Oregon Window Tint Law 2026

Note carefully WHICH conditions subsection (3) lifts: it names only (2)(a) and (2)(c), the two transmittance figures. It does NOT mention (2)(b), so the 13% film reflectance cap continues to apply to the windshield strip, as do the subsection (8) bans on mirror finishes and on red, gold, yellow, amber or black material. A dataset that recorded the Oregon strip as simply "no limit" would drop three live constraints.

A flat six inches from the top — no AS-1 reference, no tie-breaker, no seat-relative measurement. Matches Massachusetts, Illinois and New Hampshire in form. The second sentence is the operative restriction and is easy to lose: "Tinting material may not be applied to any other portion of the windshield", so the six-inch band is the ONLY place windshield tint is lawful in Oregon.

A flat prohibition, so no number is carried. Oregon joins Minnesota, Vermont, Missouri and New Hampshire in barring aftermarket windshield tint below the permitted band, against North Dakota, which allows it at 70% net.

THE FILM FIGURE. The regulated object is "the tinting material" itself, measured before or independently of installation. CUMULATIVE, NOT ALTERNATIVE. ORS 815.221(2) joins its conditions with "and", so a lawful Oregon installation satisfies the 50% FILM figure, the 13% FILM reflectance figure, and the 35% ASSEMBLY figure simultaneously. The two transmittance figures are recorded as separate rows discriminated by vlt_basis; collapsing them into one number would publish a limit Oregon does not have.

THE ASSEMBLY FIGURE. The regulated object is "the total light transmittance through the window with the tinting material applied" — film plus glass. CUMULATIVE, NOT ALTERNATIVE. ORS 815.221(2) joins its conditions with "and", so a lawful Oregon installation satisfies the 50% FILM figure, the 13% FILM reflectance figure, and the 35% ASSEMBLY figure simultaneously. The two transmittance figures are recorded as separate rows discriminated by vlt_basis; collapsing them into one number would publish a limit Oregon does not have. Note the arithmetic this implies: a 50%-transmittance film on typical glazing lands near 35% net, so the two figures are calibrated to each other rather than redundant.

Oregon does not step down behind the driver for ordinary vehicles — subsection (2) governs "the side and rear windows" as one group. The variation comes from the subsection (4) MPV route instead. CUMULATIVE, NOT ALTERNATIVE. ORS 815.221(2) joins its conditions with "and", so a lawful Oregon installation satisfies the 50% FILM figure, the 13% FILM reflectance figure, and the 35% ASSEMBLY figure simultaneously. The two transmittance figures are recorded as separate rows discriminated by vlt_basis; collapsing them into one number would publish a limit Oregon does not have.

CUMULATIVE, NOT ALTERNATIVE. ORS 815.221(2) joins its conditions with "and", so a lawful Oregon installation satisfies the 50% FILM figure, the 13% FILM reflectance figure, and the 35% ASSEMBLY figure simultaneously. The two transmittance figures are recorded as separate rows discriminated by vlt_basis; collapsing them into one number would publish a limit Oregon does not have.

DELIBERATELY NOT A NO_RESTRICTION ROW AND NOT A NUMBER. ORS 815.221(4) lets darker material go on all windows of a multipurpose passenger vehicle behind the driver, but it is a SUBSTITUTION rather than a release: "The windows as tinted shall meet the requirements for AS-3 glazing material established by federal regulation", and "This subsection applies only to vehicles that are equipped with rearview mirrors on each side of the vehicle." The statute supplies its own MPV definition — "a motor vehicle with motive power that is designed to carry 10 or fewer persons and is constructed either on a truck chassis or with special features for occasional off-road operation." Converting AS-3 into a percentage would require the federal glazing regulation, which this session did not retrieve. Note the interaction with subsection (7) — "There are no light transmittance requirements for glazing materials applied to AS-3 type windows" — which is what makes the AS-3 substitution meaningful in practice; Phase 1b should retrieve the federal standard before any figure is published here.

Subsection (2) covers the rear window in the same breath as the side windows, and Oregon attaches no mirror condition to an ordinary vehicle's rear glass — the mirror requirement appears only on the subsection (4) MPV route. CUMULATIVE, NOT ALTERNATIVE. ORS 815.221(2) joins its conditions with "and", so a lawful Oregon installation satisfies the 50% FILM figure, the 13% FILM reflectance figure, and the 35% ASSEMBLY figure simultaneously. The two transmittance figures are recorded as separate rows discriminated by vlt_basis; collapsing them into one number would publish a limit Oregon does not have.

CUMULATIVE, NOT ALTERNATIVE. ORS 815.221(2) joins its conditions with "and", so a lawful Oregon installation satisfies the 50% FILM figure, the 13% FILM reflectance figure, and the 35% ASSEMBLY figure simultaneously. The two transmittance figures are recorded as separate rows discriminated by vlt_basis; collapsing them into one number would publish a limit Oregon does not have.

ORS 815.221(4) lets darker material go on all windows of a multipurpose passenger vehicle behind the driver, but it is a SUBSTITUTION rather than a release: "The windows as tinted shall meet the requirements for AS-3 glazing material established by federal regulation", and "This subsection applies only to vehicles that are equipped with rearview mirrors on each side of the vehicle." The statute supplies its own MPV definition — "a motor vehicle with motive power that is designed to carry 10 or fewer persons and is constructed either on a truck chassis or with special features for occasional off-road operation."

THE STRICTEST REFLECTANCE FIGURE IN THE DATASET — 13%, against Minnesota's 20%, North Carolina's 20% and the 35% of the model-act states. Measured on the FILM ("the tinting material has a light reflectance of 13 percent or less"), not the assembly, so it pairs with the 50% film transmittance figure rather than the 35% net figure. Layered on top is the subsection (8)(a) categorical ban on "Mirror finish products", which bites regardless of measurement.

Subsection (2)(b) applies to the side and rear windows alike. Unlike the transmittance figures, the reflectance cap is NOT lifted by subsection (3) for the windshield strip, and subsection (4) lifts only the transmittance conditions for MPVs — so the 13% figure survives both routes.

No agency involvement and an unusually permissive evidentiary standard: ANY of three documents will do — an affidavit, a prescription, or simply a letter on the practitioner's letterhead — signed by a physician OR optometrist. It covers a condition of "another person in the person's household", not only the registrant. Like the subsection (3) windshield route it lifts only (2)(a) and (2)(c), so the 13% reflectance cap and the subsection (8) material bans still apply, and it reaches only the SIDE AND REAR windows, never the windshield. Subsection (6) requires the document be "kept in the vehicle and shall be shown to a police officer who inquires about the tint."

A carried CERTIFICATE, not a window label — the Maine model rather than the West Virginia or Minnesota model. What makes Oregon's distinctive is its content: the certificate must recite BOTH bases separately, the film's transmittance and reflectance under (b) and (c) and the assembly result under (d). The compliance paperwork itself embodies the film/assembly distinction, which is independent evidence that the two quantities are not interchangeable. Subsection (10): the certificate "shall be kept in the motor vehicle and shall be shown to a police officer who inquires about the tint."

The broadest colour bar in the dataset. Most states prohibit red, yellow and amber; Oregon adds GOLD and BLACK, neither observed anywhere else. The (8)(c) ban on brushed or sprayed liquid tint regulates the APPLICATION METHOD rather than the material's optical properties, which is unique so far — a spray-on tint is unlawful in Oregon even if it would measure compliant.

True but NARROWLY SCOPED, and the dataset should render it that way: the mirror condition attaches only to the subsection (4) MPV route for darker-than-standard rear tint. An ordinary Oregon vehicle tinting its rear windows to the standard (2) figures needs no side mirrors at all. Contrast Maine, North Dakota, Vermont and Nevada, where mirrors gate the ordinary rear allowance itself.