1986 VETOES.

However, opposition was registered by the corporations and,
after numerous hearings, the provisions were changed so that
they differ widely from the original draft. As the bill now
stands it is Interpreted to mean that a railroad has the choice
of selecting from several different methods the one which it
chooses to follow in reporting to the State Tax Commission
the amount of its gross receipts allocable to Maryland. It is
argued that the railroads would naturally prefer to accept
that formula which would cost them the least taxes. Further-
more, it is urged that different railroads might select different
formulas according to their particular circumstances.

Through eminent counsel, the corporations interested in the
bill take the position that the new provisions would make
possible a more definite formula which, when once established,
would make it possible for them to know in advance the exact
requirements to be enforced by the State taxing authorities.
They point to the fact that the bill specifies the measure by
which they are to be taxed as determined by the so-called "all
track" mileage or "main track" mileage. They further empha-
size that the bill provides that that measure should be used
"whichever more nearly reflects the actual gross receipts appor-
tionable to Maryland".

However, the bill does not mention who is to determine this
fact, whether the State Tax Commission or the corporation.
This is a most important feature of the entire subject matter
and might lead to a reduction in the amounts received by the
State from this source.

I have also reviewed with the Budget Director and with
the State Comptroller's Office the estimates of revenues ex-
pected from this source. It is manifest that a substantial
amount of taxes is anticipated and that, if by reason of any
change permitting the corporations to be relieved of taxes
otherwise payable, it might have serious effect upon the State's
fiscal situation.

I do not wish to indicate that the corporations are attempt-
ing to evade their obligations. Quite to the contrary I believe
they are entirely willing to meet the just requirements. It is to
be remembered that they did not initiate this measure and they
are taking the expected course in striving to see that the bill is
specific, workable, and uniform. My responsibility is one re-
quiring a decision as to whether there is serious danger of
impairment of State revenues with prejudicial effect to the
State Treasury. Because of the wide difference of opinion
among the various officials and representatives consulted, I
have concluded that the bill should not be signed, therefore, I
am vetoing it.