Tourists are easy money. They come, stay in hotels, eat in restaurants, buy gifts, pay tolls and entrance fees and then leave. Other than clogging the roads and cleaning up after the messy ones, they do not cost the state much and add $895 million to state and local treasuries.
In starting the state?s $2 million tourism campaign, Gov. Martin O?Malley said “tourism is one of Maryland?s greatest economic drivers, as well as one of our largest employers, so a targeted campaign that works to attract additional visitors to Maryland is money well spent.”
Maybe so. But no marketing campaign ? even one as “targeted” as Maryland?s with its “Pretty. Close” tag line designed to lure visitors who can drive here ? can make up for basic economics. Tourists are looking for deals. State legislators gave them a raw one last year by raising the sales tax 20 percent to 6 percent. With the economy slowing around the nation and gas prices skyrocketing, visitors have less money to spend and higher taxes will only act as a deterrent to shopping on holidays.
Why doesn?t O?Malley just start a “Shop Delaware” campaign? Sales tax there is zero.
Legislators also hurt Maryland?s wine industry and palates around the nation by refusing to allow the state?s vineyards, increasingly bigger tourist draws, to ship wine to visitors after they leave, unlike the majority of states. The state?s industry is growing and holds potential for exponential growth. But it remains tiny and will stay that way without structural changes to the law. Last year, total sales at Maryland?s 31 wineries were $12.7 million according to the Maryland Wineries Association. That?s less than the state Public Service Commission annual budget.
If the governor and state legislators care so much about attracting new visitors and winning repeat trips from others, they will focus on luring them with real incentives, not billboards, “mobile tourism units” with blow up kayaks and golf clubs and Civil War re-enactors. Otherwise, Maryland will remain “Pretty. Expensive.”
