More News

Maryland's treasury could collect as much as $100 million more if it adopted an accounting method that was rejected during the 2007 special session, an official in the Comptroller's Office said this week.

The figure is two to four times higher than estimates prepared for 2007, but less than what some people believed.

"I think most informed observers would say if it's nine figures, it's low nine figures," said David Roose, director of the state's Bureau of Revenue Estimates. "It would be a surprise if it reached the most optimistic estimates."

The accounting change is called "combined reporting." It would require corporations, when they file their taxes, to aggregate profit and expenses and then apportion the proper amount to Maryland. Almost half of the states now use combined reporting.

Some believe larger companies can shuttle profits to low-tax states and import expenses to Maryland to avoid paying the 8.25 percent corporate income tax.

In the run-up to the 2007 special session, Gov. Martin O'Malley proposed the adoption of combined reporting as part of his portfolio of tax increases to plug a $1.7 billion budget gap. He estimated it would provide the state with $25 million.

The nonpartisan Department of Legislative Services later estimated combined reporting would provide about $45.5 million.

But, as the session progressed, the change drew opposition. In its place, a Business Tax Reform Commission was created to study the accounting change.

Roose said he would present a better estimate at the commission's September meeting.

The group Progressive Maryland supports combined reporting, and like O'Malley (D), called it closing a tax loophole.

"It's simply enforcing the intent of the tax code," executive director Sean Dobson said.

His organization had estimated the take from combined reporting would exceed $100 million in 2007.

The Maryland Chamber of Commerce, however, believes the change would complicate corporate taxes. In the past couple of years, the state already has closed the biggest tax loopholes, chamber vice president Ronald W. Wineholt said.

"We think a lot of the big money has already been realized for the state treasury, and it's not at all clear to us that combined reporting is going to add anything but complexity," Wineholt said.

Both Roose and Wineholt said some companies would pay less in taxes, while others would pay more.

"That's why it's clear that it is not a loophole closer," Wineholt said. "You don't have winners and losers on loophole closers. It falls very unevenly among Maryland businesses."

Sen. Richard S. Madaleno Jr. said state staff members are concerned that if lawmakers make a switch, they don't do it just for the money.

"They're worried that if they dangle out, ‘This will get you $500 million,' that we'll go charging along for the $500 million as opposed to thinking through what it means for a relatively small state like Maryland to make this change," said Madaleno (D-Dist. 18) of Kensington.

Madaleno is a legislative member of the commission.

And even though Maryland tax revenues are falling because of the faltering economy, the recession might mean the state puts off any decision.

"It may be that [corporations] could be paying more taxes in combined reporting, but do we want to slap these businesses around with the economy the way it is? Or do we want to help them be more successful so we get more taxes anyway?" said Sen. Nancy J. King (D-Dist. 39) of Montgomery Village. She also serves on the commission.