A6 — proposed amendment
Official sources do not state why this measure was proposed.
Sponsor testimony, staff summaries, committee materials, or statutory findings may explain it.
Inferred from cited text; not a stated purpose.
The measure may aim to simplify Oregon’s estate tax administration and align it with federal portability standards to reduce compliance friction for married couples.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -A6 — proposed amendment
Potential effect if enacted: may claim up to $2.5 million in unused exclusion amounts if the prior spouse’s Oregon taxable estate did not exceed that limit and a timely election is filed.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -A6 — proposed amendment
Would have to file returns within 12 months of death to preserve portability, calculate tax using a flat 10% rate on Oregon-situs assets, and manage apportionment ratios for non-Oregon property.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -A6 — proposed amendment
Potential effect if enacted: Subject to the flat 10% tax after applying the $2.5 million exemption and any DSUE, replacing the previous graduated rate structure.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -A6 — proposed amendment; Fiscal Impact Statement A
Tax liability would be calculated via an apportionment ratio applied to Oregon-situs assets only, excluding intangibles subject to other jurisdictions.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -A6 — proposed amendment
Fiduciaries would have to proactively file portability elections within 12 months of the first spouse’s death, even if no tax is owed, to avoid permanent loss of the exclusion.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -A6 — proposed amendment
The Department of Revenue would incur implementation costs for form revisions, system would update, and taxpayer outreach, estimated at $149,035 in the 2025-27 biennium.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Fiscal Impact Statement A
The raised $2.5 million filing threshold would likely reduce the number of required returns, but portability eligibility would depend strictly on prior estate valuation and timely election.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -A6 — proposed amendment; Fiscal Impact Statement A
Potential effect if enacted: DOR retains rulemaking authority to extend filing deadlines, creating uncertainty around the strict 12-month window unless rules clarify extensions.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -A6 — proposed amendment
Surviving spouse with prior portability election
A surviving spouse inherits a $4 million estate. The prior spouse’s executor timely filed a portability election for a $1.5 million Oregon taxable estate. The survivor would apply the $2.5 million exemption plus the $1.5 million DSUE, reducing their Oregon taxable estate to zero and eliminating all state estate tax liability.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -A6 — proposed amendment
Executor missing portability deadline
An executor misses the 12-month portability election deadline due to administrative delay or lack of notice. The unused exclusion amount is permanently forfeited, resulting in a substantial unexpected flat 10% tax on the survivor’s estate that would have otherwise been shielded.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -A6 — proposed amendment
The text would legally permit election filing and deadline extensions, but weak enforcement or property misclassification could produce unlawful avoidance of Oregon tax obligations.
Sources · Amendment -A6 — proposed amendment
The measure simplifies the tax structure and would raise exemptions to reduce liability for most estates, but shifts compliance risk to fiduciaries who would have to strictly meet a 12-month election deadline to preserve spousal wealth transfers. Upsides include lower overall tax burdens and alignment with federal portability; downsides include new filing mandates for non-taxable estates and permanent loss of exclusions if deadlines are missed.
Would reduce estate tax liability for married couples through portability and a higher exemption threshold.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -A6 — proposed amendment
Potential effect if enacted: Simplifies rate calculation by replacing a graduated table with a flat 10% structure.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -A6 — proposed amendment
Would create a new compliance burden requiring timely portability elections even for estates that owe no tax.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -A6 — proposed amendment
Potential effect if enacted: Permanent loss of spousal exclusion if the 12-month deadline is missed, with no statutory cure.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -A6 — proposed amendment
Model self-rating: high. Analysis is grounded exclusively in the supplied proposed amendment text and official fiscal/revenue impact statements. No enacted status or external speculation is applied. This is the model’s assessment of its own analysis, not independent verification or human review.
This proposal has not become law. The generated effects below describe what it would require if enacted.
The bill would raise Oregon’s estate tax filing threshold to $2.5 million (with annual inflation indexing starting in 2028), phases in tax liability for estates valued between $2.5 million and $3.0 million, would establish a new progressive rate schedule beginning at 12.75%, and converts the existing $1 million exemption into a pre-calculation deduction from the gross estate. It would apply to deaths occurring on or after January 1, 2027.
Basis: Bill text · Source: Senate Amendments to Introduced
Official sources do not state why this measure was proposed.
Sponsor testimony, staff summaries, committee materials, or statutory findings may explain it.
Inferred from cited text; not a stated purpose.
The legislature intends to shield estates under $3 million from full estate tax liability while preserving revenue from larger estates.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Senate Amendments to Introduced
Potential effect if enacted: Exempt from filing and taxation starting in 2027, eliminating compliance costs and valuation requirements.
Basis: Bill text · Source: Senate Amendments to Introduced
Potential effect if enacted: Subject to a graduated, phased-in tax calculation rather than the full statutory rate.
Basis: Bill text · Source: Senate Amendments to Introduced
Potential effect if enacted: Pay tax at newly established progressive rates (12.75% to 19.90%) applied to the Oregon taxable estate.
Basis: Bill text · Source: Senate Amendments to Introduced
Would have to apply new deduction mechanics, phased-in calculations, and inflation-adjusted thresholds; filing obligations drop significantly for qualifying estates.
Basis: Bill text · Source: Senate Amendments to Introduced
Potential effect if enacted: Responsible for implementing CPI-based threshold adjustments, updating tax forms and GenTax systems, and processing reduced but higher-value estate returns.
Basis: Bill text · Source: Senate Amendments to Introduced
Executors of smaller estates would avoid complex valuation and filing requirements; larger estates may require accelerated planning to manage the new rate structure.
Basis: Bill text · Source: Senate Amendments to Introduced
Potential effect if enacted: Projected revenue reduction of $3.2 million (2027-29) and $35.4 million (2029-31); DOR implementation costs estimated at approximately $149,000 for 2025-27.
Basis: Official analysis · Sources: IS_Impact SB 1511 3; Fiscal Impact Statement A
Potential effect if enacted: Clearer statutory cutoffs reduce administrative barriers for qualifying estates while increasing calculation complexity for those near the phase-in boundary.
Basis: Bill text · Source: Senate Amendments to Introduced
DOR would have to accurately apply CPI indexing and ratio calculations for nonresident decedents; misapplication could lead to over- or under-assessment.
Basis: Bill text · Source: Senate Amendments to Introduced
Estates valued at exactly $2.49 million (adjusted for inflation)
Potential effect if enacted: Pays zero tax and files no return, preserving full liquidity for heirs without professional valuation costs.
Basis: Bill text · Source: Senate Amendments to Introduced
Estates valued at $3.01 million
Potential effect if enacted: Faces a sudden jump to 100% of the table tax plus higher marginal rates, potentially forcing liquidation of illiquid assets like family farms or closely held businesses to meet the liability.
Basis: Bill text · Source: Senate Amendments to Introduced
The text would legally permit phased-in taxation and inflation indexing. Weak enforcement or misclassification of 'tangible personal property' versus 'intangible personal property' in the Oregon-situs ratio calculation (ORS 118.010(8)(b)) could allow nonresident decedents to underreport Oregon assets, leading to unintended tax avoidance or double taxation claims across jurisdictions.
Sources · Senate Amendments to Introduced
The measure would reduce administrative and financial burdens on smaller estates but shifts the tax burden upward for larger estates, creating a steeper marginal rate cliff at the phase-in completion point.
Potential effect if enacted: Lower compliance costs and preserved liquidity for mid-tier estates.
Basis: Bill text · Source: Senate Amendments to Introduced
Potential effect if enacted: Inflation protection through annual CPI indexing of the $2.5 million threshold.
Basis: Bill text · Source: Senate Amendments to Introduced
Potential effect if enacted: Projected revenue reduction of $3.2 million (2027-29) and $35.4 million (2029-31).
Basis: Official analysis · Source: IS_Impact SB 1511 3
Potential effect if enacted: Potential asset liquidation pressure near the $3 million threshold due to higher marginal rates.
Basis: Bill text · Source: Senate Amendments to Introduced
Potential effect if enacted: Increased calculation complexity for phased-in liability and nonresident ratio adjustments.
Basis: Bill text · Source: Senate Amendments to Introduced
Model self-rating: high. The bill text, fiscal impact statements, and revenue analysis are consistent and directly address the proposed provisions. No conflicting official sources were provided. This is the model’s assessment of its own analysis, not independent verification or human review.
This proposal has not become law. The generated effects below describe what it would require if enacted.
If adopted, the amendment would replace Oregon’s current $1 million estate tax exemption with a $1.5 million deduction, introduces a new graduated tax table starting at 10% for estates over $1 million, and would establish a filing threshold of $2.5 million (adjusted annually for inflation) for deaths occurring on or after January 1, 2027. Materially, it would shift the tax burden toward larger estates, would eliminate return requirements for mid-sized estates, projects a net revenue reduction of up to $35.4 million over two biennia beginning in 2029, and would require the Department of Revenue to update valuation rules, forms, and automated systems to track lifetime transfers and mirror federal election options.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -4 — proposed amendment; Fiscal Impact Statement A; Revenue Impact Statement A
Official sources do not state why this measure was proposed.
Sponsor testimony, staff summaries, committee materials, or statutory findings may explain it.
Inferred from cited text; not a stated purpose.
The amendment’s structural changes—raising the deduction to $1.5 million, setting a $2.5 million filing threshold, and indexing thresholds to CPI-U—suggest an intent to shield middle-tier estates from tax liability while preserving revenue from larger estates and preventing inflation-driven bracket creep.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -4 — proposed amendment; Staff Measure Summary A
Would face a new graduated tax table but benefit from the phase-in structure and higher deduction; likely pay little to no tax initially and would be exempt from filing returns.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -4 — proposed amendment; Fiscal Impact Statement A
Would face increased marginal tax rates (up to 16%) calculated on a larger taxable base after the $1.5 million deduction, potentially increasing liability compared to prior law.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -4 — proposed amendment; Revenue Impact Statement A
Would have to file returns only if gross estate >= $2.5 million, but would have to still report all lifetime transfers and trust distributions in every estate regardless of administration status or federal return requirements.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -4 — proposed amendment
Tax would be strictly apportioned to Oregon real and tangible personal property, with clear domicile-based definitions limiting liability to in-state assets.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -4 — proposed amendment
Potential effect if enacted: Compliance costs decrease for estates under $2.5 million due to the filing exemption, reducing administrative burden on heirs and practitioners.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Fiscal Impact Statement A
The Department of Revenue would have to implement annual CPI-U adjustments to thresholds, update GenTax configuration, revise forms and instructions, and manage increased taxpayer inquiries during the transition period.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Fiscal Impact Statement A
Potential effect if enacted: Executors gain explicit authority to mirror federal valuation elections (e.g., IRC §§ 2031(c), 2056) for state purposes, simplifying cross-jurisdictional compliance but requiring precise tracking of irrevocable state-level elections.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -4 — proposed amendment
Inflation indexing prevents automatic bracket creep but introduces annual administrative complexity and would require DOR to publish updated thresholds before each tax year.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -4 — proposed amendment
Heirs of a $2.4 million estate in 2030 (post-inflation adjustment)
Potential effect if enacted: Pays zero estate tax, files no return, and retains full liquidity to maintain a family business or pay off mortgages without forced asset sales or high-interest borrowing.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -4 — proposed amendment; Revenue Impact Statement A
Nonresident decedent with $10 million in assets but only $2.6 million in Oregon real property
Potential effect if enacted: Faces the full 16% marginal rate on the Oregon-situs portion after the deduction, triggering complex apportionment calculations and potential liquidity shortfalls if heirs lack cash reserves to satisfy the tax without selling core assets.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -4 — proposed amendment
The text would legally permit strategic estate planning and mirrors federal options; the risk arises from administrative gaps in tracking cross-jurisdictional elections and lifetime transfers.
Sources · Amendment -4 — proposed amendment
The measure sacrifices near-term estate tax revenue and broadens the exemption to reduce compliance burdens on middle-tier estates, but it would increase statutory complexity through apportionment formulas, inflation indexing mechanics, and expanded executor election authorities that require precise administrative tracking.
Potential effect if enacted: Lower compliance costs and return requirements for most estates.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Fiscal Impact Statement A
Potential effect if enacted: Protection against inflation-driven bracket creep via annual CPI-U indexing.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -4 — proposed amendment
Potential effect if enacted: Clearer rules for nonresidents and explicit alignment with federal valuation options.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -4 — proposed amendment
Potential effect if enacted: Projected revenue loss of up to $35.4 million over two biennia beginning in 2029.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Revenue Impact Statement A
Potential effect if enacted: Increased administrative burden on DOR to update systems, publish annual thresholds, and manage transition-period inquiries.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Fiscal Impact Statement A
Potential effect if enacted: Potential liquidity pressure on large estates facing higher marginal rates without corresponding cash reserves.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -4 — proposed amendment
Model self-rating: high. The amendment text, fiscal impact statements, and revenue impact summaries provide explicit statutory language, threshold mechanics, and projected financial effects. Inferences are strictly bounded by the provided documents. This is the model’s assessment of its own analysis, not independent verification or human review.
This proposal has not become law. The generated effects below describe what it would require if enacted.
The amendment would raise the Oregon estate tax filing threshold from $1 million to $2.5 million (indexed for inflation starting in 2028), converts the existing exemption into a flat deduction, introduces a graduated phase-in of tax liability for estates valued between $2.5 million and $3 million, and would establish new marginal tax rates ranging from 10% to 19.9%. If adopted, it would eliminate estate tax filings for most middle-tier estates, reduce projected state revenue by approximately $35.4 million over the 2029-31 biennium, and require the Department of Revenue to update forms, software, and taxpayer guidance.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment; Fiscal Impact Statement A; Revenue Impact Statement A
Official sources do not state why this measure was proposed.
Sponsor testimony, staff summaries, committee materials, or statutory findings may explain it.
Inferred from cited text; not a stated purpose.
The measure appears designed to shield estates valued up to $3 million from full tax liability while preserving revenue from larger estates, likely in response to rising asset values and compliance costs for family-owned property.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment; Fiscal Impact Statement A
Potential effect if enacted: Face a higher filing threshold ($2.5 million) and new calculation rules, reducing compliance obligations for smaller estates but requiring updated valuation and tax computation methods for larger ones.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment; Fiscal Impact Statement A
Potential effect if enacted: Likely retain greater liquidity due to reduced tax liability and phased-in rates, particularly for estates under $3 million.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Would have to implement new tax tables, adjust GenTax software, update forms/instructions, and manage a temporary 0.42 FTE auditor position for implementation, while anticipating long-term revenue declines.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Fiscal Impact Statement A
Potential effect if enacted: may avoid forced asset liquidation to pay estate taxes if their valuation falls within the new phase-in or non-filing bands.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Staff Measure Summary A
Eligibility and Filing: Estates with gross values below $2.5 million (adjusted for inflation from 2028) would no longer be required to file an Oregon estate tax return, significantly reducing administrative burdens.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment; Fiscal Impact Statement A
Tax Calculation and Costs: Executors would have to apply a new ratio-based formula for nonresident decedents and calculate liability using a revised table with rates starting at 10% and climbing to 19.9%, subject to a phase-in multiplier for estates between $2.5 million and $3 million.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Enforcement and Access: DOR would need to revise taxpayer outreach materials and audit protocols; the inflation adjustment mechanism would require annual CPI-U calculations, creating a predictable but administratively active compliance environment.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment; Fiscal Impact Statement A
Heirs of a $2.49 million estate
Potential effect if enacted: A decedent leaves an estate valued at exactly $2.49 million consisting of a family home and retirement accounts. Under the amendment, no Oregon estate tax return is required, and zero tax is owed, allowing heirs to retain full liquidity without selling property.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Nonresident decedent with concentrated Oregon real estate
A nonresident decedent owns $8 million in Oregon vacation real estate but only $2 million in total worldwide assets. The ratio calculation (Oregon property value divided by total gross estate) would apply the full Oregon tax rate to the Oregon-situs property, potentially generating a multi-million dollar liability that forces the rapid sale of illiquid real estate to satisfy the tax due.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
The text would legally permit standard estate planning and ratio-based apportionment for nonresidents, but weak enforcement or misclassification of asset types could enable tax avoidance or trigger disproportionate administrative scrutiny.
Sources · Amendment -3 — proposed amendment; Fiscal Impact Statement A
Potential effect if enacted: The measure trades long-term structural revenue loss and a narrowed tax base for immediate liquidity preservation and reduced compliance costs for middle-tier estates.
Potential effect if enacted: Prevents forced asset sales and preserves family wealth for estates under $3 million.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Potential effect if enacted: Aligns the filing threshold with inflation, reducing future administrative burdens for both taxpayers and DOR.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Potential effect if enacted: Lowers immediate compliance costs for executors of middle-tier estates by eliminating return requirements.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Fiscal Impact Statement A
Potential effect if enacted: Projects a $35.4 million biennial revenue reduction by 2029-31, potentially shifting fiscal pressure to other state funds.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Revenue Impact Statement A
Potential effect if enacted: may create regressive outcomes if high-net-worth individuals continue to utilize federal portability or out-of-state planning to avoid the tax base.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Would require upfront DOR implementation costs and temporary staffing to modify software, forms, and audit protocols.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Fiscal Impact Statement A
Model self-rating: high. The amendment text, revenue impact statements, and fiscal analysis provide explicit statutory language, calculated thresholds, tax tables, and implementation costs. Inferences are strictly bounded by the provided text and official legislative summaries. This is the model’s assessment of its own analysis, not independent verification or human review.
This proposal has not become law. The generated effects below describe what it would require if enacted.
The amendment would raise Oregon estate tax rates, would establish a $2.5 million phase-in threshold that ramps to full liability at $3 million, converts the prior $1 million exemption into a deduction, and would raise the filing requirement threshold to $2.5 million for deaths on or after January 1, 2027. Potential effects could include reduced tax liability for estates between $2.5 million and $3 million, higher marginal rates for larger estates, elimination of filing obligations for smaller estates, and mandatory annual inflation adjustments to both the phase-in and filing thresholds beginning in 2028.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Official sources do not state why this measure was proposed.
Sponsor testimony, staff summaries, committee materials, or statutory findings may explain it.
Inferred from cited text; not a stated purpose.
The measure appears designed to prevent bracket creep by indexing the estate tax phase-in and filing thresholds to inflation, while preserving revenue from larger estates through higher marginal rates. This hypothesis is grounded in the explicit statutory mandate to adjust the $2.5 million threshold annually using the U.S. City Average Consumer Price Index starting in 2028, combined with the retention of progressive rates for estates exceeding the phase-in range.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Would have to apply a new tax table, calculate phase-in fractions for mid-sized estates, track lifetime transfers per statutory requirement, and file returns only when gross estate value meets or exceeds the inflation-adjusted $2.5 million threshold.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Potential effect if enacted: Face higher marginal tax rates (starting at 10 percent and reaching approximately 19.90 percent) compared to prior law, which may reduce net inheritance amounts and increase pressure to liquidate assets for tax payment.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Receive a phased-in tax calculation that would reduce liability proportionally as estate value approaches the threshold, potentially preserving liquidity and avoiding forced asset sales.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Potential effect if enacted: Tax liability is apportioned based on the ratio of Oregon-situs assets to total gross estate, which may lower overall tax burden if the majority of assets are located outside Oregon or subject to another jurisdiction's death taxes.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Compliance obligations shift toward precise apportionment calculations and mandatory reporting of lifetime transfers, even for estates that owe no tax. Executors would have to monitor annual CPI-U publications to anticipate threshold adjustments starting in 2028.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Administrative costs for the Department of Revenue include system would update, form revisions, and temporary staffing to manage implementation and taxpayer inquiries. Estates below the new filing threshold avoid compliance costs entirely.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Fiscal Impact Statement A
Enforcement relies on accurate valuation of intangible versus tangible property and correct application of the phase-in fraction. Misapplication of the ratio or deduction rules could trigger underpayment assessments or delayed distributions.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Executor of a $2.9 million estate
Correctly would apply the phase-in formula, reducing tax liability to near zero. Beneficiaries retain nearly the entire estate without triggering liquidity events or forced sales of family-owned real property.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Executor of a nonresident decedent with $10 million in assets and $500,000 in Oregon real property
Potential effect if enacted: Misclassifies intangible personal property to artificially inflate the denominator of the apportionment ratio. The Department of Revenue later reclassifies those assets as taxable Oregon situs property, resulting in a substantially higher tax assessment plus interest for prior underpayment.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Potential effect if enacted: The statutory ratio excludes intangibles taxed by another jurisdiction but does not provide a bright-line definition of nexus, creating room for aggressive valuation strategies that cross into misclassification.
Sources · Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Potential effect if enacted: Higher marginal rates on large estates generate revenue but reduce inheritance wealth, while the phase-in mechanism and inflation indexing protect mid-sized estates at the cost of increased calculation complexity and administrative oversight.
Potential effect if enacted: Inflation-adjusted thresholds prevent automatic bracket creep, preserving estate value for middle-tier beneficiaries over time.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Eliminating filing requirements for estates under $2.5 million would reduce compliance burdens and legal fees for smaller decedents.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Potential effect if enacted: Complex phase-in fractions and apportionment ratios increase the risk of calculation errors, potentially triggering audits or delayed distributions.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Potential effect if enacted: Higher marginal rates for estates above $3 million may force liquidation of illiquid assets, such as family businesses or farmland, to satisfy tax obligations.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Model self-rating: high. The amendment text explicitly defines thresholds, rates, phase-in mechanics, filing requirements, and effective dates. Revenue and fiscal analyses corroborate the structural changes and implementation costs. This is the model’s assessment of its own analysis, not independent verification or human review.
28 records currently loaded
Records available in the current snapshot.
Earliest loaded signal
Introduced bill text posted
Posted Jan 28, 2026, 3:25 PM PST
AI-assessed adopted replacement
The adopted rewrite removes the study and enacts estate-tax changes.
AI assessment dated 2026-09-29. This classification is separate from enactment and legal effect.
Evidence snapshot: 2026-09-29. Later legislative records are not automatically reassessed.
Policy purpose: substantially changed.
Reviewer: /root/review_recent_a · 2026-09-29
AI-assessed adopted replacement
The adopted rewrite removes the study and enacts estate-tax changes.
Policy purpose: substantially changed.
“SECTION 1. The Legislative Revenue Officer shall study the estate tax and shall review 5 options for modifying the exemption threshold and tax rates. The Legislative Revenue Officer 6 shall submit a report in the manner provided by ORS 192.245, and may include recommen- 7 dations for legislation, to the interim comm”
Introduced
“SECTION 1. ORS 118.010 is amended to read: 6 118.010. (1) As used in this section: 7 (a) “Nonresident decedent” means an individual who is domiciled outside of Oregon on the date 8 the individual dies. 9 (b) “Resident decedent” means an individual who is domiciled in Oregon on the date the indi- 10 vidual dies. 11 ”
A-Engrossed
Reviewer: /root/review_recent_b · 2026-09-29
AI-assessed adopted replacement
The adopted -3 amendment removes the study and inserts binding tax-liability changes.
Policy purpose: substantially changed.
“SECTION 1. The Legislative Revenue Officer shall study the estate tax and shall review 5 options for modifying the exemption threshold and tax rates. The Legislative Revenue Officer 6 shall submit a report in the manner provided by ORS 192.245, and”
Introduced
“SECTION 1. ORS 118.010 is amended to read: 6 118.010. (1) As used in this section: 7 (a) “Nonresident decedent” means an individual who is domiciled outside of Oregon on the date 8 the individual dies. 9 (b) “Resident decedent” means an individual who is domiciled in Oregon on the date the indi-”
A-Engrossed
“Gut and stuff” research tracks substantial replacements of a bill’s substantive text. Policy change is assessed separately: a rewrite can retain the same purpose. A proposed amendment is counted as adopted only when the official evidence supports adoption.
Two subscription subagents independently examine the same official evidence without seeing each other’s answers. An additional subagent can adjudicate disagreements against the sources. Unsupported conclusions, missing evidence, and unresolved disagreements remain uncertain. Agreement is not a guarantee of accuracy.
Session totals count each HB or SB once, including bills that did not become law. Resolutions and memorials are excluded. Counts describe the research inventory, independent of your search, interests, following, and status filters. Missing or unassessed bills are not negative findings.
The replacement watch is a rule, not an AI assessment: a bill whose introduced text is a short study bill (a study word, at most three sections, under 400 words) or a blank form (a run of blanks, 300 words or fewer) is listed once a proposed amendment is posted for it. In the 2021 to 2026 training sessions, 271 of 374 such bills were later replaced; the rate is historical and says nothing about a particular bill’s intent.
Assessments are published research snapshots. Opening this page reads saved research and does not run an AI review. Refreshes require another evidence export, independent assessment, and validated import; reports do not continuously refresh. Each bill’s evidence and reviewer provenance are available on its detail page.
Follow the official text for SB 1511 and every amendment branch. Connections come from each amendment's stated base. Horizontal position shows when each document was first posted, when available. Dotted links flag likely related proposals based on their text.
Click a card to isolate its connected lines; use View summary to jump to its details. Horizontal position shows first posting time in Pacific Time. Drag or use the arrow keys to pan. Pinch with two fingers on mobile, or zoom with the controls, +/− keys, or Control/Command + scroll; press 0 to reset. Dashed branches remained proposals. Dotted teal links are text-based early signals, not official amendment relationships.
Selected document summary
Substantial replacement
What the document says to change
Delete lines 4 through 9 and insert:
Inferred policy relationships
Likely revised proposal · Amendment -4
High confidence from shared inserted text: IRC §2056, IRC §2058, ORS 118.005, ORS 118.010, ORS 118.013, Tax deduction, Effective date.
This is a text-based early signal, not an official statement that one amendment changes the other.
Oregon records no individual sponsors.
Presession filing record
Printed pursuant to Senate Interim Rule 213.28 by order of the President of the Senate in conformance with presession filing rules, indicating neither advocacy nor opposition on the part of the President.
LC 153 became SB 1511
Mapping document posted: January 2, 2026 at 2:56 PM PST
Work Session — 10:45 - 11:00 Introduction of Committee Bills LC 153 Estate Tax LC 254 Miscellaneous Corrections and Policy Updates LC 302 Tax Reform
Senate Interim Committee on Finance and Revenue introduction work session
Committee meeting: January 13, 2026 at 8:30 AM PST
HR A
Committee introduction motion
Committee meeting: January 13, 2026 at 8:30 AM PST
Vice-Chair McLane moved to adopt the listed legislative concepts as committee bills. Motion Passed. No objections
Committee introduction allows consideration; it does not imply every member supported the introduced or final text.
The text changed substantially while keeping measure number SB 1511.
Senate carrier
Senator Anthony Broadman
Third Reading Of Senate Measures · Version A
A carrier presents the measure or report but is not necessarily its sponsor or author.
Records already listed in Activity are not repeated here.
Official origin records are incomplete; missing facts are not inferred.
28 events
Full timeline
28 entries shown.
In committee upon adjournment.
Public Hearing held.
Informational Meeting held.
Amendment -A6 proposed
Proposed
Informational Meeting
Heard · Agenda item 1 · Room HR A · Converts the $1 million exclusion for an estate subject to tax to a deduction of $2.5 million
Public Hearing
Heard · Agenda item 3 · Room HR A · Converts the $1 million exclusion for an estate subject to tax to a deduction of $2.5 million
IS_Impact SB 1511 A
Revenue Impact Statement
Referred to Revenue.
First reading. Referred to Speaker's desk.
Third reading. Carried by Broadman. Passed.
Ayes, 22; Nays, 5--Girod, Hayden, Pham, Robinson, Starr; Excused, 3--Drazan, Linthicum, Smith DB.
Second reading.
Senate Amendments to Introduced bill text posted
Recommendation: Do pass with amendments. (Printed A-Eng.)
Work Session held.
Work Session
Heard and Reported Out with Amendments · Agenda item 1 · Room HR A · Requires the Legislative Revenue Officer to study the estate tax.
Amendment -4 proposed
IS_Impact SB 1511 3
Revenue Impact Statement
Amendment -3 adopted
Public Hearing held.
Public Hearing
Heard · Agenda item 2 · Room HR A · Requires the Legislative Revenue Officer to study the estate tax.
Amendment -3 proposed
Referred to Finance and Revenue.
Introduction and first reading. Referred to President's desk.
Source title: Converts the $1 million exclusion for an estate subject to tax to a deduction of $2This source title may describe an earlier version. Read the current brief and version history above.
“Converts the $1 million exclusion for an estate subject to tax to a deduction of $2.5 million”
Confirm with the official record.
Supplemental, source-linked analysis from project researchers and community contributors. It is separate from Oregon's official record.