In This State

• in → (preposition, introducing “this state” as a location phrase)

• this → (demonstrative adjective, modifies “state”)

• state → (noun, object of the preposition “in”)

Licensed to Exploit
The OBTP Accountability Project

inThisState.com stands as a cruicial platform for exposing regulatory overreach and ensuring due process for tax professionals everywhere in the world, not just “in this state.” Join us in advocating for legal integrity and government accountability. Or sit back, snack up, and witness the slow-motion bureaucratic firestorm—equal parts comedy, tragedy, and “you’ve got to be kidding me.”

Scroll down to read, “The Story Thus Far.”

We know why you’re here. What are you waiting for?
Dive in and read about the overreach… in this state.
Close-up of a fist clutching US dollars, symbolizing wealth or finance.
A young couple reviews bills and documents in their kitchen, expressing financial stress and concern.

Narrative Overview

Welcome to inThisState.com — the public record of one preparer’s legal and administrative battle with the Oregon Board of Tax Practitioners (OBTP), an agency that believes it can require licensure from anyone, anywhere, who prepares an Oregon return.

There are two styles to this drawn-out lawsuit that I initiated. “The Narrative Brief” and “On the Record (Facts, No Fluff)”. On the Record is the fact-filled, low-nonsense version of events and happenings. It can be found on the War of Words blog page (eventually). Here, we present The Narrative Brief version of the story. A fun, albeit occasionally punchy, tale of your typical “Good versus Evil.” Unfortunately, it’s not all swords, magic, and fire-breathing dragons. Even the greatest of fanciful stories has to face the truth from time to time. And it’s not always pretty. Real harm and devastation has been wrought by a greedy, two-person department in Oregon that cares more about lining their coffers than about the false narratives it spews as justification. But, in spite of that, and maybe because of that, it’s part of what makes it worth reading. Worth investing in. There’s a truth buried in here that I haven’t even uncovered yet. And part of me doesn’t want to.

The following is a summed-up version of events with more in-depth counterparts in the War of Words blog.

Without further ado, I present to you The Narrative Brief overview.

Paper Shields and Iron Walls

It started with a simple records request on October 3, 2024. I wasn’t asking for trade secrets. I wasn’t filing a lawsuit—yet. I just wanted to know: when and how did OBTP decide that out-of-state preparers must be licensed to prepare Oregon returns?

Their response: a polite stone wall.

On October 7, OBTP denied my fee waiver request, stating:

“The Board has received few enquiries from other members of the public on this topic. The decision to deny your waiver request is also based upon the Board’s limited budget and limited staff availability.”
(Laura Kardokus, Oct. 7, 2024) They didn’t deny the records existed. They didn’t say the law supported them. They just said I’d have to pay to see the evidence.

Consumer Protection or Jurisdictional Conquest?

The Board’s general counsel, Senior Assistant Attorney General Catriona McCracken, later explained OBTP’s position:

“If a person or entity wishes to practice in this state from wherever located in Oregon or another state, they need to be licensed to practice ‘in this state.’”
(McCracken, Oct. 4, 2024)

According to the Board, the phrase “in this state” doesn’t refer to geography—it refers to the return itself. Their interpretation turned a statute about location into a mechanism for cross-border control.

When asked for supporting law, McCracken referenced ORS 673.643 and related provisions—none of which contain the interpretation OBTP is using.

The Price of Asking Questions: $6,000

By November, OBTP informed me that fulfilling my public records requests would cost:

  1. $1,600 in staff time
  2. $4,400 in attorney review
  3. $6,000, paid in full, up front

After about 30 days—on a timeline entirely of their own invention—they cut me off from pursuing the request or even submitting another (equally doomed) fee waiver attempt. The statute guarantees a 60-day response window. But hey, I guess they just wanted to give me an early Christmas present.

Payment Under Protest

Despite the barriers, I renewed my license. Not because I agreed with OBTP. Not because I believed they were right, but because letting the license lapse would put me at risk for enforcement.

So on April 17, 2025, I paid. I added this message:

“This payment is made under duress and solely to avoid the lapse of my license and for fear of reprisal… I dispute the legal authority of the Board’s policy or enforcement mechanism that compels this payment.”
(Email to OBTP, Apr. 17, 2025)

Their reply:

“Received.”

This Is Not Just About Oregon

OBTP believes it can enforce licensure requirements against any tax preparer handling an Oregon return—regardless of where they live, what credentials they hold, or whether their own state even requires licensure.

They say it’s about consumer protection. But the facts suggest it’s about power, revenue, and regulatory overreach.

This site documents everything from the beginning, through current—from legal filings and government correspondence to the mounting evidence that Oregon’s licensing board has expanded its reach far beyond what the law allows… in this state.