More News

A state senator is using a Comptroller's Office report to support his contention that Maryland should change its accounting rules to collect possibly $170 million in taxes from large corporations.

However, the author of the report cautions that the information could not be extrapolated to 2009.

"Tax year 2006 was at the end of one of the largest and longest booms in corporate profits in the post-war period, whereas the current period is experiencing one of the steepest drops in corporate profits on record," wrote David Roose, executive secretary of the Board of Revenue Estimates.

The board provides state leaders with forecasts of state tax collections to help prepare each year's budget.

The accounting change is called "combined reporting," where corporations aggregate profits and expenses and then apportion the proper amount to Maryland on their state taxes.

Maryland now is a "separate entity" state, meaning subsidiaries file their own tax returns.

Critics, including state Sen. Paul G. Pinsky, believe multistate corporations can shift profits to lower tax states and expenses into Maryland, denying the state revenue it deserves.

"If you're a Maryland business of 15 employees, you've got to pay the corporate income tax," Pinsky (D-Dist. 22) of University Park said Monday. "The big folks who really have no significant ties to Maryland get away scot free. I don't think it's a smart tax system."

The report said that depending how combined reporting was implemented, between 2,200 and 2,400 corporations would pay more taxes — as much as $338.4 million.

But the report also said that about 2,000 corporations would pay about $220 million less in taxes. About 2,000 would not see a change.

A legislative task force has convened to study combined reporting, and Roose's report was presented to it.

Roose told the task force last week that none of the projected increases in collections came from corporations trying to avoid paying taxes, said Ronald Wineholt, vice president of government affairs for the Maryland Chamber of Commerce.

Wineholt said the state needs to let the task force do its work.

"There would be a real risk in short-circuiting the work of the tax commission and a real danger to state revenues to attempt to adopt combined reporting in the depths of a recession," Wineholt said.

Corporate income tax varies widely.

In 2006, the state collected $868 million. For 2010, the state is on track to receive $672.2 million.

To Pinsky, combined reporting might not necessarily mean the huge gain expected in the report, but a percentage increase of about 19 percent.

"There's no indicator it won't still add additional revenue, even in a down year," he said.

But in Wineholt's opinion, "even if you think combined reporting is a good idea, this is the worst time to adopt such a tax change."